Harry Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 The Championship Is For Sale Owning a football club is fun and there are worse ways to spend your money than bringing enjoyment and pride to thousands. But they are bloody expensive — money pits, if you will. According to Kieron O’Connor, the football finance expert behind the Swiss Ramble Twitter feed, Championship clubs have lost a combined £2.5 billion over the last decade, which is what happens when you spend £1.16 on wages for every £1 you earn, as the clubs did in 2019-20. So, they are all “for sale”, to one degree or another, as nobody can afford this level of attrition forever — their accountants, families or investment committees won’t let them — but, clearly, some are a lot more for sale than others. Here, then, is our attempt to rank them in terms of how badly they need someone else to pay the bills, or how ready they are to share the burden. For sale or foreclosed You cannot get more “for sale” than being in administration, so let us turn the Championship upside down and start with Derby County. Local tech tycoon Mel Morris bought the two-time English champions in 2015 and spent the next five years breaking transfer records and churning through managers. Having faltered twice in the play-off semi-finals, Derby went one worse in 2019, losing to Aston Villa. That was the beginning of the end for Morris. He sold the club’s Pride Park stadium to himself to help Derby avoid breaking the English Football League’s spending rules but the ensuing controversy caught up with them in the end. Mel Morris pictured in 2016 (Photo: Tony Marshall/Getty Images) In 2020, the league charged Derby with overvaluing the stadium and manipulating the cost of their transfer spending, which triggered a legal tug-of-war that was only resolved this week. Derby beat the stadium charge but were found guilty of the accounting offence. Hoping to avoid another tribunal, club and league spent months in talks to find an agreed penalty. They finally settled on nine points. That took this season’s subtractions to 21 points, after the club were hit with the automatic 12-point penalty for entering administration in September. That was when Morris decided enough was enough. He was at least £200 million down. Insolvency specialists Quantuma are in charge now and have said they can fund the club, which is still losing money, until January. But they have had to borrow more money to do that — from whom and on what terms they have not said — which is not going to make this sale easier. One of English football’s founding clubs, Derby were a big team in the 1970s. They have a large fanbase and have had two spells in the Premier League. They also have a good reputation for developing talent and having someone as marketable as Wayne Rooney as their manager is a bonus, regardless of how good at it he may be. On the flip side, Derby have been on the market for at least two years, with proposed sales to Swiss-based businessman Henry Gabay, Dubai royal Sheikh Khaled bin Zayed Al Nehayan and Spanish boxer-turned-agent Erik Alonso collapsing along the way. There is also about £50 million in debt on the books that Morris cannot write off or Quantuma magic away. That is a lot to shell out before you address the squad, rebuild the organisation or buy back the stadium, which is worthless to anyone other than a professional football team in Derby. We want out… or do we? No team in England have had the sale signs up longer than Hull City. They first went up in September 2014 when owner Assem Allam issued a statement to say he was selling the club he bought in 2010, adding: “I will give it away. Out means I’m out. Have I ever said anything and gone back on it?” Allam put the club up for sale because of spectacular fallings-out with the club’s supporters and landlords. The first of those is the most famous, as he wanted to change the club’s name to Hull Tigers, believing it to be more marketable. The fans disagreed and the Football Association concurred, blocking it in April 2014. But it is believed Allam also wanted to drop “City” because he was fed up with the council after it refused to sell him the stadium it built in 2002 for the club and one of the city’s rugby league sides, Hull FC. Which of those frustrations was the final straw is a matter of debate but whichever it was, the result was the same: the then-Premier League side, which had reached the FA Cup final that May, were available for £120 million. Hull City celebrate promotion back to the Championship last April (Photo: Rich Linley – CameraSport via Getty Images) Since then, numerous bidders have been linked with the club, with the most serious being a group led by American-based Chinese businessman Chien Lee in 2016. They eventually decided Barnsley (see below) were better value. A Chinese group led by Dai Yongge and his sister Dai Xiu Li, who eventually bought Reading (also see below), got close in 2016, too, only to encounter undisclosed issues with the Premier League’s ownership checks. The Athletic has spoken to several parties who have looked at Hull. They have all said the main reason they did not proceed was that Allam and his son Ehab have a habit of changing the price or terms at the last moment, making them wonder if they really want to sell at all. After three relegations and two promotions in seven years, Hull are back in the Championship. But they are in the relegation zone and under an EFL transfer embargo for taking one of the league’s COVID-19 loans. They also owe the Allams about £40 million. This means the asking price has fallen to a more realistic £20 million up front, with the potential for bonus payments if the club is promoted. The amount and timescale of these bonuses have been among the sticking points. The Allams have agreed a deal in principle with Turkish media magnate Acun Ilicali. But they have been in talks for months, during which time at least one US-based party has been in for a tour. Ilicali is also understood to want to pay in instalments. Is Acun the one? Hard to say but he was back in Hull on Tuesday for a meeting with the Allams and is said to be very bullish the deal will go through. If he is not the one, the search will continue. After all, out means out, right? China calling We are now into the first of our groups of clubs, as these teams are all “for sale” for broadly the same reasons. Birmingham City are technically always for sale by dint of their parent company’s listing on the Hong Kong stock exchange. The same principle applies to Manchester United but that is where the comparisons end. Birmingham are 15th in the Championship, a fair reflection of the club they have been since relegation from the Premier League 10 years ago. Like Derby, they have had their scrapes with the EFL, lost points and sold their stadium. And like most others in this division, they have racked up huge losses. They have been under Chinese ownership since 2007, when Carson Yeung led a takeover that made former owners David Gold and David Sullivan a lot of money and left Birmingham in the hands of an entertainment and sportswear company based in Hong Kong but registered in the Cayman Islands. Troy Deeney joined Birmingham City in the summer (Photo: Eddie Keogh/Getty Images) That company, now called Birmingham Sports Holdings (BSH), has changed hands a few times and Yeung was ousted as chairman in 2014, when he was sentenced to six years’ imprisonment in Hong Kong for money laundering. BSH, which has a market capitalisation of about £250 million, still owns most of Birmingham City but has been trying to sell the team, with varying degrees of effort, for years. The problem is it will only get a fraction of the money it has poured into the club. Everyone knows that but BSH does not want to admit it as it would mean a significant loss of face and value on the balance sheet. Former Watford owner Laurence Bassini is the latest to be linked with Birmingham but there is no reason why anyone should think he is more likely to get this deal over the line than any of the others he has attached himself to. So, Birmingham will remain for sale, with mysterious owners who have no obvious link to the club, city or English football. The same can be said of local rivals West Bromwich Albion, who are in better shape on and off the pitch but are also under Chinese ownership that no longer makes much sense. Guochuan Lai bought the club in 2016 at the height of China’s football gold rush. This was a giddy period that saw investors — some state-backed, some just showing off — throw money at clubs at home and abroad. The Guangdong-based investor is understood to have paid about £200 million to join the fun. But what fun? Promotion is OK but relegation isn’t and neither are annual losses. And that is why a story about a West Brom bid comes up every six months. Lai has never looked like he was enjoying it and is certainly not getting any love in China for investing in a strategic asset. On the contrary, all of China’s football speculators have been told to bring their money home. Guochuan Lai visits West Brom in August 2016 (Photo: Matthew Ashton – AMA/West Bromwich Albion FC via Getty Images) But can he accept a 50 per cent hit? Because £100 million or so, depending on how certain promotion is looking, is the going rate for a yo-yo club, with a medium-sized ground in an unfashionable location. Which leads us to Reading, the Championship’s other Chinese-owned club. As mentioned, the Dai siblings tried to join the football party at Hull in 2016 but ended up in Berkshire a year later. Their story has shades of Birmingham and Derby about it, as they have thrown money at getting back to the Premier League, lost pots of it and had to pull the stadium-sale trick. They still face a points deduction for overspending, though. Dai Yongge’s fortune is wrapped up in a retail property firm listed on the Chinese stock market, and retail property has struggled in China