If there was a takeover in the next 12 months...

[eardun]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I struggle to see how we are investing the max under FFP now. Maybe the wage bill is much higher than predicted but I really doubt that. 

Agree @W-S-M Seagull is a bit too conservative atm. Two or three more players in the £2-3m bracket for priority positions on wages not exceeding £10-15k per week would be easily within FFP.

This is the nub of it for me. Does anyone on here really know the wage bill? NP is saying that we are at, or at least very close to, to the limit on wages. So clearly the club are telling him that. Difficult to counter that isn’t it? For me, this is critical to understanding whether any new owner could invest a pot of gold.

Personally I wouldn’t have an issue if the Gate gave naming rights to an appropriate and suitably funded local business - Thatchers Ashton Gate anyone?! - if that helped the bottom line materially. I know a lot of fans wouldn’t like that though. 

[spudski]

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

What downside risks would you be willing to accept if bigger money investment did not work out as hoped..I suspect we would have 2-3 years of it was a go for it type

May as well put it out there, a specific thread for it. There are arguments cor a takeover while the financial position a sounder one.

If there was a takeover in the next 12 months, what would you do differently.

How much might you want fo see invested, over what timeframe. Think we all know the limitations of new owner in this regard, as in we can go bigger but no blank cheque, clean slate or fresh start or 3 year cycle.

This time next season, Covid allowables or add-backs will be but a memory.

Money spent, plans, idealism v realism. Etc.

How I see it...too much focus is being put on investment. 

With FFP...an Investor could have far less money than SL. 

We'd need an investor with enough money to invest in ' projects' outside of FFP... however...the one difference is wanting someone with good decision making, an understanding of football ( not just business ), no jobs to sons with no experience, no narcissistic tendencies, bringing in football people to run the business and having little say in decisions. Having sound judgement and a plan. 

I'd also want to get rid of Bristol Sport. 

The latter, imo, being the biggest stumbling block to an investor. 

[Ska Junkie]

1 minute ago, eardun said:

This is the nub of it for me. Does anyone on here really know the wage bill? NP is saying that we are at, or at least very close to, to the limit on wages. So clearly the club are telling him that. Difficult to counter that isn’t it? For me, this is critical to understanding whether any new owner could invest a pot of gold.

Personally I wouldn’t have an issue if the Gate gave naming rights to an appropriate and suitably funded local business - Thatchers Ashton Gate anyone?! - if that helped the bottom line materially. I know a lot of fans wouldn’t like that though. 

I don't think most would give a monkey's, within reason, we would still call it the Gate anyway.

[Leveller]

Despite Lansdown’s falling short of the ambitions he had for the club, his ownership still looks lower risk than any purchase by an overseas buyer. Be careful what you wish for.

[sh1t_ref_again]

2 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

Once again, I do agree but let's turn that around and it's BCFC that are effectively homeless rather than the Rugby? That is grounds for concern isn't it? No foregone conclusion that we don't come out thr losers IMHO.

There's a resolution somewhere albeit slightly convoluted.

Nice discussion on a boring Sunday regardless.

In that instance, you are saying an investor wants to by Bristol Rugby Not not have city?

Any investor who is clever enough to have amassed enough money to buy city are not going to do it without either buying the ground as well or securing a long term lease.

Some may then complain but we are tennants, but this would allow city to be sold and give the new owners some crave at a lower value, sometimes you can't have your cake and eat it

[Midred]

Just now, Leveller said:

Despite Lansdown’s falling short of the ambitions he had for the club, his ownership still looks lower risk than any purchase by an overseas buyer. Be careful what you wish for.

Aren't there cases where a big organisation takes over and doesn't exactly asset strip but arranges the accounts to allow them to take the profits whilst piling up the debts against the club?

[Mr Popodopolous]

7 minutes ago, eardun said:

This is the nub of it for me. Does anyone on here really know the wage bill? NP is saying that we are at, or at least very close to, to the limit on wages. So clearly the club are telling him that. Difficult to counter that isn’t it? For me, this is critical to understanding whether any new owner could invest a pot of gold.

Personally I wouldn’t have an issue if the Gate gave naming rights to an appropriate and suitably funded local business - Thatchers Ashton Gate anyone?! - if that helped the bottom line materially. I know a lot of fans wouldn’t like that though. 

In 2021-22 the group wage bill was around £30m, the Football Club portion of that £23-24m.

