Lansdown

[ExiledAjax]

1 hour ago, phantom said:

It's quite well known what the asking price is and it's much more than above. 

The point I was making is £70m was quoted as being invested but much more will be repaid if the sale goes through 

If he's asking for north of £140m then that is surely for more than just BCFC + Ashton Gate?

There's no way a mid-table Championship club, even with a decent stadium in a decent city, is worth more than £140m. That's just not a market valuation reflective of the club in its current state. No way.

[REDOXO]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Who else would run up £200m losses in the P&L in a backwater football club!

I’m not upset by someone saying he’s given his money away, I’m annoyed by some people saying that means I am not allowed to have an opinion on his ownership.  It’s a bit “how dare you criticise SL”.

As you’ve probably guessed it won’t stop me having my say, and I will question why others think I shouldn’t.

 

Everybody should have their say it’s a forum. They are for free speech. 

SL HAS made mistakes, but let’s be frank they are mostly to do with manager choices and them not getting us to the PL.

I have been extremely vocal at times, particularly in terms of the my money my choice comment. That comment led us directly to a problem with FFP as you know while he bestowed shit tonnes on a bloke who was out of his depth  

However for it to be more than implied that he is in someway taking advantage financially is just plain wrong! I have no idea what the bloke has spent on Bristol Sport and it’s teams, AG,AV, the FC, academy/ies but to imply that somehow it’s personal gain driven is a distortion of the facts. 

 

[Davefevs]

14 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

However for it to be more than implied that he is in someway taking advantage financially is just plain wrong! I have no idea what the bloke has spent on Bristol Sport and it’s teams, AG,AV, the FC, academy/ies but to imply that somehow it’s personal gain driven is a distortion of the facts. 

 

I haven’t suggested / implied any of that though.

[Barrs Court Red]

24 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

 

SL HAS made mistakes, but let’s be frank they are mostly to do with manager choices and them not getting us to the PL.

 

 

They’re not. He’s made strategic blunder after strategic blunder - either wholly or partly through his entire tenure.  Woeful managerial choices are just the tip of the iceberg - and are they that bad? 

Wilson - decent

Tinnion - disaster, right man wrong time 

Johnson - decent

Coppel - disaster 

McInnes - ok

Millen - not great 

SOD - disaster 

Cotts - decent

Johnson Jnr - mixed bag

Holden - fml 

Pearson - mixed bag

With all those managers, most of the failures are with a backdrop of SL ******* about with direction/funding/letting boy blunder loose 

Biggest one of the strategic failures (if he had a hand in it) would have been the decision not to go ahead with the Ashton Gate rebuild in the very early naughties.  Though I’m not sure that’s attributable to him or not.  
 

It’s all bad though, there’s definitely balance to be had in the SL good/bad argument.  And that’s the frustration for me.  It’s not all bad…but it could and should have been so much better. 
 

[Bris Red]

1 hour ago, Ghost Rider said:

@Bris Red @Bristol Oil Services you pair of rats. I don’t give a **** if I’m banned for that. Scum.

 

I am utterly and unequivocally disgusted by the post, which depicts our owner, Steve Lansdown, as Hitler. ******* Hitler!!! This comparison is not just disrespectful; it’s ******* sick.

Hitler as you ******* know, was responsible for the deaths of millions during the Holocaust and the horrors of World War II. He stands as a symbol of hatred, intolerance, and the worst aspects of human nature. Making light of his actions, even in a satirical or humorous context, is not only tasteless but morally abhorrent.

What's even more disheartening is the fact that some of our fellow fans found this picture amusing. How can anyone find humor in something that diminishes the gravity of the Holocaust and the unimaginable suffering of its victims and the millions of deaths caused by WW2? How have the MODS even left the picture there????????

Steve’s dedication and financial support have transformed our club, taking us to new heights in terms of infrastructure, player development, and community engagement. Under his leadership, we’ve seen significant progress, from our stadium redevelopment to our youth academy’s success. He has invested not only in the team but also in the city itself, contributing positively to our community. Yes, we may not be where we want to be, but to compare him to Hitler, are you actually ******* kidding me? And for other fans to be laughing.

we really don’t deserve it success, we are such a bunch of boneheaded knuckle draggers. 
 

 

 

I stopped reading after the first paragraph, just another keyboard warrior 

[Sir Geoff]

13 hours ago, nebristolred said:

There's absolutely no need for the rudeness  The OP was probably a bit inappropriate. But mainly there were plenty of examples during the meltdown on lack of spending around deadline day, it is 8am and I am not going to trawl through for you. I just think we'd do best to stick to fair criticisms (of which there are plenty) rather than personal digs and insults.

