Never thought I would say this..

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Cityboy1954 said:

Ask Mark what hes got against Tanner he condems him each week.

Mark…

or Neil?

[ashton_fan]

Steve L's comment about the nest egg clearly related to the Club's finances not his own, he's already got more money than he knows what to do with!

It's funny how when we won NP gets the credit but when we lose it's SL's fault. We've always been a selling club, I remember Chris Garland being sold to pay for the Dolman in my early days of watching City, you can't stop players moving if they want to play in the top league and we need the money to balance the accounts.

[Davefevs]

5 hours ago, ashton_fan said:

Steve L's comment about the nest egg clearly related to the Club's finances not his own, he's already got more money than he knows what to do with!

Everyone knows this. Not sure what point you are trying to make?

5 hours ago, ashton_fan said:

It's funny how when we won NP gets the credit but when we lose it's SL's fault. We've always been a selling club, I remember Chris Garland being sold to pay for the Dolman in my early days of watching City, you can't stop players moving if they want to play in the top league and we need the money to balance the accounts.

everyone is a selling club bar a few. You have missed the point. The recent criticism of SL is because he appears to have decided to stop putting money in (his prerogative) when all his previous messages and those then cascaded and communicated by Alexander, Tins and Nige is that (sone of) the Alex Scott money woujd be available. Alexander’s SOTC interview seemed to be - how do I spin SL’s new approach to fit a view that this was all agreed in March when budgets were set. It failed because we’d heard completely different messages.

Nobody blames SL for results. We do criticise him stifling a good opportunity to progress by coming up with crap like his nest egg comments. 

[Cityboy1954]

9 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Mark…

or Neil?

Yes it was neil Dave hes only young good tackler needs to improve going forward but there seems an agenda.

[ashton_fan]

4 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Everyone knows this. Not sure what point you are trying to make?

everyone is a selling club bar a few. You have missed the point. The recent criticism of SL is because he appears to have decided to stop putting money in (his prerogative) when all his previous messages and those then cascaded and communicated by Alexander, Tins and Nige is that (sone of) the Alex Scott money woujd be available. Alexander’s SOTC interview seemed to be - how do I spin SL’s new approach to fit a view that this was all agreed in March when budgets were set. It failed because we’d heard completely different messages.

Nobody blames SL for results. We do criticise him stifling a good opportunity to progress by coming up with crap like his nest egg comments. 

Not everyons thought it was that obvious:

REDOXO

• 
• Members
• Posted 19 hours ago

Yes the nest egg comment came across to some like it’s he his building his own nest egg. A bloke with a couple of billion really doesn’t need to build it for himself. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re the nest egg I think SL's looking at the longer term. At his age a serious health issue can happen at any time. The club currently relies on him buying shares worth say £15m - £20m to balance the books each year, he can't give more than a certain amount due to FFP rules. Say for whatever reason one day he's physically unable to run the club then I imagine Jon would take over on a temporary basis until a new owner is found (that's why SL is already looking) , however I would be very surprised if Jon would be willing to sub the club millions of pounds to keep it going like his father has done. The club has to able to pay the players wages for this interim period without any help from outside potentially, if it can't then a points deduction and probable relegation would result (as happened at Wigan, Reading etc). Hence the need to reduce the wage bill and have a "nest egg" to pay the wages for, say, a year or so until other arrangements can be made. If he spent say £5m on another player the nest egg is considerably reduced and the wage bill will go up by about £20K per week (£1m per annum). I can see the logic, everyone else is thinking about the here and now whereas he's looking at the big picture/longer term.

[beaverface]

Let's be realistic, Steve Lansdown won't be able to go on indefinitely. Unfortunately that's the nature of the beast with time.....it waits for no man!

Therefore, whether it's in 1 year, 2 years, or 5 years, I would expect the club to be under new ownership, and one would hope that SL has the best interests of the club at heart to make sure he sells to a decent owner.

Of course, the flip side is that SL could get knocked over by a Bus and JL would naturally take the reins over, but would you particularly trust JL to get the best deal for the club?

