Phil Alexander Gone (Confirmed)

[TV Tom]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

I’m interested in your reasons and the context of them.

 

Do you not think presiding over 13 home games without a win is possibly worthy of a sacking or watching some of the utter dross over the last 2 years is possibly worthy of a sacking, were you at Cardiff, Swansea, Reading or Brum last season ? i accept 100% that he took over an utter mess of a team but this is now his team 100%. personally i now back him and it's obvious to see how much we've improved but it doesn't take away the fact that many many clubs (in my opinion) would of sacked him a long time ago. of course it's all about opinions 

[formerly known as ivan]

In the most basic terms possible, without having to piece together 20 pages on here, what does this mean for the club?

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, BrizzleRed said:

Alternatively, they could come in and actually make a serious attempt to go for some of the Premiership £millions, rather than just paying lip service to having genuine ambition, when clearly not meaning it.

Obviously costs also rise with the Prem, but at present, we are treading water at best.  We aren’t talking huge money to strengthen and a couple of targeted additions to this current squad could work wonders.

it seems pretty clear that any ambition SL may have had for City in the past is long gone and he’s maybe looking for new, probably more rewarding challenges.

Are we wrong to want a new impetus and energy around the club, or should we be content to just stagnate and eventually slip downwards out of this division?

I don't disagree with this but I suppose the million dollar q as I put on the hypothetical takeover thread.

A) How much should we spend and over what time period? In other words how much should the cost base go up by.

B) How big a risk are we keen to take if it goes wrong ie if we plan to spend x and it leads to a major FFP breach 2-3, 4 at a push years down the line if we don't go up, are we as fans willing to accept a major downside risk.

Or try and go up in 2 frontloading expenditure making a 3rd or 4th year fail risk irrelevant.

I don't think we are spending enough now btw.

Edited September 18, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

Just now, TV Tom said:

Do you not think presiding over 13 home games without a win is possibly worthy of a sacking or watching some of the utter dross over the last 2 years is possibly worthy of a sacking, were you at Cardiff, Swansea, Reading or Brum last season ? i accept 100% that he took over an utter mess of a team but this is now his team 100%. personally i now back him and it's obvious to see how much we've improved but it doesn't take away the fact that many many clubs (in my opinion) would of sacked him a long time ago. of course it's all about opinions 

To be honest, it never crossed my own mind, I thought he was vital to us rebuilding…and staying in the division.  Easy to spin losing runs, just like winning runs if you’re trying to justify a position.  We always dug a result out.  I just saw a mess that was slowly being recovered from.  Slow, because of how big the mess was, and no money to resolve, under the shadow of covid.

There will always be odd performances that are shit, just like ones where you think the corner is turned.

I suspect we couldn’t afford to sack him either, both monetary wise and risk of going down wise.  Which in some ways on the second point was the big reason…egg on face of decision maker because deep down they knew he was sorting us out and keeping relatively competitive.

[chinapig]

1 hour ago, ashton_fan said:

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. At the time I can't remember people saying we shouldn't give all this money to LJ, there were times when it was close to working and we were in the top six, who was to know at that time that COVID was around the corner and that we wouldn't quite make it? SL gave us a chance but it didn't work, doesn't mean it wasn't worth trying 

I agree that the great majority of fans took and still take little or no interest in the club's finances so weren't bothered about what was happening. A minority of us do and did.

However it was a mistake in Steve's own terms. He has after all talked for years about financial sustainability and indeed still does. I'm all for that though there is a limit to the extent that a club of our size can be self sustaining.

What happened though was the opposite of sustainability in that we ended up with a bloated squad and a wage bill that had doubled to £30m. It was a gamble that failed. Derby County also gambled and failed but fortunately Steve is not a cheat like Mel Morris so he didn't abandon the club to its fate but we could still have faced a points deduction and probable relegation.happening

Now Steve has gone in the other direction again (Danny Wilson was given lots to spend then Gary Johnson managed on a shoestring). It would be nice to find a happy medium!

There is much to say on the number of bad signings we made and absence of any football philosophy but I've gone on too long already.

[GrahamC]

22 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Gary Owers on SOTC:

• Richard Gould did a good job
• lets not talk about Mark Ashton

Love Owers, played the game to a very decent standard but still an obvious fan.

If he could just learn how to pronounce Nakhi Wells’ first name he’d be perfect.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, RedM said:

No. Mates first, then came the jobs. I have no idea if one in particular is brilliant or not at his job, but he has had various roles over the years, and it is years and years. It is very different from working for a company where you are colleagues and become friends through work. AG/BS is full of friends and people related to eachother. 

