Jon talks...

[chinapig]

2 minutes ago, Harry said:

That may indeed be true. 
And one of the reasons it’s a complex sale. What if the new owner doesn’t want anything to do with the rugby? 
Jon says they can be decoupled. Well; how do you decouple them if they’re allowed to use the stadium until the year 2129? 

It might be less difficult as 2129 is precisely the year Jon is targeting for promotion.

[Frenchay Red]

21 minutes ago, lenred said:

All this talk of Boards and investment reminds me.  I saw Scudamore on Saturday after the game and he was with someone who very very very much looked like the old Chelsea chairman Bruce Buck. Probably something and nothing but struck me as a little weird that BB would want to take in City v Rotherham on a Saturday afternoon even if he is good mates with Scudamore.  

I have heard from a knowledgeable source that Scudamore is still closely involved with the club, and that new investment is very much being sought. Also heard from same source that a club representative is in USA on a similar quest. But will anything come of it? Seems unlikely to me the way the BS thing is set up.

[W-S-M Seagull]

3 minutes ago, Frenchay Red said:

I have heard from a knowledgeable source that Scudamore is still closely involved with the club, and that new investment is very much being sought. Also heard from same source that a club representative is in USA on a similar quest. But will anything come of it? Seems unlikely to me the way the BS thing is set up.

Although I heard that some bridges were burned with Scudamore following the treatment of Phil Alexander who was his recommendation. 

[Harry]

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

Although I heard that some bridges were burned with Scudamore following the treatment of Phil Alexander who was his recommendation. 

Correct 

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, beaverface said:

I listened to this interview with it playing in the background, but did I hear right when JL said that we're looking for outside investment, with no mention from him of looking to sell?

Could I be putting two and two together and thinking that SL\JL probably don't want to fund the transfers (certainly not as much as they have done) and would be reliant on someone else to come in and foot the bill? But until then we keep spending what we make off of transfer sells?

2 hours ago, Tony Tootle said:

Yes, and this is the most likely outcome IMO. New investor taking a controlling stake while the Lansdowns maintain a smaller holding.

He also said…”or expertise”.

Well some / all of that expertise required (PL experience / getting to the PL exoerience) was sacked last year:

• Alexander
• Pearson
• Euell
• Fleming
• Rennie

Think it proves they don’t follow strategy.

Harry’s “waffle” post the other day summed it up perfectly.

[chinapig]

9 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

He also said…”or expertise”.

Well some / all of that expertise required (PL experience / getting to the PL exoerience) was sacked last year:

• Alexander
• Pearson
• Euell
• Fleming
• Rennie

Think it proves they don’t follow strategy.

Harry’s “waffle” post the other day summed it up perfectly.

Was about to post that very list. So in effect it seems the Lansdowns and Tinnion believe they have more expertise than those people.

I take my criticisms back, we are lucky to be in the hands of such gifted people.

[luke_bristol]

1 hour ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Although I heard that some bridges were burned with Scudamore following the treatment of Phil Alexander who was his recommendation. 

I’d be interested to know how Scudamore thinks Bristol City could overcome the massive disadvantage of competing against parachute payments, something introduced while he was in charge of the Premier League.

[Davefevs]

27 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Was about to post that very list. So in effect it seems the Lansdowns and Tinnion believe they have more expertise than those people.

I take my criticisms back, we are lucky to be in the hands of such gifted people.

In all honesty I don’t think they do, but they also don’t recognise what they had and what they did.

[W-S-M Seagull]

3 minutes ago, luke_bristol said:

I’d be interested to know how Scudamore thinks Bristol City could overcome the massive disadvantage of competing against parachute payments, something introduced while he was in charge of the Premier League.

Luton did it last season. Ipswich look like they will do it this season. Brentford and Brighton two more examples of clubs getting promoted without parachute payments. West Brom may well do it this season. 

Ultimately if we want to get to the premier league, we need to overcome that challange. No point in wasting energy on it because it is what it is. 

If we ever get to the PL then we'd suddenly be greatful of the parachute payments. 

Don't get me wrong, the issue of parachute payments is very complicated. I don't like it and it needs to change but I do understand why it's in place. 

[frenchred]

2 hours ago, Frenchay Red said:

I have heard from a knowledgeable source that Scudamore is still closely involved with the club, and that new investment is very much being sought. Also heard from same source that a club representative is in USA on a similar quest. But will anything come of it? Seems unlikely to me the way the BS thing is set up.

Scudamore is not a lone soldier!

[CodeRed]

4 hours ago, redsquirrel said:

what does an investor gain other than losing money? thats a bit like my neighbour asking me to buy him a new car so he can keep his own money.

Yes, but you get to watch him drive it................