I'll save you time. There has been nothing as you describe written or posted on this forum.

[BrizzleRed]

2 hours ago, ashton_fan said:

I remember what it was like before he took over, stuck in the 3rd division, 10k gates, hardly any young players coming through, stadium falling apart and no decent training facilities. This is the first time we've been established at this level since the 70's, gates have doubled and we have brilliant facilities. Some people have short memories.

Valid points, but don't forget back then, the club owned Ashton Gate and didn't have the huge debts that we have now.  It also felt like OUR club back then, but it really doesn't feel like that to me now. 

[REDOXO]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I haven’t suggested / implied any of that though.

I think you have David! 
 

 

[REDOXO]

2 hours ago, Barrs Court Red said:

They’re not. He’s made strategic blunder after strategic blunder - either wholly or partly through his entire tenure.  Woeful managerial choices are just the tip of the iceberg - and are they that bad? 

Wilson - decent

Tinnion - disaster, right man wrong time 

Johnson - decent

Coppel - disaster 

McInnes - ok

Millen - not great 

SOD - disaster 

Cotts - decent

Johnson Jnr - mixed bag

Holden - fml 

Pearson - mixed bag

With all those managers, most of the failures are with a backdrop of SL ******* about with direction/funding/letting boy blunder loose 

Biggest one of the strategic failures (if he had a hand in it) would have been the decision not to go ahead with the Ashton Gate rebuild in the very early naughties.  Though I’m not sure that’s attributable to him or not.  
 

It’s all bad though, there’s definitely balance to be had in the SL good/bad argument.  And that’s the frustration for me.  It’s not all bad…but it could and should have been so much better. 
 

Strategic blunder after strategic blunder. 
 

Im interested in your list of strategy blunders. You name one and then half take it back??!
 

The manager list is not great. That’s clear and obvious. However we we only had one AD, a billion years ago, who took years to develop a playing staff. We are as near replicating that now than we have been since 1980. 
 

 

[Davefevs]

25 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

I think you have David! 
 

 

What?

if by “personal gain” you mean taking the money for Scott for himself, or Bears, etc?  Nope. Never said that, or implied that.

If by “personal gain” you mean using his ownership to do something like the Sporting Quarter to leverage housing at Longmoor?  Absolutely.  At its most basic that’s a bit of “give and take”.

[REDOXO]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

What?

if by “personal gain” you mean taking the money for Scott for himself, or Bears, etc?  Nope. Never said that, or implied that.

If by “personal gain” you mean using his ownership to do something like the Sporting Quarter to leverage housing at Longmoor?  Absolutely.  At its most basic that’s a bit of “give and take”.

David. The commentary about a company owned by SL charging minimal interest on loans to the football club is enough. The inference is clear reading your posts. 
 

You seemed upset that somehow Lansdown was not beyond criticism because he/Pula were charging standard interest for loans and he was making money from the club. I refer to my previous posts. 
 

Lansdown is not above criticism on any level, but get real, the money he has put in is beyond reproach. The managerial decisions he’s made on that basis have been poor. 

[ashton_fan]

7 hours ago, Barrs Court Red said:

They’re not. He’s made strategic blunder after strategic blunder - either wholly or partly through his entire tenure.  Woeful managerial choices are just the tip of the iceberg - and are they that bad? 

Wilson - decent

Tinnion - disaster, right man wrong time 

Johnson - decent

Coppel - disaster 

McInnes - ok

Millen - not great 

SOD - disaster 

Cotts - decent

Johnson Jnr - mixed bag

Holden - fml 

Pearson - mixed bag

With all those managers, most of the failures are with a backdrop of SL ******* about with direction/funding/letting boy blunder loose 

Biggest one of the strategic failures (if he had a hand in it) would have been the decision not to go ahead with the Ashton Gate rebuild in the very early naughties.  Though I’m not sure that’s attributable to him or not.  
 

It’s all bad though, there’s definitely balance to be had in the SL good/bad argument.  And that’s the frustration for me.  It’s not all bad…but it could and should have been so much better. 
 

Hindsight's a wonderful thing. Most of those appointments looked ok at the time and were welcomed by the fans. Virtually all managerial appointments end in failure at some point in any case.

[Mike Hunt-Hertz]

10 hours ago, Bris Red said:

I stopped reading after the first paragraph, just another keyboard warrior 

A weapon grade flounce! 

[nebristolred]

10 hours ago, Sir Geoff said:

I'll save you time. There has been nothing as you describe written or posted on this forum.