They also recruit people who have previously left for greener pastures and found they weren’t quite as green as they thought and have been welcomed back with open arms.

Don’t know if other clubs are the same but there seems to be a very ‘closed shop’ attitude in place.

 

[One Team]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Gary Owers on SOTC:

• Richard Gould did a good job
• lets not talk about Mark Ashton

Worth a listen Fevs?

[DaveInSA]

It could this be “peak Lansdown”

I hope so.

it doesn’t take long for instability off the pitch to impact on it. 

My view is Steve should sell up and move on.

If he can’t find a buyer, he needs to butt out of the running of the club and appoint proper people to do it.

 

[exAtyeoMax]

45 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

Love Owers, played the game to a very decent standard but still an obvious fan.

If he could just learn how to pronounce Nakhi Wells’ first name he’d be perfect.

I love the way he says Nah ee

[Davefevs]

15 minutes ago, One Team said:

Worth a listen Fevs?

I think so.  Just opinions from GO, but he’s generally got a bit of inside info I reckon.

[headhunter]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I think so.  Just opinions from GO, but he’s generally got a bit of inside info I reckon.

I thought he was very measured in his responses.

[Ivorguy]

5 hours ago, marmite said:

The majority of fans only turn up for games and are completely unaware of what happens outside of matchday. 

Who knew that Keith Dawe was our chairman for several years and many still think that SL is chairman. 

There is more knowledge on this forum which breeds healthy debate, as in this case.

Until the club tells us what's happening for fact, it's all pure conjecture. 

Something appears to be going wrong off the pitch however. My main complaint is the lack of communication from the club. They don't need to go into detail but they shouldn't just ignore the fans concerns. We are the lifeblood of the club. 

Personally my faith in S L is fading rapidly but that is because he,  or the club,  doesn't keep us informed of developments. 

I've always been a supporter of Steve but I think his "it's my club and my money" stance is beginning to alienate people.

I was alienated years ago, along with others 

[IAmNick]

6 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

Quite.

It's why I lean towards an investor to come in alongside SL rather than a complete sale. Such an investor could of course then progressively takeover the whole club, going from a minority to majority stake in due course.

Perhaps I stupidly still hold out some misguided hope that a billionaire in his seventies might be persuaded to change the habit of a (financially successful) lifetime and accept taking a backseat and letting others run his business.

As you put it, I back SL becoming the benevolent owner who sits in his corporate box watching his trusted generals and lieutenants run the operation.

It's something I've actually wondered a bit about - without sounding stupid, why does he need to sell?

He sure as hell doesn't need the money.

He could take a total backseat as you say and enjoy the highs, ignore the lows, and let others take the flak when it goes wrong.

If he's sick of it but still loves the club/city he could give the club ownership to the fans. Why not? Now THAT would be a legacy.

Selling the club just gets him more money he doesn't need. What's the point? I'd honestly love to know - although of course I think I know the answer, that you don't get that unimaginably wealthy by giving things away.

Basically every scenario between full control and chilling at home is available to him without selling.

Edited September 18, 2023 by IAmNick

[EstoniaTallinnRed]

1 hour ago, GrahamC said:

Love Owers, played the game to a very decent standard but still an obvious fan.

If he could just learn how to pronounce Nakhi Wells’ first name he’d be perfect.

Love him myself, talks a lot of sense on RB, it's probably his Geordie accent that's why it sounds strange. 

[Numero Uno]

5 hours ago, marmite said:

Something appears to be going wrong off the pitch however. My main complaint is the lack of communication from the club. They don't need to go into detail but they shouldn't just ignore the fans concerns. We are the lifeblood of the club. 

Personally my faith in S L is fading rapidly but that is because he,  or the club,  doesn't keep us informed of developments. 

I've always been a supporter of Steve but I think his "it's my club and my money" stance is beginning to alienate people.

It is surprising that there are quite a few on here who think we have no right to know anything. The expectation is you part with your £300-£600 for a season ticket, sit down and shut up. This isn't 1978 and Peter Godsiff telling you what the club wants you to hear on the back page of the Evening Post six weeks after it happened and they have finally come up with a plausible explanation. As somebody put it last night the pub conversation also happens on the Internet and in 2023 people have far more ways of finding stuff out than they ever used to. As a result the club should really communicate but our Owner isn't interested in that.