Surely fair to assume it fell last year.. Palmer gone, Cundy and O'Dowda gone.

Yes a few in on probably no more than £10k per week each, Wells contract renewal on much lesser terms cuts in real terms. Bentley, Massengo half-season apiece gone. Likewise Klose and Martin but we don't know what percentage payoff we gave.

Haikin came in and went again so only maybe 2 months wages.

Semenyo again half season gone. Simpson and Downing if any payoff existed in 2021-22, won't be replicated.

Edited August 27, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Port Said Red said:

I am not a businessman or even a Euromillions winner, but if it was me, any deal that didn't include the ground would be a no deal. Especially under FFP, it's the only external revenue stream we have really apart from TV money which could either increase or disappear completely in the next few years. 

Buying a club or a team is far too limiting for a serious investor.

I don’t think anyone would buy the club without the ground…too risky!

FWIW, my guess is that if they did just buy the club, the revenues from matchdays would continue to be ours, and then just paying the commercial agreement to use the ground.  AG Ltd hasn’t posted a profit for the last 5 accounting years!

[Midred]

Just now, Midred said:

Aren't there cases where a big organisation takes over and doesn't exactly asset strip but arranges the accounts to allow them to take the profits whilst piling up the debts against the club?

On another point what were Rovers promised?

[BUTOR]

54 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

SL gets a hell of a lot of crap from our fans, but the vast majority of FL clubs would love him to own them. 

We are sometimes guilty of taking his ownership for granted. 

So many clubs have dodgy owners. 

As long as SL is here we will always have a club. 

Absolutely agree. I travel a lot and speak to fans up and down the country, the amount of horror stories regarding owners is striking. Those who travel with City away regularly I’m sure will have had the same experiences. From the Championship to the amateur leagues there are supporters everywhere who have had their clubs torn to pieces.

We as a fan base are not used to being owned by someone who may not have the best interests of BCFC at heart. The very fact we can say that of our owner (despite errors of judgement) makes us the envy of hundreds of football clubs in this country and beyond. When the time comes I don’t think many are ready for the change it will bring. We are not talking about a couple of new January signings here who will ‘freshen things up’ (a quote I’ve seen regarding new ownership), we are talking about a seismic change of order and everything Bristol City has been for a long old while - for better or worse - will cease to be again. I just pray to god it works out. 

Edited August 27, 2023 by BUTOR

[ExiledAjax]

In answer to @Mr Popodopolous

What I'd want most from a new investor/owner is an overhaul of the governance. Greater numbers and diversity of thought at board level. Not having the son of the owner on the board. Non-executive directors to challenge the executives and bring balance. Greater transparency when reporting accounts, and of course the creation of a golden share to be issued to the SC&T.

The finances and investment in the squad would happen of course, but some new ideas behind the scenes would be so refreshing.

[The Gasbuster]

4 minutes ago, BUTOR said:

Absolutely agree. I travel a lot and speak to fans up and down the country, the amount of horror stories regarding owners is striking. Those who travel with City away regularly I’m sure will have had the same experiences. From the Championship to the amateur leagues there are supporters everywhere who have had their clubs torn to pieces.

We as a fan base are not used to being owned by someone who may not have the best interests of BCFC at heart. The very fact we can say that of our owner (despite errors of judgement) makes us the envy of hundreds of football clubs in this country. When the time comes I don’t think many are ready for the change it will bring. We are not talking about a couple of new January signings here who will ‘freshen things up’ (a quote I’ve seen regarding new ownership), we are talking about a seismic change of order and everything Bristol City has been for a long old while - for better or worse - will cease to be again. I just pray to god it works out. 

Yep.

Remember the "Reform Group" who promised P.L. in 2 years ?

They claimed the money they had put in was absorbed by wages. And there we were signing the likes of Rodney McAree and Marvin Harriot 

Edited August 27, 2023 by The Gasbuster

[Ska Junkie]

4 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

In that instance, you are saying an investor wants to by Bristol Rugby Not not have city?

No mate. I'm saying SL possibly sells BCFC and not the rugby club as they're less of a drain on his finances. Purely hypothetical as I've said but we all know how difficult it is to get a stadium built in Bristol.

It's possible if very unlikely I appreciate.

[Supersonic Robin]

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

What downside risks would you be willing to accept if bigger money investment did not work out as hoped..I suspect we would have 2-3 years of it was a go for it type

I think we have to accept any downside risk we are presented with.

