What is for sale….?

[cidered abroad]

If he sells the clubs but keeps the Stadium, that affects us more than any other part. of Bristol Sport.

Bears have only one FFP type financial restriction of limiting the total outlay on about 40 players total wages. Approx £5.5 million I believe. The top one or two big paid stars are exempt from this total. No other expenditure can be penalised

The Basketball club are irrelevant.

City however depend very heavily on the income from the stadium usage from those who use the internal facilities; wedding receptions, companies using the rooms in the stadium for a multitude of reasons. I seem to remember a figure of £10 million just before Covid arrived. Without that money, we would be looking at dire happenings related to FFP.

[Ivorguy]

3 minutes ago, cidered abroad said:

If he sells the clubs but keeps the Stadium, that affects us more than any other part. of Bristol Sport.

Bears have only one FFP type financial restriction of limiting the total outlay on about 40 players total wages. Approx £5.5 million I believe. The top one or two big paid stars are exempt from this total. No other expenditure can be penalised

The Basketball club are irrelevant.

City however depend very heavily on the income from the stadium usage from those who use the internal facilities; wedding receptions, companies using the rooms in the stadium for a multitude of reasons. I seem to remember a figure of £10 million just before Covid arrived. Without that money, we would be looking at dire happenings related to FFP.

Well some of us have been saying this for literally years

[ExiledAjax]

1 hour ago, bcfcredandwhite said:

If it’s just the club then we presumably will have to rent Ashton Gate from Bristol Sport?

Bristol Sport does not own Ashton Gate.

[James54De]

3 hours ago, RedReg said:

I thought Ashton gate owned by the football club? 

Yes

[22A]

4 hours ago, RedorDead BCFC said:

I doubt very much, there is much rugby over there. 

Played mainly in colleges and by the US Marines. USA didn't qualify for this year's World Cup but have appeared in quite a few of them sine the first in 1987.

[GBF]

I really don’t like the fact that the football club doesn’t own its own stadium any more. We are reliant on current and future owners to do the right thing. Before SL sells I would want him to protect the Football Club from the possibility that it could be held to ransom for access  or use of its own historical stadium. I think Ken Bates did something along those lines for Chelsea fans when h gave the Chelsea fans voting rights on the use and future development of Stamford Bridge befit he sold the Club

 

 

[Cityboy1954]

6 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Whole Bristol Sport “empire”.  Football Club, Stadium, Rugby, etc, etc.

Think thats what the hold up is Dave with the American consortium are they interested in the rest of the rubbish or just the football.? 

[Davefevs]

6 hours ago, cidered abroad said:

If he sells the clubs but keeps the Stadium, that affects us more than any other part. of Bristol Sport.

Bears have only one FFP type financial restriction of limiting the total outlay on about 40 players total wages. Approx £5.5 million I believe. The top one or two big paid stars are exempt from this total. No other expenditure can be penalised

The Basketball club are irrelevant.

City however depend very heavily on the income from the stadium usage from those who use the internal facilities; wedding receptions, companies using the rooms in the stadium for a multitude of reasons. I seem to remember a figure of £10 million just before Covid arrived. Without that money, we would be looking at dire happenings related to FFP.

The financial accounts are out there for all to see.

The intra-group transactions do make it hard to get a true picture though.  Having said that at a really basic level, Ashton Gate Ltd (the stadium) basically makes a bit of money to cover off some of the interest on the loans from SL and the depreciation of the stadium.  But it still makes a loss.  There might be good reason why it’s made to run at a loss.  I’m not an accountant though.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

The fact that wages are about 1/3 of turnover for AGL and it still runs at a loss- granted depreciation and amortisation plus no separate cash..Well the obvious question of tax offsetting even a small amount but really from a cost control perspective that kind of company shouldn't be making a loss surely. IMO.

[fgrsimon]

26 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

The financial accounts are out there for all to see.

The intra-group transactions do make it hard to get a true picture though.  Having said that at a really basic level, Ashton Gate Ltd (the stadium) basically makes a bit of money to cover off some of the interest on the loans from SL and the depreciation of the stadium.  But it still makes a loss.  There might be good reason why it’s made to run at a loss.  I’m not an accountant though.