The people who say part with your money and keep quiet seem to lack the basic understanding that without fans there is literally no toy for a rich billionaire to **** around with and without fans how many billionaires would be interested in buying a football club in the first place? It's an uncomfortable truth for anybody who wants to buy a football club and do what they want with it. If it's your money and your club then it's also our right as paying punters to form a judgement.........

There is a club round here where the expectation as a fan is you take whatever you are fed..............have a think about that.

[tin]

9 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

It's something I've actually wondered a bit about - without sounding stupid, why does he need to sell?

He sure as hell doesn't need the money.

He could take a total backseat as you say and enjoy the highs, ignore the lows, and let others take the flak when it goes wrong.

If he's sick of it but still loves the club/city he could give the club ownership to the fans. Why not? Now THAT would be a legacy.

Selling the club just gets him more money he doesn't need. What's the point? I'd honestly love to know - although of course I think I know the answer, that you don't get that unimaginably wealthy by giving things away.

Basically every scenario between full control and chilling at home is available to him without selling.

Excellent post. Rather than leaving a legacy, I’ve long suspected SL prefers the idea of being the richest man in the graveyard.

Edited September 18, 2023 by tin

[TV Tom]

10 minutes ago, tin said:

Excellent post. Rather than leaving a legacy, I’ve long suspected SL prefers the idea of being the richest man in the graveyard.

In that case he should be told that shrouds don't have pockets 

[Hxj]

14 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

If he's sick of it but still loves the club/city he could give the club ownership to the fans. Why not? Now THAT would be a legacy.

And who would fund the £30 million odd a year needed to pay the bills and get the squad necessary for promotion.  Assuming there are 10,000 fans able to pay the bills that's a £3,500 annual season ticket.  Total pipe dream.  Shows a complete lack of reality.

[frenchred]

14 minutes ago, Hxj said:

And who would fund the £30 million odd a year needed to pay the bills and get the squad necessary for promotion.  Assuming there are 10,000 fans able to pay the bills that's a £3,500 annual season ticket.  Total pipe dream.  Shows a complete lack of reality.

Yeah let's keep the shit show we have instead

Every other club manages why wouldn't we?

 

 

[TV Tom]

5 minutes ago, frenchred said:

Yeah let's keep the shit show we have instead

Every other club manages why wouldn't we?

 

 

Is it really that bad ? a shit show is what we went through from '80-'83, now that really was a shit show

[ExiledAjax]

59 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

It's something I've actually wondered a bit about - without sounding stupid, why does he need to sell?

He sure as hell doesn't need the money.

He could take a total backseat as you say and enjoy the highs, ignore the lows, and let others take the flak when it goes wrong.

If he's sick of it but still loves the club/city he could give the club ownership to the fans. Why not? Now THAT would be a legacy.

Selling the club just gets him more money he doesn't need. What's the point? I'd honestly love to know - although of course I think I know the answer, that you don't get that unimaginably wealthy by giving things away.

Basically every scenario between full control and chilling at home is available to him without selling.

I guess my answer is money, control and the human condition.

Whoever owns and runs this or any other club needs to pump millions into it every year to keep it afloat. Generally people who have millions and who put millions into businesses want to control that business. 

I know that a billion pounds is more than any single human needs to live in luxury. I know he could, feasibly, give away control, use half his fortune to establish a trust to generate funds for the club, and still live like an emperor. But he won't do that. He's a human.

So in short he has to sell because he has to sell. He has to relinquish control because those who are in a position to buy from him will demand it.

Edited September 18, 2023 by ExiledAjax

[Mr Popodopolous]

Surely the amount needed is the Cash Flow rather than the Operating Costs vs Income. Disregard factors like amortisation, depreciation etc.

More like £10-15m per year and somewhat less now given the fall in wages, transfer expenditure and less being shelled out on fees thereby reducing the outbound instalments.

All the same, unless we are being run on a cash breakeven basis and can't rule that out atm, or closer to it than for years someone will need to out something in over and above our revenue just to keep the lights on.

[BrizzleRed]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I don't disagree with this but I suppose the million dollar q as I put on the hypothetical takeover thread.

A) How much should we spend and over what time period? In other words how much should the cost base go up by.

B) How big a risk are we keen to take if it goes wrong ie if we plan to spend x and it leads to a major FFP breach 2-3, 4 at a push years down the line if we don't go up, are we as fans willing to accept a major downside risk.

Or try and go up in 2 frontloading expenditure making a 3rd or 4th year fail risk irrelevant.