 

...........off a cliff

[Street red]

3 hours ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

You have to wonder how much that vision - for a team perennially overshadowed in its home city - will be realised; no Prem rugby side or particularly prominent other sports tenants seem likely.  As for being a short walk to the city centre.... umm, I guess if you fancy a stroll under one of the UK's most hideous roundabouts and through horrible Digbeth, then yes. 

I'm thinking it's more for the housing and potential hotel, that Knighthead are interested. 

That's all about the vision for one club even though it has things on the outside of the stadium housing etc it's still one club all about future proofing Birmingham city football club, Supporters will have a ground to feel great about without any sharing like we have. The Lansdowns have got it all wrong and they should of focused on Bristol city football club and not this Bristol sport dream.

[cheese]

1 hour ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Luton did it last season. Ipswich look like they will do it this season. Brentford and Brighton two more examples of clubs getting promoted without parachute payments. West Brom may well do it this season. 

Ultimately if we want to get to the premier league, we need to overcome that challange. No point in wasting energy on it because it is what it is. 

If we ever get to the PL then we'd suddenly be greatful of the parachute payments. 

Don't get me wrong, the issue of parachute payments is very complicated. I don't like it and it needs to change but I do understand why it's in place. 

We all know that, being Bristol City, if we ever get to the PL then that will be the day they decide to drop parachute payments.

[redsquirrel]

16 hours ago, WessexPest said:

Yeah, that “Fans playing football manager” comment really stuck in my craw too.

Most of us recognise, and are realistic about, the financial constraints the club operate under, but we do have some resources and continually poor-mouthing the manager when he asks for transfer funds yet expecting us to challenge with a young side that is obviously lacking in key areas is unreasonable on JL’s part.

Perhaps we DO tend to default to critical whenever he opens his mouth, but it’s hard not to be when not only do you have cause to doubt a lot of the decisions he’s made but that he comes across as a supercilious prat into the bargain.

 

i had to look supercilious up in the dictionary, flip me,you couldnt have described him better

[Mr Popodopolous]

@W-S-M Seagull @cheese

Plus anyone else.

Parachute Payments, it can be done- see also Huddersfield but how far back to we want to go, what sort of sample size are we looking at.

Ipswich seem to have pulled a 1 in 20 type season, Brighton had infrastructure but also some big spending, Leeds also big spending and top manager, Wolves ditto.

The first scenario is what % of Parachute Payments clubs vs non Parachute Payments clubs over x years get Automatic Promotion.

Then what % reach the top 6.

Lastly what % go up vs non Parachute Payments clubs.

The stars truly have to align or you have to catch that magic season in a bottle as Ipswich seem to have done, the momentum can carry you. The rules hindered us in 2017-18, and arguably 2015-16 on one level it caused a need for caution or a perceived need. 1 year vs 3 year.

Ipswich I look through and it defies rationale really, some capable but not amazing Championship players some over 30 competing with and in 2 cases we expect outmatching Parachute bolstered big clubs for the level in Leeds, Leicester and Southampton.

[Mr Popodopolous]

2019-20

Leeds- Title (non-Parachute)

WBA 2nd (Parachute)

Fulham, Brentford, Cardiff, Swansea 

3 and 1

There were 6 Parachute Payments clubs in the Championship that year and 4 made the  top 6.

4/6 vs 2/18. In the top 2, 1/6 vs 1/18.

2020-21

Norwich- Title (Parachute)

Watford- 2nd (Parachute)

Brentford, Barnsley, Bournemouth and Swansea

2 and 2

There were 7 Parachute Payments clubs in the Championship that year and 4 made the top 6.

4/7 vs 2/17. In the top 2, 2/7 vs 0/17.

2021-22

Fulham- Title (Parachute)

Bournemouth- 2nd (Parachute)

Nottingham Forest, Huddersfield, Sheffield United and Luton

2 and 2

There were 5 Parachute Payments clubs in the Championship that year and 4 made the top 6.

4/5 vs 2/19, In the top 2, 2/5 vs 0/19.

2022-23

Burnley- Title (Parachute)

Sheffield United- 2nd (Parachute)

Luton, Middlesbrough, Coventry, Sunderland- No Parachute!

There were 5 Parachute Payments clubs in the Championship that year and 2 went up Automatically, 0 finished in playoffs.

2/5 Automatically promoted, 4/19 made the playoffs.

The most democratic for while!

I'll let others do ratios but.. 

Edited May 1 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

This year 4 of the top 6 look likely to be in receipt of Parachute Payments unless Hull do it.

Watford are the 5th Parachute Payments club, I'm surprised tbis is permissible under Competition Law 24 clubs in the same division this level of distortion via a third party.

[Sir Geoff]

14 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

This year 4 of the top 6 look likely to be in receipt of Parachute Payments unless Hull do it.

Watford are the 5th Parachute Payments club, I'm surprised tbis is permissible under Competition Law 24 clubs in the same division this level of distortion via a third party.

Hull can only do it at the expense of West Brom. Norwich can't be caught, so still 4 from 6.