 

You posted a very useful flow diagram thingy of the Bristol Sport hierarchy a while ago. Have you still got it? Can't remember whether AG Ltd is under BCFC1982 or whether both were under another holding company? 

Either way I'm pretty sure the football club still owns/controls the stadium.

[Davefevs]

8 minutes ago, fgrsimon said:

You posted a very useful flow diagram thingy of the Bristol Sport hierarchy a while ago. Have you still got it? Can't remember whether AG Ltd is under BCFC1982 or whether both were under another holding company? 

Either way I'm pretty sure the football club still owns/controls the stadium.

@ExiledAjax created this…he might have an update.

[fgrsimon]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

@ExiledAjax created this…he might have an update.

Yes that's the fella thanks. It's a bit of reassurance anyway.

[ExiledAjax]

5 hours ago, Davefevs said:

@ExiledAjax created this…he might have an update.

 

5 hours ago, fgrsimon said:

Yes that's the fella thanks. It's a bit of reassurance anyway.

BCFC 1982 Ltd is now named Bristol City Holdings Limited. It's the same company just with a name change in 1996.

I'll try and update this later this week if I get a minute - as I said on the other thread I think it's just checking the directors are correct, to my knowledge the companies are all the same and in the same place.

[ExiledAjax]

@Davefevs @fgrsimon updated below.

Main interesting points - 

1. Tom Rawcliffe is deemed important enough to be a director of BCFC Women Limited, but not of any other company. So he is not an appointed statutory director of the company he is the Chief Operating Officer for - not necessarily weird in itself as a COO doesn't necessarily need to be on the board, but it is weird when combined with him being appointed to the women's board.
2. Conversely, Jon Lansdown is deemed important enough to be on the board of every other company (including BCFC Heritage and Archive Limited), but is not on the board of BCFC Women Limited. Presumably this explains why he was so busy that he could only do a two minute in-house interview two days after the manager was sacked.
3. Obviously, we only have two directors at Men's team and Holdings level. BCFC is not subject to the Sport England Code for Governance (pretty much the best generic sports governance code in the UK) but if we were this board would fail it's highest level of requirements - and I'd presume we would seek to satisfy the levels required of companies/organisations that take £1m in funding from Sport England.
4. I have added company numbers to this version to make it easier to track them.
5. Lisa Knights - recently appointed CEO of the Flyers, still manages to find time to be on the board of directors of Ashton Gate Limited, Bristol Sport, Bristol Rugby Women Limited, and BCFC Women Limited. Truly multi-talented.

Help needed - 

1. I am trying to establish exactly how FeverPitch Films (name?) fits in. I cannot tie down the company. I can't see a company name on reachfeverpitch.com, I've tried searching the domain name on WhoIs? ttop find who owns it, but it's just GoDaddy (:laugh:). I've tried looking at Jon's list of directorships but he's either not a director of FeverPitch or it's listed under a slightly different name for him. Any ideas?

[chinapig]

14 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

@Davefevs @fgrsimon updated below.

Main interesting points - 

1. Tom Rawcliffe is deemed important enough to be a director of BCFC Women Limited, but not of any other company. So he is not an appointed statutory director of the company he is the Chief Operating Officer for - not necessarily weird in itself as a COO doesn't necessarily need to be on the board, but it is weird when combined with him being appointed to the women's board.
2. Conversely, Jon Lansdown is deemed important enough to be on the board of every other company (including BCFC Heritage and Archive Limited), but is not on the board of BCFC Women Limited. Presumably this explains why he was so busy that he could only do a two minute in-house interview two days after the manager was sacked.
3. Obviously, we only have two directors at Men's team and Holdings level. BCFC is not subject to the Sport England Code for Governance (pretty much the best generic sports governance code in the UK) but if we were this board would fail it's highest level of requirements - and I'd presume we would seek to satisfy the levels required of companies/organisations that take £1m in funding from Sport England.
4. I have added company numbers to this version to make it easier to track them.
5. Lisa Knights - recently appointed CEO of the Flyers, still manages to find time to be on the board of directors of Ashton Gate Limited, Bristol Sport, Bristol Rugby Women Limited, and BCFC Women Limited. Truly multi-talented.