We're at a point with Lansdown where I and many others feel we cannot truly progress without new ownership.

I'm not convinced that any risk is greater than the risk of 20 more years of underachievement. We HAVE to try something new, and accept that the potential for risk is also an element of the potential for reward.

52 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

SL gets a hell of a lot of crap from our fans, but the vast majority of FL clubs would love him to own them. 

We are sometimes guilty of taking his ownership for granted. 

So many clubs have dodgy owners. 

As long as SL is here we will always have a club. 

The might say that, but I think that's because they haven't fully thought it through.

They may want Lansdown's money, but they haven't considered that they also get Lansdown's culture and decision making. They get Jon Lansdown as Chairman, they get Mark Ashton as CEO, they get managers like Keith Millen and Dean Holden. They get 20 years of not really achieving anything.

If they were to consider the FULL picture, I doubt that many EFL clubs of a similar size to us would want 20 years of the Lansdowns.

 

[sh1t_ref_again]

3 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

No mate. I'm saying SL possibly sells BCFC and not the rugby club as they're less of a drain on his finances. Purely hypothetical as I've said but we all know how difficult it is to get a stadium built in Bristol.

It's possible if very unlikely I appreciate.

But as I said  someone with the millions required to buy city are not stupid enough to do  a deal that could leave them without a ground

[Mr Popodopolous]

10 minutes ago, Midred said:

Aren't there cases where a big organisation takes over and doesn't exactly asset strip but arranges the accounts to allow them to take the profits whilst piling up the debts against the club?

Leveraged buyout?

Yes the Glazers did that very well at Man United. Burnley managed to absorb it probably as they had been impeccably run for years with major xash reserves which are now perhaps diminished.

They could yet benefit in the long run but relegation triggered the departure of Pope, Collins, McNeil, Cornet all sold.

Tarkowski also left for free, Mee as well.

Wood sold January 2022, maybe a footballing decision and Weghorst came and went.

Kompany and their brave new approach may pay dividends in the long run too early to say but wonder how many of the above they wanted to lose.

[Mr Popodopolous]

The thing is with us, what profit is there to leverage against??

Is there much point in a leveraged buyout of an entity when said entity makes cash and accounting losses most years as a matter of course.

There are probably many types but basically you borrow purchase price or the bulk of the purchase price against the entity. They pay off the debt and interest or the portion leveraged against.

Can do it via Cash Reserves to help out but what Cash Reserves? £1m or below in 2022.

Edited August 27, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[redkev]

53 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

Once again, I do agree but let's turn that around and it's BCFC that are effectively homeless rather than the Rugby? That is grounds for concern isn't it? No foregone conclusion that we don't come out thr losers IMHO.

There's a resolution somewhere albeit slightly convoluted.

Nice discussion on a boring Sunday regardless.

Boring ffs , you ain’t seen the list of jobs I got from my mrs to do this weekend 

[IAmNick]

45 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

In answer to @Mr Popodopolous

What I'd want most from a new investor/owner is an overhaul of the governance. Greater numbers and diversity of thought at board level. Not having the son of the owner on the board. Non-executive directors to challenge the executives and bring balance. Greater transparency when reporting accounts, and of course the creation of a golden share to be issued to the SC&T.

The finances and investment in the squad would happen of course, but some new ideas behind the scenes would be so refreshing.

Totally agree with this. I'm sure there are loads of oddities in how the club operates just because that's how it's always been done. I'm sure there are loads of inefficiencies or areas we could improve (recruitment department? Data analytics?) Which just aren't a priority, or there're some historical or personal pride/reasons they're left how they are.

The biggest benefit of new owners wouldn't be the money or even the managers they pick imo, it'd be a fresh pair of eyes over the club from top to bottom, and a slightly ruthless attitude to how each part is run.

[Red_Alligator]

If there were to be such a change, I wouldn't be surprised if new owners were American, purely because the "sports portfolio" package is very popular there. 

Whatever any change in ownership, I'm more concerned  about the current financial model imposed by the EFL.

The opportunity to "buy" a football club into the top flight - popular around the time that SL took ownership - has long since passed, and where spending power is now allied towards factors such as club turnover (rather than simply the spending power of the owner), it makes the challenge of building success on the field more difficult for clubs like ours.

Edited August 27, 2023 by Red_Alligator

[sh1t_ref_again]

As the old saying goes, how do you make a small fortune out of football?