as much as it has everywhere else during the pandemic. There is no evidence he is short of cash but he has shut down the football clubs he owned in Belgium and China. A fight against relegation awaits. That makes Reading hard to value, even before you get into any conversation about what Dai Yongge’s pride would accept. A change of circumstances Our next group of clubs are in this category for different reasons and they also differ from each other in lots of ways. But they are all for sale, whether they would publicly admit it or not. Huddersfield Town head this group as the circumstances of majority-owner Phil Hodgkinson have rapidly changed in the last few weeks, prompting speculation about his ability to hold onto the club. He bought them in 2019 from Dean Hoyle, the founder of greeting cards retailer Card Factory. Hoyle had been in charge of his boyhood club for a decade that saw the West Yorkshire side go from League One to the Premier League. His health was failing, though, so he decided to sell the club to another local boy made good in Hodgkinson, who owned non-League side Southport but sponsored Huddersfield and made it clear which club he really wanted to own. After sorting out Southport’s sale, Hodgkinson took over at Huddersfield, now back in the Championship, with Hoyle retaining 25 per cent and about £45 million in IOUs. His first two seasons in charge saw the club struggle on the pitch, finishing 18th and 20th, but run a tight ship by the division’s standards, with Hoyle’s debt falling to under £35 million. Alex Pritchard and Steve Mounie celebrate a Premier League goal against West Ham in November 2018 (Photo: William Early/Getty Images) But earlier this month, Hodgkinson put nine of his companies, including claims firm Pure Legal, into administration. This put hundreds of jobs in jeopardy but it also told every accountant, agent, banker and lawyer who specialises in club takeovers that Huddersfield were in play. Huddersfield issued a statement to point out the club was a separate entity to the Pure companies and there was no need to panic. It should also be stated that Hoyle’s health has improved. With him involved, there is no suggestion Huddersfield must be flogged off pronto. Hoyle will be looking for help, though. Preston North End are another club that is being discussed by people who watch the market, albeit with great respect, as Preston’s owner Trevor Hemmings died last month. The bricklayer-turned-billionaire had been on Preston’s board since the 1970s but only bought them outright in 2010. His support helped get Preston out of League One in 2015 and turned them into solid Championship performers. But like their rivals, they lose money every season, even before COVID-19. His son Craig wrote an open letter last week that talked of honouring his father’s legacy and “getting on with things”. It was well written and exactly what fans, players and staff will have wanted to hear but he admitted the family have always seen themselves as “custodians” whose goal it is “to leave the club in better condition than when we took over (when/if that day eventually comes)”. Nobody is suggesting that day is imminent but Blackburn Rovers, Bolton Wanderers and Wigan Athletic are three neighbours who found new custodians soon after their long-term benefactors died or decided to hand over the keys. Sheffield United, or more precisely their owners, United World Group, are also understood to be open to offers. United World Group is controlled by Prince Abdullah bin Musaid Al Saud. The Saudi royal first bought a 50 per cent stake in Sheffield United for £1 in 2013 but that was when he and former owner Kevin McCabe were partners. That relationship ended up in the courts, with Prince Abdullah winning the right to pay £5 million for the other half of the club in 2019, as well as market value for property assets linked to the club. In the meantime, Prince Abdullah has built his own multi-club group, with teams in Belgium, Dubai, France and India. McCabe and Prince Abdullah in happier times (Photo: Chris Brunskill/Getty Images) Some sources believe he may have overstretched himself, a situation not helped by the pandemic. But others say there is a simpler reason why Sheffield United are available: there can only be one English club in Saudi Arabia and that is Newcastle United. Speaking to the Sheff United Way YouTube channel in September, Prince Abdullah admitted Sheffield United “had to sell players” this summer but did not want to tell the world that news. As a result, the club got good prices, particularly for Aaron Ramsdale following his £24 million move to Arsenal. But to avoid getting into that position again, the owner added: “We’re trying to get some partners to make the group more strong financially.” Will someone make me an offer, please? We’re getting into mid-table now and first up is Bristol City, a club in a similar corner of the market to Preston, in that this is a question of succession. Owner Stephen Lansdown is very much alive and still fabulously wealthy, having made billions in stockbroking, some of which he has spent on turning Bristol City, basketball team Bristol Flyers and rugby union club Bristol Bears into a multi-sport gang called Bristol Sport. Lansdown is 69 and has been involved at Bristol City for 25 years. His son Jon is chairman of Bristol City but Stephen Lansdown told a Bristol City fans’ podcast earlier this year that he and his family were thinking about how much longer they wanted to do this — the football club lost £10 million in 2019-20. Jon Lansdown repeated the same sentiments last month. The Athletic is aware the search for help, and potentially a full takeover, is underway. Bristol City have lots going for them — a great ground and a state-of-the-art training facility — but they have only spent nine of their 126 years in the top flight and were a third-tier side as recently as 2015. The feelers have been put out at Nottingham Forest, too, although it can sometimes be hard to work out if people claiming to have “mandates” to sell clubs really do, or if the plan is to find the buyer first and then contact the club’s owner to see if they are interested. That could be said about half a dozen clubs in the Championship. What we can say about Forest is that Greek media and shipping magnate Evangelos Marinakis bought them in 2017 for £50 million and promised to restore the double European champions to continental competition within five years, as well as redeveloping the City Ground and training facility. Forest have finished 17th, ninth, seventh and 17th under his watch, and are currently 13th. Steve Cooper is his sixth manager (nine including caretakers) and Forest lost more than £45 million between 2017 and 2020. There has been no discernible progresson the building work, either. Blackburn Rovers‘ Indian owners the Rao family would be forgiven for wanting out, too, having bought the Lancashire club for about £43 million, including debt repayments, in 2010. Best known for their chicken business, Venky’s, the Raos have put close to £200 million into Blackburn, which is hardly a paltry sum. Relegated to the third tier in 2017, they bounced back at the first opportunity and have been a mid-table side for the last three seasons. They are currently seventh. It could be a good time to get out. Cardiff City owner Vincent Tan is another mega-rich businessman who came from Malaysia in 2010. Tan has enjoyed two promotions to the Premier League but Cardiff’s stays in the top flight were fleeting and they are no longer one of the lucky half-dozen clubs on parachute payments. They lost £12 million in 2020 and 2021’s figure will be worse. The 69-year-old’s main business is the Malaysian conglomerate Berjaya Corp, which lost nearly £80 million last year. Tan is still very rich but nobody can lose money forever. Of course we’re for sale, what do you think we’re doing here? That leads us to the next group: Barnsley, Coventry City, Millwall and Swansea City. Four teams owned, or largely owned, by US-based investors. We have listed them alphabetically, as none is more for sale than the other but all have been linked with takeovers, or talk of new investment, in recent years, which is not surprising when you remember who owns them and why they bought them. As mentioned, Barnsley were bought in late 2017 by a group comprised of Chinese-American hotel entrepreneur Chien Lee, American investor Paul Conway’s Pacific Media Group, Indian businessman Neerav Parekh and Oakland Athletics exec Billy “Moneyball” Beane. An eclectic bunch, then. Lee and Pacific Media Group have already cashed in one football investment, OGC Nice, and reinvested the money in teamsin Switzerland, Belgium, France, Denmark and the Netherlands. They will do so again if the price is right or the player-trading returns are not working. Coventry City should probably be the most “for sale” of these clubs, though, as they are owned by a hedge fund run by an American who was admiringly called the “queen of debt” by The Sunday Times in 2005. Few Coventry fans have spoken about Joy Seppala in such positive terms during the 14 years Sisu Capital has owned their club. Sisu has been by far the most controversial of this subset of owners, having spent most of the last 14 years in dispute with various landlords at the Ricoh Arena — a row that has seen Coventry spend a year playing at Northampton Town and then two years at Birmingham City. They also got relegated to League Two in 2017. But, despite numerous “rescue” offers, Seppala and Sisu are still in charge and Coventry are back in the Championship, at the Ricoh, playing well. She even gave an interview to the BBC recently, saying Sisu was committed to building a new ground. Wonders never cease. But equally, if someone was to offer her, say, £50 million in cash, with another £20 million on promotion, they would not need to repeat themselves. Millwall are majority-owned by John Berylson. The 68-year-old