Help needed - 

1. I am trying to establish exactly how FeverPitch Films (name?) fits in. I cannot tie down the company. I can't see a company name on reachfeverpitch.com, I've tried searching the domain name on WhoIs? ttop find who owns it, but it's just GoDaddy (:laugh:). I've tried looking at Jon's list of directorships but he's either not a director of FeverPitch or it's listed under a slightly different name for him. Any ideas?

Short version:

The corporate structure is a mess and corporate governance is weak. Not an attractive purchase.

[James54De]

10 hours ago, GBF said:

I really don’t like the fact that the football club doesn’t own its own stadium any more. We are reliant on current and future owners to do the right thing. Before SL sells I would want him to protect the Football Club from the possibility that it could be held to ransom for access  or use of its own historical stadium. I think Ken Bates did something along those lines for Chelsea fans when h gave the Chelsea fans voting rights on the use and future development of Stamford Bridge befit he sold the Club

 

 

Can anyone on this ******* forum read. 

[Davefevs]

@ExiledAjax I get the impression Fever Pitch is actually a part of Bristol Sport, an in-house creative team, with its “brand”.  Might be wrong.

[ExiledAjax]

8 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

@ExiledAjax I get the impression Fever Pitch is actually a part of Bristol Sport, an in-house creative team, with its “brand”.  Might be wrong.

So it's not a standalone company, but instead is just a brand. If correct then that explains why there's nothing on CH etc.

[Davefevs]

6 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

So it's not a standalone company, but instead is just a brand. If correct then that explains why there's nothing on CH etc.

Only my guess.

[IAmNick]

5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Only my guess.

[BigTone]

16 hours ago, ralphindevon said:

I just think selling it all must really shorten the list of potential buyers

Agree 100%

My Wife and I have a house and 2 holiday Gites for sale here in France, however if it was just the house it would sell much quicker.

[ExiledAjax]

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Only my guess.

Cheers. It's a guess that makes sense though.

I had another point on recent changes. Victoria Long was appointed Bristol Sport CFO and quietly put on the board of Bristol Sport over the summer. I've spoken to a couple of her now ex-colleagues and didn't get a glowing report regarding what they inherited from her.

I'm not sure how much influence she has on BCFC - but I assume it's quite a bit. 

3 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

Thanks, doesn't say it's a company, although "within the Bristol Sport group" suggests it might be...but is also ambiguous and unclear. I wonder what the actual employing entity would be here? Maybe I'll apply and ask a question or two

[The Bard]

8 hours ago, Davefevs said:

The financial accounts are out there for all to see.

The intra-group transactions do make it hard to get a true picture though.  Having said that at a really basic level, Ashton Gate Ltd (the stadium) basically makes a bit of money to cover off some of the interest on the loans from SL and the depreciation of the stadium.  But it still makes a loss.  There might be good reason why it’s made to run at a loss.  I’m not an accountant though.

 

'Other operating expenses' of £8 million. Love to hear the explanation of them.

[bcfc01]

12 hours ago, James54De said:

Yes

No.

Ashton Gate is not owned by the football club and hasn't been for a long time.

It is owned by Ashton Gate Ltd.

[Barrs Court Red]

1 hour ago, The Bard said:

'Other operating expenses' of £8 million. Love to hear the explanation of them.

Crayola by the pallet load.

[ExiledAjax]

40 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

No.

Ashton Gate is not owned by the football club and hasn't been for a long time.

It is owned by Ashton Gate Ltd.

Trouble is, both you and @James54De can be correct - depending on what you define as the "football club".

Some will argue (and I assume you fall into this camp) that the "football club" in its strictest interpretation is the company that owns the elements required to operate as a football club, being:

1. the player registrations and contracts;
2. the coaching staff contracts;
3. the share in the EFL (or Premier League) that entitles the club to compete in EFL/PL competitions; and
4. the training ground.

In our case the company that owns all of those things is Bristol City Football Club Limited, and you are correct that this company does not own Ashton Gate Stadium, either directly or indirectly.

However, Bristol City Football Club Limited is itself owned by Bristol City Holdings Limited. That company is also the parent company of Ashton Gate Limited, and so indirectly owns Ashton Gate Limited. There are two reasons one might argue that the "football club" is not just Bristol City Football Club Limited, but is in fact Bristol City Holdings Limited:

1. it is Bristol City Holdings Limited that reports consolidated accounts for the purposes of EFL and FA financial monitoring and "FFP", and
2. it is in Bristol City Holdings Limited that fans still own some residual shares dating from 1982, which is when OvalshelfCo (Number Thirty Six) Limited was taken off the shelf and renamed Bristol City (1982) PLC.
3. Bristol City Football Club Limited was not incorporated until 1996 when it was slotted in under the newly named Bristol City Football Holdings Limited in order to fulfil its current role as the football operations company.