Funny that, seeing as 16 others seem to agree with me. Either we're all wrong, or maybe 'Sir Geoff' should learn to read. 

[Davefevs]

9 hours ago, REDOXO said:

David. The commentary about a company owned by SL charging minimal interest on loans to the football club is enough. The inference is clear reading your posts. 
 

You seemed upset that somehow Lansdown was not beyond criticism because he/Pula were charging standard interest for loans and he was making money from the club. I refer to my previous posts. 
 

Lansdown is not above criticism on any level, but get real, the money he has put in is beyond reproach. The managerial decisions he’s made on that basis have been poor. 

Nope, completely the wrong end of the stick / wrong conclusion drawn.

Your final para sums my point - some on here think he is beyond criticism because of the money he has put in and tell us we should be grateful.

Even if it was “free money” he can still be criticised.  The fact that it’s not free money makes those who say we can’t criticise because of it, wrong about the basis of their argument!  We can also give credit too.  I have many times.

That is the main point, the right to criticise on a forum.  You agree with that.

++++++++++++++

The examples I’ve given are merely used to explain / demonstrate it’s not free money, nothing more than explanation, e.g.

• interest on loans (the rate is irrelevant, it’s not free)
• he wants payment when he sells

I have no issues with those two bullets at all.  I said that in my posts above, I even referenced a Bank that charges a lot more.  I think that inter-group loans have to be charged at “arms length” anyway, so I’m not criticising the rate he charges at all, nor am I implying it either.

++++++++++++++

So what if he doesn’t get back what he put in.  That’s a market value for you.  If I buy something for £100 and sell it 20 years later for £20 I haven’t given away / gifted £80 to the buyer, it’s that the item is now only worth £20.  Hopefully I’ve had 20 years of use, or 20 years of pleasure from the item.

In terms of SL, he’s had 20 years of owning a football club, making key decisions, etc, etc.  I hope he’s had some fun out of it too, both for him and his family.

++++++++++++++

So, one final time.  I am merely pointing out I don’t think I should be restricted from criticising SL by some posters based on an inaccurate position that he’s given away £200m (or whatever amount it is).

And criticism doesn’t have to be restricted to just manager appointments.  Of late I’ve been critical of Comms, in particular not communicating why it appears from the outside that he’s pulled up the drawbridge on funding losses.  You’ll see in those posts that I’ve said that his his prerogative, in many respects I’m in favour of more sustainability (especially when we look at recent FFP issues), it’s just the timing, and no rationale explaining.

Hope that explains my stance.  It really isn’t a criticism of his financial methods.  He’s the billionaire.

 

Edited October 11, 2023 by Davefevs

[Son of Fred]

7 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Nope, completely the wrong end of the stick / wrong conclusion drawn.

Your final para sums my point - some on here think he is beyond criticism because of the money he has put in and tell us we should be grateful.

Even if it was “free money” he can still be criticised.  The fact that it’s not free money makes those who say we can’t criticise because of it, wrong about the basis of their argument!  We can also give credit too.  I have many times.

That is the main point, the right to criticise on a forum.  You agree with that.

++++++++++++++

The examples I’ve given are merely used to explain / demonstrate it’s not free money, nothing more than explanation, e.g.

• interest on loans (the rate is irrelevant, it’s not free)
• he wants payment when he sells

I have no issues with those two bullets at all.  I said that in my posts above, I even referenced a Bank that charges a lot more.  I think that inter-group loans have to be charged at “arms length” anyway, so I’m not criticising the rate he charges at all, nor am I implying it either.

++++++++++++++

So what if he doesn’t get back what he put in.  That’s a market value for you.  If I buy something for £100 and sell it 20 years later for £20 I haven’t given away / gifted £80 to the buyer, it’s that the item is now only worth £20.  Hopefully I’ve had 20 years of use, or 20 years of pleasure from the item.

In terms of SL, he’s had 20 years of owning a football club, making key decisions, etc, etc.  I hope he’s had some fun out of it too, both for him and his family.

++++++++++++++

So, one final time.  I am merely pointing out I don’t think I should be restricted from criticising SL by some posters based on an inaccurate position that he’s given away £200m (or whatever amount it is).

And criticism doesn’t have to be restricted to just manager appointments.  Of late I’ve been critical of Comms, in particular not communicating why it appears from the outside that he’s pulled up the drawbridge on funding losses.  You’ll see in those posts that I’ve said that his his prerogative, in many respects I’m in favour of more sustainability (especially when we look at recent FFP issues), it’s just the timing, and no rationale explaining.

Hope that explains my stance.  It really isn’t a criticism of his financial methods.  He’s the billionaire.