first invested in the club in 2007, attracted more by the development potential around the stadium and its proximity to central London than any great passion for football. But the Boston-based businessman has stuck around, far longer than anyone expected, and has helped them to become a stable Championship side on a modest budget. They lost “only” £10 million in 2020, having made a small profit the year before. It is no secret, however, they would like some help to realise that development potential and perhaps even mount a serious tilt at promotion. Steve Kaplan and Jason Levien teamed up to buy 80 per cent of Swansea in 2016, when the Welsh side were still in the Premier League. Kaplan is the co-founder of a successful asset management firm that specialises in distressed securities, a tradeable debt in stricken companies. Hmmm. Levien is a lawyer turned agent, who joined actor Will Smith in a group that bought NBA team the Philadelphia 76ers in 2011. Smith, of course, is “West Philadelphia born and raised”. Levien swapped that stake for one in new NBA team the Memphis Grizzlies but not before he and fellow Sixers owner Erick Thohir had bought majority stakes in MLSside DC United. In 2019, he joined a consortium that bought 75 per cent of Australian basketball team Brisbane Bullets. That is how these guys roll and the longer Swansea remain a) outside the Premier League and b) loss-making, the likelihood grows they will sell their stakes and go to a league where the downsides are less terrifying. We’re OK, thanks… unless you want to make me an offer? Only eight clubs left, so we are getting to the ones who could probably look each of us in the eye and say “no, we’re not for sale” and sound like they mean it. This next group is made up of five clubs owned by British or Irish owners, some of whom still live in the area and appear to like football, which is nice. Dublin-born entrepreneur Darragh MacAnthony bought Peterborough United in 2006, having learned about the opportunity from Big Ron Manager, a documentary about former Manchester United manager Ron Atkinson’s efforts to find the League Two side a new owner. MacAnthony was only 30 at the time, the youngest owner in the league, and he delivered on his promise to get them up to the Championship in two years. They have been up and down twice since then but he is still very engaged in the business, despite living in Florida — a state full of wealthy people who seem to want to invest in English clubs, so maybe someone will make him an offer. Luton Town were led out of administration in 2008 by a consortium of supporters, including TV presenter Nick Owen. He stood down as chairman in 2017, by which time the club had climbed out of the National League. They would be promoted to League One in 2018 and the Championship a year later. They finished 12th last season and are currently 11th, which is some achievement for a club run on a sustainable basis. They are a model club in many ways but have been trying to build a new stadium for as long as anyone can remember. That may require some help. Hong Kong-based hedge fund boss Simon Sadler bought his boyhood club Blackpoolin 2019, when a court ordered the former owners, the Oyston family, to sell to settle an unpaid debt to a former partner. For fans who had been boycotting the club until the Oystons left, this was the best news since promotion to the Premier League in 2010. Blackpool celebrate promotion to the Championship via the play-offs in May (Photo: Rob Newell – CameraSport via Getty Images) Blackpool earned promotion back to the Championship last season, Sadler’s second, and they have made a good start to this campaign. He is also pushing ahead with plans for a new training ground and a new stand at the club’s Bloomfield Road home. Middlesbrough have been owned by their local-boy-done-good for far longer than two years, as Steve Gibson joined the board at 26, formed a consortium to save them at 28 and then became the club’s majority owner at 35. The transportation entrepreneur is now 63 and has been bankrolling the club for 37 years. They spent 11 straight seasons in the Premier League between 1998 and 2009, winning the League Cup in 2004 and getting to the UEFA Cup final two years later. Boro have only had one season in the top flight since 2009, though, which has forced Gibson to dig deep into his pockets. The club lost nearly £36 million in 2020. He has reined in his support a bit since then and become an advocate for tighter financial controls across the game, but there is no sign of him wanting to cash his chips in just yet. The division’s other great local benefactor, the Coates family, also appear to be happy to keep subsidising their team, Stoke City, although they would actually prefer it if the league would let them spend even moreof the millions they make from their Bet365 empire than they are currently allowed. Stoke born and bred, Peter Coates first became the club’s majority owner in 1986 but sold the club to an Icelandic consortium in 1999. Seven years later, however, he bought Stoke back, as they were struggling on and off the pitch. A decade in the Premier League came to an end in 2018 and the last three seasons have been frustrating. But the arrival of former Northern Ireland manager Michael O’Neill has improved matters and they are currently fifth. Peter’s son John is now the club’s co-chairman and his daughter Denise runs Bet365. There seems to be no danger of the family running out of money: she earned £469 million last year. Unfinished business That leaves three clubs owned by wealthy foreigners or, in one club’s case, more than one wealthy foreigner. We will start with them because Queens Park Rangers could once claim to have the richest owners in football. That was when Indian steel magnate Lakshmi Mittal joined Formula One bosses Flavio Briatore and Bernie Ecclestone at Loftus Road in 2007. Mittal was one of the world’s richest men at the time but it soon became apparent he was not really involved at all, and QPR was something for his British son-in-law Amit Bhatia to do. Bhatia is still involved but Briatore and Ecclestone handed their keys over years ago. Malaysian businessman Tony Fernandes became the majority shareholder in 2011, with compatriot Ruben Gnanalingam making it a triumvirate again in 2015. Fernandes (right) with QPR’s director of football Les Ferdinand in 2017 (Photo: Stephen Pond/Getty Images) On their watch, QPR have enjoyed two promotions, followed by two quick relegations. They also eventually accepted an EFL fine of more than £40 million in 2018 for overspending during their 2013-14 promotion season. That persuaded them to stop throwing money around and the trio now talk a refreshingly good game on sustainability. They also seem to enjoy their football and clearly do not need the money. Bournemouth owner Maxim Demin is another who does not need the money, having made the best part of a billion in petrochemicals, but it is hard to know what the Russian thinks as he never speaks publicly. He has homes in the UK but lives in Switzerland and is rarely seen at games. But he has been the Cherries’ sugar daddy for a decade. After five seasons in the Premier League, they were relegated in 2020 and lost in the play-off semi-finals last season. They look determined to avoid the thrills of the play-offs this season, as they are currently top of the table, eight points clear of third-placed West Brom. Club sources have said Demin might not look like he is enjoying it much but he is determined to get Bournemouth back to the big time. And that is undoubtedly true of Fulhamowner Shahid Khan, too. According to US business magazine Forbes, the Pakistani-American is worth £6.7 billion, having made a fortune from car bumpers. He bought the NFL’s Jacksonville Jaguars in 2012 and Fulham a year later. Including the amount he spent buying the club from former Harrods owner Mohamed Al-Fayed, Khan is probably in for about half a billion pounds at Fulham. But he loves the competition and his son Tony Khan fancies himself as a player recruitment specialist. With a third promotion to the Premier League in five seasons in reach, the Khans will be hoping they can stick around a bit longer next time. 1 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 59 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said: I think this is a very underrated point. Bottom line is Lansdown's never invested in the club to make money so what he wants out of it must be something else. My guess is local kudos from developing sport in Bristol plus the enjoyment of doing something "fun" with the money he has made. My view, a cynical view is….The football club is the loss-leader for the opportunity of “everything else”….the flats / houses, land, etc. I’m sure if you net them off, he’ll make money on the overall “thing”. I also think that he is doing it for good reasons too, but he isn’t gifting the money. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 2 minutes ago, Harry said: Championship clubs have lost a combined £2.5 billion over the last decade, That is the line that is somehow staggering and not surprising at the same time. Certainly, no one outside football would be able to understand it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 Personally, I think it’s time for a change. I’ve lost confidence in SL and I never had any in JL in the first place. 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coxy27 Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 23 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said: The entire corporate governance of the club is wrong: Two directors, one not in the UK for much of the year, combined with an owner who has taken a hands-off policy recently and is based off shore. It all leaves City as a bit of a rudderless ship. I don't know if Richard Gould can shoulder giving the club direction alone. In his work at Surrey CC he was in charge of the wealthiest county club in the UK - a slightly different challenge than he has here. I'm grateful to Steve for his investment over the years. It has moved us forward: AG was a ground that was an embarrassment in the second tier; We now seem more like a "natural Championship side" than we did when he arrived. There are 5. Steve Lansdown, Jon Lansdown, Rochard Gould (CEO), Doug Harman, and Gavin Marshall (CFO) Totally agree with your second paragraph. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBristolian Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Davefevs said: My view, a cynical view is….The football club is the loss-leader for the opportunity of “everything else”….the flats / houses, land, etc. I’m sure if you net them off, he’ll make money on the overall “thing”. I also think that he is doing it for good reasons too, but he isn’t gifting the money. I agree with all that but, nonetheless, there are way easier ways to make more money than a twenty year-plus long game in football. I think you are right that he is doing nothing for free and will come out in profit but, even so, the the flats, houses and land all feel like ways to make the business of owning a football club profitable rather than his ultimate motive for owning a football club at all... Edited November 18, 2021 by LondonBristolian 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigAl&Toby Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 2 hours ago, Robbored said: Do you remember AG before the upgrade? AG has been redeveloped to its maximum potential given the location in BS3. There’s no other ground space available to expand it further. That’s why SL wanted to relocate but the ‘village green’ legislation put a stop to that. AG is now as good as gets. The blind still lead the blind…. Lansdown never wanted to relocate to Ashton Vale. Twas a smokescreen to get what he really wanted. His cake and the crumbs after he’d devoured it…. Ashton Vale was only ever wanted for it’s true development potential. Houses. Not a sports stadium. And bugger me he got them both. The cash cow keeps mooing as Steve’s hands are massaging it’s teats. Meanwhile we’ve got a footballing feast to look forward to on Saturday……. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Coxy27 said: There are 5. Steve Lansdown, Jon Lansdown, Rochard Gould (CEO), Doug Harman, and Gavin Marshall (CFO) Totally agree with your second paragraph. I think you'll find SL isn't a director of BCFC any more. Gould is listed as a director, but as an employee that hinders his ability to disagree with any decision taken by the Lansdown family. Marshall is company secretary, not a director. Look at most other clubs and you'll find more than two non-employee directors. Edited November 18, 2021 by Red-Robbo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clutton Caveman Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 10 hours ago, zippycar said: I also wonder that if Mr Hargreaves had been a football man, would we be where we are today? There are always at least two in every partnership and anyone at Hargreaves Lansdown will tell you who was the boss and the driver and who knew that there was no upside to owning a football club. I think Mr Lansdown is a good man. The industry where he made is money is a cesspit full of speculators, fast buck start ups and regulators who try to force folks to buy products they don't need. This industry does not make anything, and thrives in good or bad times insulated by the fact they play with other peoples money and take a cut. I think this environment is so different to that of say a manufacturing or even a retail business. 40 years of experience there hardly prepares you for life in a different world. The FS industry is full of people like Mr Ashton and so the panic bells that would have rung for most did not ring for Mr Lansdown. I think his poor judgement of slick fast talking people like Ashton and LJ is his weakness and one that is unlikely to be overcome. I think that in many ways Steve has been great for us bringing stability, a great stadium a better chance to be financially viable. However I think his people blind spot and lack of engagement with the football world will now hold us back. I would hope that a deal could come along, perhaps based on a staged buy out where the Lansdowns get their money back. On the face of it, based on the size of the city, the potential fan base, the fact that the stadium has multiple income streams including the Bears, we would have to be at least as attractive as the likes of Swansea, Bournemouth, Derby, Cardiff Forest or Middlesbrough or for that matter based on potential Brentford or Watford. People will say that we are not a big enough club but few of the above listed have spent too much time in the top flight is the last 10 years. So many thanks SL, you have been great but lets hope somebody with the ability to employ the right type of management and players will come along and rescue us from mediocracy .... on the other hand we could get a new owner like Mel Morris ..... 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarksRobin Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 2 hours ago, Robbored said: You seem to be contradicting yourself there WR. How so? If you spend enough money you can build anything, even a 40,000 seater stadium at Ashton Gate. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigAl&Toby Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 11 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said: or is that "he's taken us as far as he wants to take us"? It's difficult to know with the Lansdowns, and it's probably time to recognise them as a collective. Whether it's in terms of day to day decision-making or a horrible worst case scenario, it's not just Steve that is, or would, make decisions involving the football club, it is also Maggie and Jon. Some may consider it inappropriate to speculate in this way, but should the worst happen to Steve, I believe Maggie would inherit his shares. And so forth. Therefore, it is important to recognise that Bristol City FC, RFC, WFC and Flyers are owned by "The Lansdowns". Steve owns 99% shares in Bristol City FC, yet I still see people banging on about there being "a board". The board is Steve, Maggie and Jon, because guess what? They own 99% of the club. Brian Tinnion, Lee Johnson, Mark Ashton, Nigel Pearson, Richard Gould - employees, nothing more. Their say, pretty much subservient with their level of power at the club. Over the past 20 years The Lansdowns have presided over the football club and been key to all decision making, including the appointment of managers. When I say "key", I mean appointing every single one of the football managers and agreeing to every single signing made by the football club, without exception. Ah, bar one Steve Cotterill, who was only appointed following an extremely persuasive case put forward by recruitment specialist Keith Dawe. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm sure very persuasive cases were put forward, by someone, of why we should sign Gustav Engvall and Sammy Szmodics, however the buck stops with the man, and his family, that sanctioned these signings. And sanctioned the people that were put in place to make these signings. Recuitment has been an unmitigated disaster over the past three years, and ultimate responsibility must be laid at the door of the family signing off this wastage. As we head back towards L1 for a potential third relegation under The Lansdowns, the question has to be asked: Have they taken us as far as they can, or indeed, as far as they want to take us? From where I am, it's a resounding yes. And I'd go further and say they would be quite happy with us being a big fish back in L1. Derby County are about to be sold for £50m. It got me thinking. The Lansdowns picked up the club and ground for comparative peanuts. Mel Morris still owns Pride Park so that is not part of the deal. If The Lansdowns were to sell Bristol Sport including the ground, I would hazard a guess that it wouldn't be too far off the £150m+ they have invested. Further to that, I would speculate that once the sporting village is complete they would break even AT WORST on their investment. This isn't supposed to be a hatchet job, just an honest appraisal of The Lansdowns running of our football club. From where I'm standing, I hope what I read today in The Athletic, and what I already knew to be fair, is true and help or potentially a full takeover is on the way. Far more eloquent, balanced and reasoned than anything I’ve ever said about the Clan. I take no pleasure from having said it before or repeating myself now but the Lansdowns have only ever had one motivation for investing in Bristol Sport. Nothing to do with making us proud - who’s feeling proud today? Nothing to do with the club that we’ve all supported all our lives. Nothing to do with sport whatsoever. All the lot of them have ever wanted is to make more money. At the club’s and our expense. Where once we had a real interest in our club, and our club had assets, we now have no interest. The club has no tangible assets. And it’s saddled with debt that is nicely secured by the man who provided it. Nice. Many will talk about FFP. Or Covid. Or a nice new stadium. Or a superb training venue. Yet we are where we are. We win at home and dance around to Madness as if we’ve won the ******* Champions League. Then it’s back to earth with a bump. I wish that men with money kept their money and kept well away from football - whether that’s the old Great Mills Western League or the EFL. It never ends well and sadly spoils the memories. We’ll win nothing under Lansdown. Why? Because he doesn’t want it like you and me. He’s comfortable in the knowledge that his investment is secure and that he won’t be losing. Every day that goes by Project Ashton Vale makes certain of that….. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 16 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said: I agree with all that but, nonetheless, there are way easier ways to make more money than a twenty year-plus long game in football. I think you are right that he is doing nothing for free and will come out in profit but, even so, the the flats, houses and land all feel like ways to make the business of owning a football club profitable rather than his ultimate motive for owning a football club at all... I said mine was a cynical view 5 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said: I think you'll find SL isn't a director of BCFC any more. Gould is listed as a director, but as an employee that hinders his ability to disagree with any decision taken by the Lansdown family. Marshall is company secretary, not a director. Look at most other clubs and you'll find more than two non-employee directors. Gavin is a Director (also Secretary): https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/03230871/officers The pertinent bit though: 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveInSA Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 For me, it's all about a plan. A top business will disclose to its stakeholders their strategy for the next 5 years (and even longer in the case of long-term impacts like climate change). As long as SL has been in place, this piece of work is missing. At least it isn't visible to key stakeholders - the supporters. What is the long term vision for BCFC and how does that fit into Bristol Sport? I have no idea - we have a goal to be in the "premier league" - along with 22 other championship teams and the rest of the EFL and the premier league clubs themselves. I've said before - we don't have a plan. Without a plan how do you recruit players and create a succession plan for managers. How do academy players feed into the first team? You can't make an omelette without cracking eggs. Steve doesn't like omelettes. So we continue to underachieve because the stability in structure and the strategy to achieve it isn't in place. As long at the Lansdowns are there, I can't see this changing. Unless, unless, they finally get it an put the structure in place for long term success. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 2 minutes ago, Davefevs said: I said mine was a cynical view Gavin is a Director (also Secretary): https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/03230871/officers The pertinent bit though: Just listed as secretary in that Companies House listing: https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/03230871/officers I'm not for suggesting that Steve doesn't take major decisions. He's not hands-off in that he doesn't know what the board are doing. I use that phrase in that he has, by his own admission, "stepped back" from day-to-day running of BCFC and he lives a long way away and doesn't attend board meetings. Which is why he made Jon his proxy in effect. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 Just now, DaveInSA said: For me, it's all about a plan. A top business will disclose to its stakeholders their strategy for the next 5 years (and even longer in the case of long-term impacts like climate change). As long as SL has been in place, this piece of work is missing. At least it isn't visible to key stakeholders - the supporters. What is the long term vision for BCFC and how does that fit into Bristol Sport? I have no idea - we have a goal to be in the "premier league" - along with 22 other championship teams and the rest of the EFL and the premier league clubs themselves. I've said before - we don't have a plan. Without a plan how do you recruit players and create a succession plan for managers. How do academy players feed into the first team? You can't make an omelette without cracking eggs. Steve doesn't like omelettes. So we continue to underachieve because the stability in structure and the strategy to achieve it isn't in place. As long at the Lansdowns are there, I can't see this changing. Unless, unless, they finally get it an put the structure in place for long term success. Nail on head Dave (St Annes or South Africa?). Along with the accounts for 20/21, I’d really like a clear statement of at least the short / mid-term plan, and how the finances allow or constrain that. We need to know what it means. Does Nige have to trim more costs? What is the plan to achieve, e.g. not re-contracting or trying to sell high earners, bring in younger, lower wages players and / or retain the best young players like Massengo. Sustainability is a buzzword not a plan. 2 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said: Just listed as secretary in that Companies House listing: https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/03230871/officers I'm not for suggesting that Steve doesn't take major decisions. He's not hands-off in that he doesn't know what the board are doing. I use that phrase in that he has, by his own admission, "stepped back" from day-to-day running of BCFC and he lives a long way away and doesn't attend board meetings. Which is why he made Jon his proxy in effect. Scroll down - he has a twin! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 14 minutes ago, Harry said: Personally, I think it’s time for a change. I’ve lost confidence in SL and I never had any in JL in the first place. A major worry would be if SL sold up who would buy the club? We could end up with a dodgy ownership and suffer the consequences of that. SL is a Bristolian and to me that’s vitally important and in my view he’s achieved a great deal so far. Started Bristol Sport, Revamped AG, brand spanking new training facilities. The only thing missing is a squad capable of reaching the riches of the PL. Sure, he’s made mistakes not only with managers but with senior members of staff at AG but I’m more than happy to forgive for those errors - I really wish more City fans shared my view. SL has top drawer business acumen - hence his billionaire status and fair play to him but City is not his only interest. Fairly recently he bought up a hotel complex and golf club in Guernsey and who knows what other interests he has. I’d be seriously concerned if he ever sold up. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo88 Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 3 hours ago, NcnsBcfc said: @Kid in the Riot Some interesting points, but like others have asked, what article are you referring to in the Athletic? I think it's a classic case with the Lansdowns of a businessman, who probably doesn't know that much about football trusting the wrong people to invest on his behalf. That article that showed we had recieved the most in player sales in the EFL (£75M+), but rather than invest in 15 quality players, we bought 60 mediocre ones in an attempt to generate future income. In the process, we have sold the family silver (I know some of the players wanted to leave), and have invested in something akin to a dodgy timeshare investment. Unlike other owners in the Champ, Lansdown can't bring himself to push the moral boundaries of FFP. Probably more down to his personal ethics, than a business decision. If you look at the clubs that haven't had parachute payments, and got up to the PL, then there's probably only a few that haven't gambled financially. I just can't see us doing that. The whole Bristol Sport set up is probably more of a hindrance than benefit to City. The infrastructure of the club means that to spin it out on it's own, would make the whole concept unsustainable. Rugby/basketball, wouldn't really work on their own. Would any interested party also have to buy the whole Sports village plans? Once again a massive potential investment, that might not be in their future plans. For me, what is the point spending £60m+ on a ground upgrade, training facilities; and then a Sports Village in the future, when the main attraction on the pitch gets relegated? Tough decisions in Jan i think. Relegation would set us back a number of years, and knock tens of millions off any purchase price. But this team at the moment is only going in one direction, and has been for a number of years. Thank you , but as you say probably needs a cut and paste by someone with a subscription. I don't feel that Bristol Sport as a package is a hindrance. The rugby club can be successful for a fraction of the cost of getting the football club into the Premier League, even allowing for this season's poor start. Having both clubs share the ground brings in more income than just on club. As for the Sorts Village, there is massive potential to generate non match day income to complement that already generated in the stadium. 3 hours ago, WarksRobin said: I understand what you are saying, but with enough time and money we could have the best stadium in the world in BS3. These are the limiting factors for any built infrastructure. If we reached the Premier League, were swimming in cash and were selling out every match, every effort would be made to extend the stadium further. As Ashton Vale is dead, where in BS3 or even Bristol, would the best stadium in the world be built? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 18 minutes ago, WarksRobin said: How so? If you spend enough money you can build anything, even a 40,000 seater stadium at Ashton Gate. Where do suggest that a 40k stadium gets built? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tinmans Love Child Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 3 hours ago, tin said: The Gate’s a nice ground nowadays, but I preferred the old days of the East End. Maybe it’s too nice; too nice for the opposition, little atmosphere etc. As for the new training ground, it delivers anything but high performance and therein lies the irony. With respect, many clubs have had nice new stadiums and have also been successful, for me the AG renovation has had absolutely nothing to do with our fortunes on the pitch. I remember us being pretty crap in the old AG for many seasons as well. For me its all down to managers and players, and we’ve sold too many good players, bought too many bad ones, and not got the manager appointments right. On the training ground, the name is definitely ridiculous and sends the wrong message to players and fans. It’s all very well calling it HPC when things are going well and you’ve had proven success, but when it’s not going well you become a laughing stock. If I was NP I’d be requesting a change to the name ASAP, if only for a physiological boost. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lenred Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 1 hour ago, Red-Robbo said: The entire corporate governance of the club is wrong: Two directors, one not in the UK for much of the year, combined with an owner who has taken a hands-off policy recently and is based off shore. It all leaves City as a bit of a rudderless ship. I don't know if Richard Gould can shoulder giving the club direction alone. In his work at Surrey CC he was in charge of the wealthiest county club in the UK - a slightly different challenge than he has here. I'm grateful to Steve for his investment over the years. It has moved us forward: AG was a ground that was an embarrassment in the second tier; We now seem more like a "natural Championship side" than we did when he arrived. But our current poor form - for the entire bloody year! - is horrendous, and the "Nigel away until we know not when, Curtis Fleming in charge because we can't think what else to do" thing, just underlines how, still, decisions are not taken by Bristol Sport, the club is ambushed by events. We have the foresight of Mr M'Goo. "Medium-term strategy? Contingency planning? What is that!?" If this new investment means a farewell to the Lansdowns, I'm cool with that. If it means, a co-owner who might shake things up a bit and not allow the drift we've seen, I'd be cool with that as well. But something's gotta give. Agree. I’ve got to the point now where it feels like it’s just become so stale. The owner seems to have lost interest - at least outwardly - and we barely hear a peep from JL. That’s fine, it’s his ball and he can ultimately do what he wants with it. But I’d be very happy to say thanks for all you’ve done SL, and see where a new owner / part owner takes us. Feels like we need a new journey as stagnating, which it feels like we’ve been doing for years, eventually only leads to decline. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 31 minutes ago, BigAl&Toby said: Lansdown never wanted to relocate to Ashton Vale. Twas a smokescreen to get what he really wanted. His cake and the crumbs after he’d devoured it…. Ashton Vale was only ever wanted for it’s true development potential. Houses. Not a sports stadium. Got any hard evidence of that? or is it just made up agenda supporting complete bollocks? 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Show Me The Money! Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 (edited) I read that article I don’t get the feeling of wanting the Lansdown’s to sell up. So many of the clubs mentioned with foreign owners who have come in with supposed unlimited wealth and delivered nothing but massive debt on the clubs. SL has made some bad appointments and we are crying out for a director of football to work with the COO to agree a business and football plan and then just let them get on with it. i believe SL is a City fan and looking to do the best for the club. He would of sold up ages ago otherwise. He’s a retired billionaire ffs. If some other billionaire comes in or some investment group with hidden backing that we’ll never know anything about take over then the risk of things going further tits up increases. Just look at the other takeovers of other clubs in this division. How many have got to the prem and established themselves without then coming back down after a couple of seasons and ended up with massive debts. Cardiff, Swansea, Reading, Hull, Sheff Utd Edited November 18, 2021 by Show Me The Money! 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingswood Robin Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 6 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said: Just listed as secretary in that Companies House listing: https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/03230871/officers I'm not for suggesting that Steve doesn't take major decisions. He's not hands-off in that he doesn't know what the board are doing. I use that phrase in that he has, by his own admission, "stepped back" from day-to-day running of BCFC and he lives a long way away and doesn't attend board meetings. Which is why he made Jon his proxy in effect. Is this proxy often physically further away than the person they are representing? If the family really is thinking more about it's next adventure and their heart isn't in the football any more, they need to move on. It's making for terrible viewing. Not unlike watching the last few months of a striker that knows full well they won't be here next season. The way things have been allowed to drift is starting to make SL look a bit like Young (old) Mr Grace ! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NcnsBcfc Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 (edited) 3 hours ago, TonyTonyTony said: Its very easy to spend other people's money..... The thing about it being Lansdown' money is that all the equity that SL has put into the club, has been converted into shares, that are owned by him It's not the Mel Morris case at Derby, where the whole pack of cards has come falling down, and he's lost a fortune. If SL was to walk away/sell the club; then the £150m that he has invested (then converted into shares) would be recompensed by the buyers. He's certainly not going down the Eddie Davies at Bolton route, of writing off £125m worth of loans. I admire Lansdown's determination to upgrade AG, and the Failand facility. But he is no mug when it comes to finances. Any loss made by the club, will not of impacted on his own finances/wealth. You just offset the loss against other companies operating under the Pula/Bristol City stadium Holdings banner, and any loan to cover that loss; is converted into yet more shares. Those shares will get cashed out at some later stage i'm sure; one way or another. Edited November 18, 2021 by NcnsBcfc 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid in the Riot Posted November 18, 2021 Author Share Posted November 18, 2021 52 minutes ago, Davefevs said: My view, a cynical view is….The football club is the loss-leader for the opportunity of “everything else”….the flats / houses, land, etc. I’m sure if you net them off, he’ll make money on the overall “thing”. I also think that he is doing it for good reasons too, but he isn’t gifting the money. That's absolutely right. When they walk away from Bristol City, I am convinced the Lansdowns will do so having not made a substantial personal financial loss, and with the sporting quarter and Ashton Vale elements, may in fact walk away with a handsome profit. The company that submitted the sporting quarter application has three named directors, by the way: Martin Griffiths, Gavin Marshall and Jon Lansdown. All three stand to be enriched considerably by that project. Marshall seems a decent enough guy, but seems to have come from nowhere. I'd be interested to know how and why he has got himself into a position where he stands to make a considerable amount of money from a Bristol Sport project. It appears that the Lansdowns are now "looking after" a few of their closest allies, as the end of their reign nears. Nothing illegal or even morally wrong with it, necessarily, but something that I feel people need to be aware of. Griffiths, Marshall, and Steve and John, will surely walk away with millions between them from this project. Yet to most City fans they are viewed either as club employees or benefactors. That's certainly not the full story... 7 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NcnsBcfc Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 3 hours ago, Major Isewater said: Some listened to the Oxford and Watford fans who were more than delighted to see the back of him and the toxic atmosphere he bought to their clubs. Ashton did some good for the club but more good for Mark Ashton . Yep, what was he basic wage per year? Something like 500k wasn't it? No doubt he'll have some bonus/incentive structure in place as well. No surprise that after gaining our first profit in 20+ years (basically down to accounting the Kelly money in with the Webster one); he walked. He knew he would never be able to recreate what he had done during the last 4/5 years, as the cupboard was now bare; and the gamble on the 60 players; hadn't paid off. It's amazing that he is trying the same thing at Ipswich now, isn't it? something like 20 players bought in the summer. With no salary caps in place, L1 is obviously the place to try it now. He must do a wonderful Powerpoint presentation to the heirachy. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyTonyTony Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 3 minutes ago, NcnsBcfc said: I admire Lansdown's determination to upgrade AG, and the Failand facility. But he is no mug when it comes to finances. Any loss made by the club, will not of impacted on his own finances/wealth. You just offset the loss against other companies operating under the Pula/Bristol City stadium Holdings banner, and any loan to cover that loss; is converted into yet more shares. Those shares will get cashed out at some later stage i'm sure; one way or another. You are right - i just find it a bit lazy to say he can easily afford more. Its not for us to decide that BTW i am in the camp that the club needs a fundamental change, but im also wary about what new ownership would bring. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingswood Robin Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 2 minutes ago, TonyTonyTony said: You are right - i just find it a bit lazy to say he can easily afford more. Its not for us to decide that BTW i am in the camp that the club needs a fundamental change, but im also wary about what new ownership would bring. True, but he is the owner and we should keep working on it ! People at the club will shortly be working very hard to get more money out of us. A two way thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NcnsBcfc Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 (edited) 8 minutes ago, TonyTonyTony said: You are right - i just find it a bit lazy to say he can easily afford more. Its not for us to decide that BTW i am in the camp that the club needs a fundamental change, but im also wary about what new ownership would bring. Completely agree Tony, it all feels very stale now. It's almost as if the Lansdown era has run it's course; and the Sports village was the last opportunity to grind out some money out of the situation. The thing with the necessary change though, is how can it happen whilst the Sports village is going through the required planning application/building phase? Any new owner would probably have to keep the project running in order for everybody concerned to make their money out of it. So any potential buyer of Bristol City would have to recompense SL's shares, then pay for the building fixtures/fittings (AG,HPC); then possibly the Sports Village. Would they have to buy Bristol Sport as well? Rugby/Basketball all the other minor sports under that umbrella. I can't image the Lansdown's going ahead with the Sport's village if the football club isn't tied into the package. The whole thing feels so unwieldy at the moment; and that we've taken our focus off what is happening on the pitch with the team. Really it should be the team's success that it the momentum for upgrading stadia/training facilities/Sports villages. Just feels more like asset building at the moment. Edited November 18, 2021 by NcnsBcfc 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NcnsBcfc Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 3 minutes ago, And Its Smith said: Makes the Gould interview even more bizarre Is this for the Lansdown "taken as far as we can " thread or another "Nige is back one"? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigAl&Toby Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 30 minutes ago, Robbored said: Got any hard evidence of that? or is it just made up agenda supporting complete bollocks? Sorry. Couldn’t respond earlier. Bargain Hunt was on. No evidence that I’m sharing with you. How about good old common sense? Ever asked yourself why if he’s as successful as he clearly is in other aspects of his life he’s made such a mess of this part? Or perhaps he hasn’t. Perhaps his plan is coming together quite nicely. And which bit aren’t you clear about? The structure of Pula and BCFC? The fact that Steve is the beneficial owner? The fact that he’s put his money in and secured with a debenture? You keep living your dream. If you like what you’re seeing week in week out then carry on. Meanwhile Steve, Maggie and Jon will appreciate your support. Keep the faith. 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coxy27 Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 1 hour ago, Red-Robbo said: I think you'll find SL isn't a director of BCFC any more. Gould is listed as a director, but as an employee that hinders his ability to disagree with any decision taken by the Lansdown family. Marshall is company secretary, not a director. Look at most other clubs and you'll find more than two non-employee directors. There is a bit of a discrepancy between Companies House and the OS. I think you're right about SL judging from Companies House. Marshall however, is a Director: Along with JL, Harman and Gould. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 (edited) 21 minutes ago, BigAl&Toby said: Sorry. Couldn’t respond earlier. Bargain Hunt was on. No evidence that I’m sharing with you. How about good old common sense? Ever asked yourself why if he’s as successful as he clearly is in other aspects of his life he’s made such a mess of this part? Or perhaps he hasn’t. Perhaps his plan is coming together quite nicely. And which bit aren’t you clear about? The structure of Pula and BCFC? The fact that Steve is the beneficial owner? The fact that he’s put his money in and secured with a debenture? You keep living your dream. If you like what you’re seeing week in week out then carry on. Meanwhile Steve, Maggie and Jon will appreciate your support. Keep the faith. You don’t have any evidence because there is none. So it’s just a made up agenda supporting complete load of bollocks then……..…… Edited November 18, 2021 by Robbored 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1t_ref_again Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 47 minutes ago, Show Me The Money! said: I read that article I don’t get the feeling of wanting the Lansdown’s to sell up. So many of the clubs mentioned with foreign owners who have come in with supposed unlimited wealth and delivered nothing but massive debt on the clubs. SL has made some bad appointments and we are crying out for a director of football to work with the COO to agree a business and football plan and then just let them get on with it. i believe SL is a City fan and looking to do the best for the club. He would of sold up ages ago otherwise. He’s a retired billionaire ffs. If some other billionaire comes in or some investment group with hidden backing that we’ll never know anything about take over then the risk of things going further tits up increases. Just look at the other takeovers of other clubs in this division. How many have got to the prem and established themselves without then coming back down after a couple of seasons and ended up with massive debts. Cardiff, Swansea, Reading, Hull, Sheff Utd Felt the same, all the article did was to reinforce the likelihood of being owned by some anonymous just got rich Chinese merchant as a status symbol or a bunch of investors hoping to chuck some money and get to the premier league promise land and when that does not work looking how to exit and sell on. It would seem that 10 million a year losses are low to average for a championship team, so with approx 25 games at home depending on cups, with lets say 17,000 home fans per game, if they all pay an extra £23.50 each per game then that will cover the losses, or how much each game you attend (if losses were only £10m) are being subsidised by the owners. Of course a few will try to say SL is going to make money out of this and cover all the money he has put in, but its easy to write what ever you want on a forum and pass off as fact without the slightest bit of evidence to back it up or true in depth knowledge. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Port Said Red Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 1 hour ago, Davefevs said: My view, a cynical view is….The football club is the loss-leader for the opportunity of “everything else”….the flats / houses, land, etc. I’m sure if you net them off, he’ll make money on the overall “thing”. I also think that he is doing it for good reasons too, but he isn’t gifting the money. 1 hour ago, BigAl&Toby said: The blind still lead the blind…. Lansdown never wanted to relocate to Ashton Vale. Twas a smokescreen to get what he really wanted. His cake and the crumbs after he’d devoured it…. Ashton Vale was only ever wanted for it’s true development potential. Houses. Not a sports stadium. And bugger me he got them both. The cash cow keeps mooing as Steve’s hands are massaging it’s teats. Meanwhile we’ve got a footballing feast to look forward to on Saturday……. So the old joke is "how do you become a millionaire?, Start with a billion and invest it in a football club." right? So my view is that Lansdown is too smart to allow that to happen to him but, everything else he has invested in and has planned will only allow him to get his money back. I don't believe there is a massive profit in this unless something surprising happens in the future to the football, the womens game, rugby or UK basketball sides that we can't foresee. Even reaching the premier League is only going to allow some investment on the playing side without further input from him. I don't think this is a bad thing, we have a ground the majority of us appreciate, the team is currently out of form, but the consensus of opinion on here in the last 10 years was that we wanted an extended spell in the Championship, and we have had that. In another post @BigAl&Toby suggested that he was never interested in Ashton Vale, I am not sure why he spent 10 years fighting for it, spent a large sum on buying land for it then. It would have definitely been cheaper starting from scratch and the income from match days would have been higher due to no disruption while the build was going ahead. There is also the peripheral benefits to the City that people seem to overlook, regeneration of the Ashton area, new jobs in hospitality, conferencing etc, it all comes from the investment of one man. He has also done this with little help, and in some cases downright opposition from Bristol City Council over the years. Why should that cost him a large percentage of his fortune? Over the last 55 years I have seen so much lip service paid by successive Chairmen since Harry Dolman to the progression of this club. At every turn they either took more money out of the club than the put in, or suggested investment that never came. Lansdown has done pretty much the opposite, when he has added money from the sale of shares just to keep us afloat, there has been little or no fanfare about it. Forget red herrings like "% of income invested" and "I pay through the turnstiles" rhetoric, combined we would do well to match what he has put into this club over his time here. I should think that he feels his £150 - 200m investment is pretty unappreciated right now, no wonder he wants to pass it on to some other sucker. 