Personally, I probably agree with you that in modern reality it is Bristol City Football Club Limited that is the "football club", but I do understand the other side of the argument which does have a lot of merit if you frame the modern history of the club correctly.

I'd also say that having a set up like this - where the stadium is owned by a sister company to the football club operating company - is very common in modern English football. There are very good reasons for doing it, the main one being that it protects the stadium in the event that the football club operating company becomes insolvent. If Bristol City Football Club Limited owned Ashton Gate Stadium, and Bristol City Football Club Limited became insolvent and entered administration, then the administrators would potentially come under pressure to sell the stadium in order to raise the money needed to satisfy the debts owed by Bristol City Football Club Limited. Given the football creditors rule and HMRC's attitude to issuing winding up proceedings (even if they don't then pursue their full creditor entitlement) this is a real danger. 

This structure has received a bad name as it has been abused by clubs who generated overly generous valuations when they split their stadium from their football operations. It also can still cause issues if the football club company goes bankrupt as you can end up in a situation lioke Bury where one party owns the stadium and one owns the football club and they don't get on. However, in the scenario described above where the administrators sell the stadium to satisfy debts, you would very likely end up at this same position, but could be in a worse position as you're dealing with a shark who has snapped up the stadium at a cut-price from a desperate seller. Who knows what their attitude might be. At least in our cuirrent situation we know who any phoenix/successor club would be dealing with - Lansdown.

Basically the point is that the separation of stadium and football club - if that is how one reads it - is not a nefarious scheme dreamt up by the Lansdowns and the Lansdowns alone to strip Bristol City Football Club of a major asset. It's a legitimate and rational method of attempting, so far as is possible, to protect that stadium asset from potential future issues. It may not be perfect, but it is not in my opinion a major issue with which to bash the Lansdowns. 

Edited November 1, 2023 by ExiledAjax

[James54De]

53 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

No.

Ashton Gate is not owned by the football club and hasn't been for a long time.

It is owned by Ashton Gate Ltd.

Which is owned by Bristol City Holdings. Ain’t difficult. 

[bcfc01]

16 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Trouble is, both you and @James54De can be correct - depending on what you define as the "football club".

Some will argue (and I assume you fall into this camp) that the "football club" in its strictest interpretation is the company that owns the elements required to operate as a football club, in our case being:

1. the player registrations and contracts;
2. the coaching staff contracts;
3. the share in the EFL that entitles BCFC to compete in EFL competitions; and
4. the training ground.

In our case the company that owns all of those things is Bristol City Football Club Limited, and you are correct that this company does not own Ashton Gate Stadium, either directly or indrectly.

However, Bristol City Football Club Limited is itself owned by Bristol City Holdings Limited. That company is also the parent company of Ashton Gate Limited, and so indirectly owns Ashton Gate Limited. There are two reasons one might argue that the "football club" is not just Bristol City Football Club Limited, but is in fact Bristol City Holdings Limited:

1. it is Bristol City Holdings Limited that reports consolidated accounts for the purposes of EFL and FA financial monitoring and "FFP", and
2. it is in Bristol City Holdings Limited that fans still own some residual shares dating from 1982, which is when OvalshelfCo (Number Thirty Six) Limited was taken off the shelf and renamed Bristol City (1982) PLC.
3. Bristol City Football Club Limited was not incorporated until 1996 when it was slotted in under the newly named Bristol City Football Holdings Limited in order to fulfil its current role as the football operations company.

Personally, I probably agree with you that in modern reality it is Bristol City Football Club Limited that is the "football club", but I do understand the other side of the argument which does have a lot of merit if you frame the modern history of the club correctly.