Start with a large fortune

And never a truer word said than for Championship sides, unless you can get to the prem and share the tv money, but we are playing in a rigged competition where we are an outside bet due to FFP and parachute payments

Think you have to be very rich and stupid to want to own a football club, unless you have an attachment to it

[Mr Popodopolous]

In theory if they are part of a consortium or a wider business group we sponsor the stadium, each stand and the Training Ground. Perhaps a couple to few million more per year in total.

Then you spend up to the £39m..as it stands 3 year £60m accounting losses and hope. If you have a good Year 1 you can spread this risk over 2 seasons maybe.

Downside is you fail and you're in a mess! Would new ambitous owners have the patience for the downside risk of cost cutting, potential sanctions, and maybe 2 years until they can go again.

However they would know what they are signing up to.

If they took over in a year they could spend £39m in 2 years plus a remaining headroom from this season and hope to go up by 2026.

Again huge problems if you don't.

Edited August 27, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Ska Junkie]

34 minutes ago, redkev said:

Boring ffs , you ain’t seen the list of jobs I got from my mrs to do this weekend 

You as well Kev. I've been tiling all bloody day.

[WarksRobin]

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I mean revenue streams. E.g. SL could in theory sell naming rights for Ashton Gate, as a stadium, each stand individually and even maybe the HPC.

In theory we could run on less than £39m in 3 years but that could limit progress. Run on more for a time, if it doesn't pay off we stall or maybe even fall foul eventually.

Well we know the club underperforms on commercial rights, from sponsorship to selling replica kits, or selling anything much in the club shop. If I were an external investor I would definitely see upside opportunities to increase revenue. However, I don't think this is a massive game-changing opportunity, it would need to form part of a package of savings and improvements.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Just now, WarksRobin said:

Well we know the club underperforms on commercial rights, from sponsorship to selling replica kits, or selling anything much in the club shop. If I were an external investor I would definitely see upside opportunities to increase revenue. However, I don't think this is a massive game-changing opportunity, it would need to form part of a package of savings and improvements.

Agreed. Think for off field Commercial Revenue ie events etc we score quite well, saw a table of clubs a few years ago at out level from 2019 and we were quite competitive for this level.

A weird one was Stoke as their Commercial Revenue actually rose during Covid which defies Fair Value norms I would suggest for a non elite club in the middle of this League...another for the League to look at?

Yeah definitely as part of a package but only in some ways do we score badly and then we have to factor in the cost side- does shutting the club shop more frequently in the week, greater click and collect actually make a net saving?

[fisherrich]

1 hour ago, tin said:

Plenty of interest in BCFC, apparently; little interest in Bristol Sport - SL’s Barcelona replica pipe dream.

Not many investors would be interested in Bristol Sport as a 100% package - pro rugby especially has a lot problems financially, just doesn’t work for many foreign investors. But Bristol City FC could be a wise investment for the right owner.
Time will tell.

[Mr Popodopolous]

One other thing.

Would a new owner stick with NP? A lot of new owners do not stick with the incumbent.

My hope is yes of course but...that's another risk factor.

Edited August 27, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

5 minutes ago, fisherrich said:

Not many investors would be interested in Bristol Sport as a 100% package - pro rugby especially has a lot problems financially, just doesn’t work for many foreign investors. But Bristol City FC could be a wise investment for the right owner.
Time will tell.

They are seemingly trying to push rugby in USA but how successful that will prove, is proving dunno.

Yes Wasps, Worcester and I dunno how it ended with London Irish in the end.

Edited August 27, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[cidercity1987]

5 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

One other thing.

Would a new owner stick with NP? A lot of new owners do not stick with the incumbent.

My hope is yes of course but...that's another risk factor.

Lansdown is binning him off in 8 months anyway....

[WarksRobin]

The other consideration here is who would want to invest? There are essentially three types of investors:

1. Institutional investors, eg pension funds who want a stable long term income from their investment. They are never going to invest in a Championship football club.

2. Venture Capital type investors who will be looking for a strong return in the short or medium term. If there was no return in a few years they would start selling anything to find a return. Also, they may not have the means to invest significant sums. A possible investor but undesirable from a fan perspective.

3. An angel investor. Similar to what we have today in SL. Someone who invests and wants a long term return but is patient and prepared to take a loss. Most football investors fall into this category but there are not many of them around.