TBH, I think JL gets a lot of stick on here - especially with all the crayon jibes for new kits etc - but equally, we hear so very little from him, maybe he prefers to sit in the background pulling the strings for his father, and SL is the public facing figure??!

I just don't know, but at this moment the better option would be for SL to line up a sound and safe investor\owner. One that can take us to the next level but without stupidly gambling everything.

I think what all of us want, is for us to continue to have a club to support, and one that is having a decent go at promotion.

[Davefevs]

41 minutes ago, ashton_fan said:

Not everyons thought it was that obvious:

REDOXO

• 
• Members
• Posted 19 hours ago

Yes the nest egg comment came across to some like it’s he his building his own nest egg. A bloke with a couple of billion really doesn’t need to build it for himself. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re the nest egg I think SL's looking at the longer term. At his age a serious health issue can happen at any time. The club currently relies on him buying shares worth say £15m - £20m to balance the books each year, he can't give more than a certain amount due to FFP rules. Say for whatever reason one day he's physically unable to run the club then I imagine Jon would take over on a temporary basis until a new owner is found (that's why SL is already looking) , however I would be very surprised if Jon would be willing to sub the club millions of pounds to keep it going like his father has done. The club has to able to pay the players wages for this interim period without any help from outside potentially, if it can't then a points deduction and probable relegation would result (as happened at Wigan, Reading etc). Hence the need to reduce the wage bill and have a "nest egg" to pay the wages for, say, a year or so until other arrangements can be made. If he spent say £5m on another player the nest egg is considerably reduced and the wage bill will go up by about £20K per week (£1m per annum). I can see the logic, everyone else is thinking about the here and now whereas he's looking at the big picture/longer term.

Those people probably think he’s spending the Scott fee on the Bears. 

[transfer reader]

Thought it was fairly obvious the 'nest egg' comment was about building ourselves up a buffer.

We skirted close to FFP over the last few years.

That seems to be sorted now, but a self imposed wage budget cap that doesn't use up all our limit is just sensible.

It's about building up some leeway, flexibility to do more in the future.

 

OTIB doing OTIB things and assuming the worst of everything then running with it.

[Mr Popodopolous]

We are well clear of it now..otoh if it is laying a foundation now building up for a 2 year push across 2024-25 and 2025-26 then that could also work, but the Scott fee under the current system will cease to be relevant come 2026-27 if we're still at this level.

Edited October 2, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Rocking Red Cyril]

7 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Everyone knows this. Not sure what point you are trying to make?

everyone is a selling club bar a few. You have missed the point. The recent criticism of SL is because he appears to have decided to stop putting money in (his prerogative) when all his previous messages and those then cascaded and communicated by Alexander, Tins and Nige is that (sone of) the Alex Scott money woujd be available. Alexander’s SOTC interview seemed to be - how do I spin SL’s new approach to fit a view that this was all agreed in March when budgets were set. It failed because we’d heard completely different messages.

Nobody blames SL for results. We do criticise him stifling a good opportunity to progress by coming up with crap like his nest egg comments. 

Wise words Dave 

[Redrascal2]

On 01/10/2023 at 09:25, Shauntaylor85 said:

In my view City will never get to the PL under current ownership. Just need to accept it. 

Absolutely right. The only way we are destined under Lansdown is League 1. If Pearson goes and we continue  to sell the best young players we produce it is inevitable.

[supercidered]

On 01/10/2023 at 09:25, Shauntaylor85 said:

In my view City will never get to the PL under current ownership. Just need to accept it. 

I know I may get pelters on here for posting this but, I'm not massively bothered about getting to the Premier League. I doubt whether I will see it my life time (in my 50's) in any case and I'm pretty comfortable with that.

If we ever did get there, I don't want to see us get walloped week in week out. I don't want to have celebrations and or matches with VAR spoiling my day out. God I hope that VAR doesn't get filtered down in to the Championship.

I also don't want glory hunting fans emerging from the wood work if we were to get there. It just feels that there are more negatives than positives by getting to the so called 'promised land'. 

So many clubs go up and then come down and the cycle starts again. For every Fulham there is a Norwich, Derby, WBA, Reading etc, etc. 