I'd also say that having a set up like this - where the stadium is owned by a sister company to the football club operating company - is very common in modern English football. There are very good reasons for doing it, the main one being that it protects the stadium in the event that the football club operating company becomes insolvent. If Bristol City Football Club Limited owned Ashton Gate Stadium, and Bristol City Football Club Limited became insolvent and entered administration, then the administrators would potentially come under pressure to sell the stadium in order to raise the money needed to satisfy the debts owed by Bristol City Football Club Limited. Given the football creditors rule and HMRC's attitude to issuing winding up proceedings (even if they don't then pursue their full creditor entitlement) this is a real danger. 

This structure has received a bad name as it has been abused by clubs who generated overly generous valuations when they split their stadium from their football operations. It also can still cause issues if the football club company goes bankrupt as you can end up in a situation lioke Bury where one party owns the stadium and one owns the football club and they don't get on. However, in the scenario described above where the administrators sell the stadium to satisfy debts, you would very likely end up at this same position, but could be in a worse position as you're dealing with a shark who has snapped up the stadium at a cut-price from a desperate seller. Who knows what their attitude might be. At least in our cuirrent situation we know who any phoenix/successor club would be dealing with - Lansdown.

Basically the point is that the separation of stadium and football club - if that is how one reads it - is not a nefarious scheme dreamt up by the Lansdowns and the Lansdowns alone to strip Bristol City Football Club of a major asset. It's a legitimate and rational method of attempting, so far as is possible, to protect that stadium asset from potential future issues. It may not be perfect, but it is not in my opinion a major issue with which to bash the Lansdowns. 

I understand the complexity of the structure SL has set up (thanks for posting the chart btw) but the asset is owned by Ashton Gate Ltd, a separate entity to Bristol City Football Club with a different board of directors. As you pointed out there is no doubt in my mind (or legally) who owns Ashton Gate Stadium and it aint the football club.

But yes, I agree that it all comes down to who owns (majority shareholder) all the companies in the group which is ultimately SL. In that respect, it could be seen as one organisation. But that could all change if SL sells the lot and if he does I hope there are covenants or such like to protect the football club and stadium/HPC.

 

2 minutes ago, James54De said:

Which is owned by Bristol City Holdings. Ain’t difficult. 

No it isn't difficult.

Ashton Gate is legally owned by Ashton Gate Ltd.

Edited November 1, 2023 by bcfc01

[James54De]

6 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

I understand the complexity of the structure SL has set up (thanks for posting the chart btw) but the asset is owned by Ashton Gate Ltd, a separate entity to Bristol City Football Club with a different board of directors. As you pointed out there is no doubt in my mind (or legally) who owns Ashton Gate Stadium and it aint the football club.

But yes, I agree that it all comes down to who owns (majority shareholder) all the companies in the group which is ultimately SL. In that respect, it could be seen as one organisation. But that could all change if SL sells the lot and if he does I hope there are covenants or such like to protect the football club and stadium/HPC.

 

No it isn't difficult.

Ashton Gate is legally owned by Ashton Gate Ltd.

Which is legally owned by Bristol City Holding ltd. That is the company that both the FA and EFL consider our football club. 

[ExiledAjax]

5 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

I understand the complexity of the structure SL has set up (thanks for posting the chart btw) but the asset is owned by Ashton Gate Ltd, a separate entity to Bristol City Football Club with a different board of directors. As you pointed out there is no doubt in my mind (or legally) who owns Ashton Gate Stadium and it aint the football club.

But yes, I agree that it all comes down to who owns (majority shareholder) all the companies in the group which is ultimately SL. In that respect, it could be seen as one organisation. But that could all change if SL sells the lot and if he does I hope there are covenants or such like to protect the football club and stadium/HPC.

As I say, it comes down to:

1. What you define as the "football club"; and

2. How comfortable you are with the set up.

I've given my thoughts on the first point above. On the second, for me at least, the answer is "very comfortable".

Firstly it's a normal set up and to my knowledge the Lansdowns have not abused it so far (ie there was no over inflation of value and it's alm operated fairly and quite well in a commercial sense).

Secondly, I cannot see who would agree to buy Bristol City Football Club Limited without also buying Ashton Gate Limited. It would seem mad to do that as the buyer would own a football club but not also own it's home stadium. I really think that risk is so small as to be negligible.

The bigger risk is probably that a new buyer decides that AG is a bad site and wants to move. Here we would rely on the registration as an asset of community value, and the fact that AG is so developed now that again, I think it's a small risk.

Basically I'm fine with the current set up, but do understand the concerns you might have.