 

Excellent post Sir

[phantom]

15 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

If he's asking for north of £140m then that is surely for more than just BCFC + Ashton Gate?

Correct

I am led to believe that this is part of a stumbling block, the size of the ground and the lack of opportunity to expand it

[fisherrich]

14 hours ago, BrizzleRed said:

Valid points, but don't forget back then, the club owned Ashton Gate and didn't have the huge debts that we have now.  It also felt like OUR club back then, but it really doesn't feel like that to me now. 

Post of the day, so so true. As Lansdown said -  “it’s my club”. Pure arrogance.
NO Lansdown. Every football club belongs to the fans. 

Edited October 11, 2023 by fisherrich

[REDOXO]

4 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Nope, completely the wrong end of the stick / wrong conclusion drawn.

Your final para sums my point - some on here think he is beyond criticism because of the money he has put in and tell us we should be grateful.

Even if it was “free money” he can still be criticised.  The fact that it’s not free money makes those who say we can’t criticise because of it, wrong about the basis of their argument!  We can also give credit too.  I have many times.

That is the main point, the right to criticise on a forum.  You agree with that.

++++++++++++++

The examples I’ve given are merely used to explain / demonstrate it’s not free money, nothing more than explanation, e.g.

• interest on loans (the rate is irrelevant, it’s not free)
• he wants payment when he sells

I have no issues with those two bullets at all.  I said that in my posts above, I even referenced a Bank that charges a lot more.  I think that inter-group loans have to be charged at “arms length” anyway, so I’m not criticising the rate he charges at all, nor am I implying it either.

++++++++++++++

So what if he doesn’t get back what he put in.  That’s a market value for you.  If I buy something for £100 and sell it 20 years later for £20 I haven’t given away / gifted £80 to the buyer, it’s that the item is now only worth £20.  Hopefully I’ve had 20 years of use, or 20 years of pleasure from the item.

In terms of SL, he’s had 20 years of owning a football club, making key decisions, etc, etc.  I hope he’s had some fun out of it too, both for him and his family.

++++++++++++++

So, one final time.  I am merely pointing out I don’t think I should be restricted from criticising SL by some posters based on an inaccurate position that he’s given away £200m (or whatever amount it is).

And criticism doesn’t have to be restricted to just manager appointments.  Of late I’ve been critical of Comms, in particular not communicating why it appears from the outside that he’s pulled up the drawbridge on funding losses.  You’ll see in those posts that I’ve said that his his prerogative, in many respects I’m in favour of more sustainability (especially when we look at recent FFP issues), it’s just the timing, and no rationale explaining.

Hope that explains my stance.  It really isn’t a criticism of his financial methods.  He’s the billionaire.

 

Ok Can we have a list of people who say that Lansdown can’t be criticized because of the money he put in?

Im not even sure your premise is accurate! 
 

Who are these people? 

[Kingswood Robin]

35 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

Ok Can we have a list of people who say that Lansdown can’t be criticized because of the money he put in?

Im not even sure your premise is accurate! 
 

Who are these people? 

There was one on page 3 of this thread. It was Davefevs response to him that kicked off your mini debate with him. I don't know if he's from Clutton or indeed if he lives in a cave !

[REDOXO]

15 minutes ago, Kingswood Robin said:

There was one on page 3 of this thread. It was Davefevs response to him that kicked off your mini debate with him. I don't know if he's from Clutton or indeed if he lives in a cave !

So we have one!

Edit:

Found it!

So @Clutton Caveman has in someway restricted @Davefevs right to free speech about SL on a public forum!

I think some of us need a new hobby, including me! 

Edited October 11, 2023 by REDOXO

[steviestevieneville]

17 hours ago, Barrs Court Red said:

They’re not. He’s made strategic blunder after strategic blunder - either wholly or partly through his entire tenure.  Woeful managerial choices are just the tip of the iceberg - and are they that bad? 

Wilson - decent

Tinnion - disaster, right man wrong time 

Johnson - decent

Coppel - disaster 

McInnes - ok

Millen - not great 

SOD - disaster 

Cotts - decent

Johnson Jnr - mixed bag

Holden - fml 

Pearson - mixed bag

With all those managers, most of the failures are with a backdrop of SL ******* about with direction/funding/letting boy blunder loose 

Biggest one of the strategic failures (if he had a hand in it) would have been the decision not to go ahead with the Ashton Gate rebuild in the very early naughties.  Though I’m not sure that’s attributable to him or not.  
 

It’s all bad though, there’s definitely balance to be had in the SL good/bad argument.  And that’s the frustration for me.  It’s not all bad…but it could and should have been so much better. 
 