I don't think we are spending enough now btw.

I for one certainly wouldn’t want to see some chancer come in and put us in danger.  Even under SL we were sailing close to the wind with FFP in the last few years, but how much of that was caused by the amount of multi-million pound transfer fees being written off with players leaving us on a free?!

If that money had been spent more wisely, there would have been a far better return on the outlay and our finances would have looked a lot healthier.  What I’m saying is, a new owner could conceivably stay within fhe same budget, but use the money more effectively and get far more from their investment.

I think the ideal situation would be for someone to come in with the attitude fhat we’ve got a hell of a lot going for us, if only we are run properly.  They can then formulate a clear plan, making sure they have people in place with the right expertise to carry out that plan.  

The owner can then stand back and let the people in post get on in doing the job they’re paid for, without unecessary interferance, or constant moving of the goal posts.  Hopefully we could then avoid the regular wasteful rebuilds, as we lurch from one ‘plan’ to the next

Only a dream I know, but I’d love to see it happen.  I’m just bored with hearing SL occasionally outlining his aims, including play-offs and ultimately the Prem, whilst his actions often seem to completely contradict his words.  We’ve heard it all far too many times now!

[Mr Popodopolous]

44 minutes ago, frenchred said:

Yeah let's keep the shit show we have instead

Every other club manages why wouldn't we?

 

 

The thing with some of these clubs, and this isn't a defence of the status quo but a mere counterpoint.

Putting aside that FFP would kick in within 2-3, 4 at most years if unsuccessful 

There are also mooted regulatory changes that could severely inhibit this model- Rick Parry the Head of the Football League has said the following:

The mood music seems to be against the owner benefactor model..whether it will play out this way who knows but he has critiqued it a few times.

Edited September 18, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Sleepy1968]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

I think so.  Just opinions from GO, but he’s generally got a bit of inside info I reckon.

I like listening to GO's footballing opinions but I didn't hear any insight to Alexandergate tonight.

I also like listening to that Ellie when she's on. I think @headhunter should get her on forever bristol city - I know she's a friend of the 'official' bristol city podcast (as Dave P likes to refer to three peeps), so there might be a loan fee involved.

Edited September 18, 2023 by Sleepy1968

[Hxj]

20 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

urely the amount needed is the Cash Flow rather than the Operating Costs vs Income. Disregard factors like amortisation, depreciation etc.

Currently yes - but have you read the posts on here?  £30 million is based upon:

£13 million for FFP purposes

£7 million to cover costs outside FFP

£10 million to improve the squad.

The issue is that banks will not lend funds without proof of income.

[mozo]

7 hours ago, REDOXO said:

Ok. So what I know for certain! Alexander has stepped down. 

In his statement he mentioned NP and BT but noticeably not JL or SL. 

The club thanked him for his service. 

No one has said why he has left  

So the rumour mill concludes

1 That he was fired

2 He walked away 

3 He didn’t get on with SL

4 Didn’t get on with NP

5 Didn’t get on with JL

6 Didn’t like the club structure

7 Didn’t like nepotism 

8 Didn’t like SL interference

9 SL thought he was crap

10 He was crap at his job

11 ETC ETC EYC ETC

I love the way things get twisted on here to support the posters existing view. 
 

Someone who knows something could call in to Sound of the City tonight or maybe the show try’s (hard) to get a comment from someone at the club tonight. It’s called journalism FYI!

I'm not one for rumours and conspiracies myself, but I'll leave just two words here: shape-shifting lizards...

[Mr Popodopolous]

13 minutes ago, Hxj said:

Currently yes - but have you read the posts on here?  £30 million is based upon:

£13 million for FFP purposes

£7 million to cover costs outside FFP

£10 million to improve the squad.

The issue is that banks will not lend funds without proof of income.

Otoh owners are happy in the main to fund it, especially if they want promotion.

I do wonder if there is a bit of double counting with the FFP vs equity ie the £13m loss will if put in in the form of equity include the £8m.

Certainly the more costly the squad (transfer instalment vs wages) the more owner funding is required.

[B-Rizzle]

I’ve no idea what the craic is with Phil Alexander but to me it’s becoming clearer and clearer that SL in general is succession planning and preparing the club for a sale.

A previous poster compared us to Ipswich pre their takeover and commented that they were appealing FFP-wise. Is that not what SL might be doing now, getting finances in order? Yet, everyone’s slagging him off for not pushing the budget. Isn’t a sale what these same people want?!