Time will tell but I think sometimes we as loyal City fans need to be careful what we wish for. I'll get my tin hat on!!

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, transfer reader said:

Thought it was fairly obvious the 'nest egg' comment was about building ourselves up a buffer.

We skirted close to FFP over the last few years.

That seems to be sorted now, but a self imposed wage budget cap that doesn't use up all our limit is just sensible.

It's about building up some leeway, flexibility to do more in the future.

 

OTIB doing OTIB things and assuming the worst of everything then running with it.

If that was the case….and I don’t believe it is btw….why not communicate that as such, rather than try to spin a load of crap / retro-fit a story re budgets set in March?  If Alexander had come out and said - we’ve got a great fee for Alex, that sets us up financially so FFP is no longer an issue over the next 2,3,4 seasons / cycles then we can understand the strategy.

But he didn’t.

And when you add that interview to SL’s own interviews (Nest Egg vs What Football Earns it can Spend) it is clear that it is bugger all to do with FFP.

SL has not communicated the strategy, nor has he via Alexander either.

The wage budget and amortisation levels are as low as they were in 2016-ish.

SL - stop treating us like idiots.  Just explain why, rather than leaving us making educated guesses or in some cases false accusations.  What a way to own a business where fan base is important.  He’s turning into football’s equivalent of Gerald Ratner whenever he gets interviewed.

+++++++++

We did skirt close to FFP, but that disappeared 1) through collaboration with The EFL and 2) further goodwill by selling Semenyo in January.

The current reporting period 21-22 / 22-23 / 23-24 sees the £38m loss from 20-21 no longer in the picture.  21-22’s £28m loss is underpinned by covid allowances and FFP allowances.  22-23’s (yet to be published) will be underpinned by FFP allowances and the Semenyo sale.  My calculations say we could’ve kept Scott and still been way inside FFP.

 

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

My cautious best guess is £39m plus £7m per season plus £2.5m in Covid. Leaving £62.5m before tax across 2021-22, 2022-23 and 2023-24.

It could all swing if last season's accounts are worse than anticipated but probably a couple of million within had we kept Scott- miles within post the sale. £2-3m without maybe.

[The Fat Controller]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

My calculations say we could’ve kept Scott and still been way inside FFP.

But presumably there would then be another £25m that SL would have to dig out from his pocket?

[Mr Popodopolous]

Just now, sinenomine said:

But presumably there would then be another £25m that SL would have to dig out from his pocket?

Cash Flow and Cash Losses vs Profit and Loss.

Extrapolating from the 2021-22 accounts £5-10m surely.

Edited October 2, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

50 minutes ago, sinenomine said:

But presumably there would then be another £25m that SL would have to dig out from his pocket?

Not £25m, no….certainly less than he’s previously had to put in.

[bexhill reds]

This has been a really interesting discussion, but to take it on a slightly different tangent, assuming that SL sells the club and the Bristol Sport group, what sort and background of owners do we want?

My own thought is that the Bristol Sport group would attract more US investors given the range of sports under the umbrella and the overall business, whereas the football club alone might attract more vanity type investors from Asia or the Middle East, I can’t see a UK based owner stumping up the cash required to run a club of our size in terms of squad, set up or payroll.

[Davefevs]

Just now, bexhill reds said:

This has been a really interesting discussion, but to take it on a slightly different tangent, assuming that SL sells the club and the Bristol Sport group, what sort and background of owners do we want?

My own thought is that the Bristol Sport group would attract more US investors given the range of sports under the umbrella and the overall business, whereas the football club alone might attract more vanity type investors from Asia or the Middle East, I can’t see a UK based owner stumping up the cash required to run a club of our size in terms of squad, set up or payroll.

High waisted trouser wearing is a pre-requisite!

Seriously though, an ownership group who employ the best people to help them determine the strategy and achieve the objectives, whether that be football-people, commercial-people, whatever-people.  That’s quite woolly, but it is clear that we’ve not done that in the past.  And communicate openly two-ways with the fans, supporter groups.