Mciines wasn’t ok , his team & ashton got us relegated. O’driscoll continuously gets slagged off but he had to do what Pearson initially came in to do . Get rid of the dead work & start the rebuild . We had a massively lop sided & overpaid squad . He brought jet in plus flint, fielding & Marlon I think . Cotterill gave us our best season since the 50’s so he deserves more than “decent” . No credit to Lansdown for him though as it was Kieth Dawes appointment .  

[Numero Uno]

On 10/10/2023 at 12:14, Clutton Caveman said:

I really am at a loss regarding the criticism of SL. He has poured lots of his own money into the club writing off huge sums. We are still not profitable and so each year he has to write a cheque. Who of us if we won the Euro millions would take on a club where after 5 years we would be broke. Clearly people of this wealth become involved in sport as a hobby. A very expensive one at that. It seems he has played enough with the toy and wants to sell it, quite understandably but is not pitching it to every low life in a baseball cap. Clearly we are now more saleable than we were under Ashton and LJ. And hopefully we will reduce our losses to the point where a good buyer can be found.

I ask 2 questions. What other owner since Harry Dolman has done a better job?

Given a lottery win of £150 million would you plough this into BCFC?

If I had a lottery win of £1.2b I would be delighted to plough £150m of it into the football club!!

[Topper 123]

17 hours ago, BrizzleRed said:

Valid points, but don't forget back then, the club owned Ashton Gate and didn't have the huge debts that we have now.  It also felt like OUR club back then, but it really doesn't feel like that to me now. 

But how many clubs aren’t owned either by consortiums or big foreign owners and various groups ?

[lenred]

21 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

If I had a lottery win of £1.2b I would be delighted to plough £150m of it into the football club!!

Me too. Especially when I’d get a lot of it back as well when I came to sell.
 

This fallacy that SL is doing all of this out of the goodness of his heart is just that - a fallacy.   We’ve known that he isn’t ever since his ‘my club’ rant during LJs rein. Probably knew it before but that confirmed it for many.  

The infrastructure is better but that’s it.  And even that - as great as it is - is not that incredible for this level as we’re continually told - it’s very decent for the Championship and would just about stand up in the Prem.  But it’s not anywhere near groundbreaking  
 

We’re in the same league as before he took over and haven’t been anywhere near his continually stated aim of becoming an established Premier club.
 

His rein has been one of treading water when it could’ve been so so much more had he made smarter decisions. I’d imagine he’s finally realised that and now wants to cut ties when he gets what he wants out of us financially.  If figures are correct though it could be a long wait! 

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, REDOXO said:

So we have one!

Edit:

Found it!

So @Clutton Caveman has in someway restricted @Davefevs right to free speech about SL on a public forum!

I think some of us need a new hobby, including me! 

Not just this thread but plenty of others implying / giving a general sentiment that we are not allowed to criticise.

Here’s a couple (not aimed at the two posters), just examples, and of course they are entitled to express their view too.

 

 

[Bazooka Joe]

On 06/10/2023 at 12:42, frenchred said:

I see the Fuhrer is taking the easy route with a Q and A with the eggchasers before their game at Ashton gate

Lansdown will be fuhrer-ious when he sees this.

What gives you the Reich to address him in this way?

You obviously think you have the moral Heil ground.

[SecretSam]

11 hours ago, ashton_fan said:

Hindsight's a wonderful thing. Most of those appointments looked ok at the time and were welcomed by the fans. Virtually all managerial appointments end in failure at some point in any case.

Absolutely, SO'D was very positive, yet didn't work out (although Pack, Flint...both for a song). 

And yet Cotts' appointment was greeted with vitriol and anger, and now he's seen as some sort of Messiah.

[Sleepy1968]

42 minutes ago, lenred said:

The infrastructure is better but that’s it.  And even that - as great as it is - is not that incredible for this level as we’re continually told - it’s very decent for the Championship and would just about stand up in the Prem.  But it’s not anywhere near groundbreaking 

My seat in the Dolman isn't any better than it would've been 50 years ago. In fact it might be worse because they moved the seats yo get more in.0okay it might be plastic v wooden, but I don't have a cushion like they did back in the 2 channel tv days.

[BrizzleRed]

56 minutes ago, Topper 123 said:

But how many clubs aren’t owned either by consortiums or big foreign owners and various groups ?

I really don’t know tbh.  

As you raise that point, I’ll say this.  How many of those other owners you’ve mentioned have treated their club like a personal toy and then lost interest when they found newer ones and as good as stuck their old toy (the club) in a cupboard and forgotten about it??