[Mr Popodopolous]

12 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

Hull can only do it at the expense of West Brom. Norwich can't be caught, so still 4 from 6.

I think but I'm not certain, WBA are out of Parachute Payments now.

Clubs who go up and then drop straight back down get Years 1 and 2 only.

Should be 4 or 5 in receipt next season.

[Numero Uno]

16 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

Hull can only do it at the expense of West Brom. Norwich can't be caught, so still 4 from 6.

Technically Norwich can fall out. Would need a 5-0 Hull win and 3-0 defeat for them. Nigh on impossible but if you start like a train and are 3-0 up at half time knowing exactly what you need to do.......... It's enough risk to make Norwich take Birmingham seriously, that's the main thing for me!!

[Davefevs]

5 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I think but I'm not certain, WBA are out of Parachute Payments now.

Clubs who go up and then drop straight back down get Years 1 and 2 only.

Should be 4 or 5 in receipt next season.

West Brom’s ended 22/23

Norwich's end 23/24

Southampton and Leeds end 25/26

[Numero Uno]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

West Brom’s ended 22/23

Norwich's end 23/24

Southampton and Leeds end 25/26

You just KNOW that should we make it to the Premier League it will be achieved to coincide with the first season that parachute payments end...........

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

You just KNOW that should we make it to the Premier League it will be achieved to coincide with the first season that parachute payments end...........

Either ended or reformed drastically ie along the lines of what the EFL are looking for.

Ie distributed significantly differently as opposed to all staying in the PL.

Edited May 1 by Mr Popodopolous

[W-S-M Seagull]

9 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Either ended or reformed drastically ie along the lines of what the EFL are looking for.

Ie distributed significantly differently as opposed to all staying in the PL.

The problem with parachute payments for me is that you kinda need it to go all the way down to the very bottom of the game for it to be fair. 

Yea you can distribute it better in the Championship but then that just creates a wider gap between the Championship and league one. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

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

The problem with parachute payments for me is that you kinda need it to go all the way down to the very bottom of the game for it to be fair. 

Yea you can distribute it better in the Championship but then that just creates a wider gap between the Championship and league one. 

My view is still as it was a few years ago..starting point.

Solidarity Payments plus Parachute Payments plus EFL TV money

Then distributed equally by the current divisional structure. The huge cliff edge between the top 2 divisions but maybe that weighting needs looking at too Idk.

[Sir Geoff]

3 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I think but I'm not certain, WBA are out of Parachute Payments now.

Clubs who go up and then drop straight back down get Years 1 and 2 only.

Should be 4 or 5 in receipt next season.

They are out of PP, so the 4 would be Norwich, Leeds, Soton and Leic

[Mr Popodopolous]

9 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

They are out of PP, so the 4 would be Norwich, Leeds, Soton and Leic

Watford too this year. Who received PP.

Near season it'll be the 3 who drop from the PL, plus or both of Leeds and Southampton depending on if they stay down.

[Sir Geoff]

7 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Watford too this year. Who received PP.

Near season it'll be the 3 who drop from the PL, plus or both of Leeds and Southampton depending on if they stay down.

Yes but we were talking about PP clubs that could be promoted this season.

[Mr Popodopolous]

9 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

Yes but we were talking about PP clubs that could be promoted this season.

Aah right, with you now.

We do miss an element of luck, as well as poor ownership and backing the wrong horse at the wrong time.

Near year could be a year to go for it but if we still had the NP and Gould combo I'd have a bit more faith.

The ratio of Parachute Payments clubs to top 6 though in the last few years.. do we keep as many key players as possible and spend big  do we cross our fingers.

Ipswich squad on paper isn't all that.

Edited May 1 by Mr Popodopolous

[Ian M]

4 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

@W-S-M Seagull @cheese

Plus anyone else.

Parachute Payments, it can be done- see also Huddersfield but how far back to we want to go, what sort of sample size are we looking at.

Ipswich seem to have pulled a 1 in 20 type season, Brighton had infrastructure but also some big spending, Leeds also big spending and top manager, Wolves ditto.

The first scenario is what % of Parachute Payments clubs vs non Parachute Payments clubs over x years get Automatic Promotion.

Then what % reach the top 6.

Lastly what % go up vs non Parachute Payments clubs.

The stars truly have to align or you have to catch that magic season in a bottle as Ipswich seem to have done, the momentum can carry you. The rules hindered us in 2017-18, and arguably 2015-16 on one level it caused a need for caution or a perceived need. 1 year vs 3 year.

Ipswich I look through and it defies rationale really, some capable but not amazing Championship players some over 30 competing with and in 2 cases we expect outmatching Parachute bolstered big clubs for the level in Leeds, Leicester and Southampton.

It's also worth assessing which non-parachute payment achieved promotion by flouting the FFP rules at the time. I can think of at least 3 potential examples.