7 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 (edited) 34 minutes ago, Coxy27 said: There is a bit of a discrepancy between Companies House and the OS. I think you're right about SL judging from Companies House. Marshall however, is a Director: Along with JL, Harman and Gould. Yup. Listed twice for some reason. My point about having employees as directors still stands though. I think one of the problems with BCFC is the composition of the board: the owner's son and a bloke who has the profile of the invisible man, plus two people employed by the owner. Where's the oversight? Where's the expertise? Who was there to say, "I don't think Dean Holden is ready to manage at this level", for example? Where is an independent voice? We'd be much better with it, which is why I welcome new investment in the club. New stakeholders should mean the cosy consensus is challenged. Edited November 18, 2021 by Red-Robbo 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 3 minutes ago, Port Said Red said: So my view is that Lansdown is too smart to allow that to happen to him but, everything else he has invested in and has planned will only allow him to get his money back. I don't believe there is a massive profit in this unless something surprising happens in the future to the football, the womens game, rugby or UK basketball sides that we can't foresee. Even reaching the premier League is only going to allow some investment on the playing side without further input from him. I agree, but the investment is bigger than “sports”! For me, the profit / recoup of football spending doesn’t come from the sports…..it comes from land….flats….houses. As I said my cynical view is that “sports” is an “enabler”. He doesn’t get to put flats and houses on THAT land without having done the sports stuff. 6 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said: Yup. Listed twice for some reason. My point about having employees as directors still stands though. I think one of the problems with BCFC is the composition of the board: the owner's son and a bloke who has the profile of the invisible man, plus two people employed by the owner. Where's the oversight? Where's the expertise? Who was there to say, "I don't think Dean Holden is ready to manage at this level", for example? Where is an independent voice? We'd be much better with it, which is why I welcome new investment in the club. New stakeholders should mean the cost consensus is challenged. Mark Ashton has a twin too….likely just crap de-duplication in the CH Database. But there are two Mark Anthony Ashton’s! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malago Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 (edited) These types of thread always remind me of the Charlton fans who agitated for the sacking of Alan Curbishley after three mid table Premier league finishes in a row, claiming he’d taken them as far as he could. Be careful what you wish for. It may come true. Edited November 18, 2021 by Malago 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 1 minute ago, Davefevs said: Mark Ashton has a twin too….likely just crap de-duplication in the CH Database. But there are two Mark Anthony Ashton’s! Lord 'elp us! One was bad enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Davefevs said: I agree, but the investment is bigger than “sports”! For me, the profit / recoup of football spending doesn’t come from the sports…..it comes from land….flats….houses. As I said my cynical view is that “sports” is an “enabler”. He doesn’t get to put flats and houses on THAT land without having done the sports stuff. Mark Ashton has a twin too….likely just crap de-duplication in the CH Database. But there are two Mark Anthony Ashton’s! Please Dave, the prospect of two Mark Ashtons is too horrible to think about! Edited November 18, 2021 by chinapig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 1 minute ago, chinapig said: Please Dave, the prospect of two Mark Ashtons is too horrible to think about! Probably explains how he sucks his own 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Port Said Red Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 Just now, Davefevs said: I agree, but the investment is bigger than “sports”! For me, the profit / recoup of football spending doesn’t come from the sports…..it comes from land….flats….houses. As I said my cynical view is that “sports” is an “enabler”. He doesn’t get to put flats and houses on THAT land without having done the sports stuff. Thank's, that was my point, he knows he can't make money from the sport alone (it's unlikely at least) hence the joke. But he has had to extend his investment into all that land alongside Ashton Road to try and offset his investment, something he wouldn't have needed to do with Ashton Vale. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coxy27 Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 12 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said: Yup. Listed twice for some reason. My point about having employees as directors still stands though. I think one of the problems with BCFC is the composition of the board: the owner's son and a bloke who has the profile of the invisible man, plus two people employed by the owner. Where's the oversight? Where's the expertise? Who was there to say, "I don't think Dean Holden is ready to manage at this level", for example? Where is an independent voice? We'd be much better with it, which is why I welcome new investment in the club. New stakeholders should mean the cosy consensus is challenged. Can't disagree with that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 2 minutes ago, chinapig said: Please Dave, the prospect of two Mark Ashtons is too horrible to think about! I think I've found a picture of the other one: 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blagdon red Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 1 hour ago, Kid in the Riot said: That's absolutely right. When they walk away from Bristol City, I am convinced the Lansdowns will do so having not made a substantial personal financial loss, and with the sporting quarter and Ashton Vale elements, may in fact walk away with a handsome profit. The company that submitted the sporting quarter application has three named directors, by the way: Martin Griffiths, Gavin Marshall and Jon Lansdown. All three stand to be enriched considerably by that project. Marshall seems a decent enough guy, but seems to have come from nowhere. I'd be interested to know how and why he has got himself into a position where he stands to make a considerable amount of money from a Bristol Sport project. It appears that the Lansdowns are now "looking after" a few of their closest allies, as the end of their reign nears. Nothing illegal or even morally wrong with it, necessarily, but something that I feel people need to be aware of. Griffiths, Marshall, and Steve and John, will surely walk away with millions between them from this project. Yet to most City fans they are viewed either as club employees or benefactors. That's certainly not the full story... I think you are in danger of mixing up being a director of a company and being a significant shareholder. It is quite possible that a director is not a shareholder at all. It seems to me quite normal for the FD of BS to be a director of the sporting quarter company. It does not follow, however, that he has a substantial shareholding or stands to make "millions" from that role. Overseeing the group finances is, after all, his day job. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid in the Riot Posted November 18, 2021 Author Share Posted November 18, 2021 16 minutes ago, Blagdon red said: I think you are in danger of mixing up being a director of a company and being a significant shareholder. It is quite possible that a director is not a shareholder at all. It seems to me quite normal for the FD of BS to be a director of the sporting quarter company. It does not follow, however, that he has a substantial shareholding or stands to make "millions" from that role. Overseeing the group finances is, after all, his day job. A fair point. It would be interesting to know if Marshall is a shareholder. I suspect he would be, however you are right that it may not be substantial, or not as substantial as Lansdown and Griffiths', at least. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarksRobin Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 2 hours ago, pongo88 said: As Ashton Vale is dead, where in BS3 or even Bristol, would the best stadium in the world be built? Apologies, I don't think I made myself clear. A previous poster suggested we can never improve Ashton Gate further. I argue that with enough money and time we could not only further expand Ashton Gate but we could turn Ashton Gate into the best stadium in the world if we wanted to do so. We may need to buy additional land and divert utilities and roads but none of that is impossible in a technical sense Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 9 hours ago, Major Isewater said: As much as we moan about paying high prices to follow the club we haven’t ,or ever will ,pour in the millions that the Lansdowns have. It must be very frustrating for them. SL has seemingly tried every type of set up, he finally gets a top experienced bloke in and we are still struggling. We are a bit unlucky but ultimately the responsibility for failure to go up or produce attractive winning football lies at his feet. I hate to say it but I am sure the Bears give him more pleasure than the football club. I guess it’s easier to be successful with a rugby club, and Bristol Bears have been slated by other fans for buying their way to success. As for the amount he has put in, I don’t disagree but it’s all relevant too. Take someone who earns £10 an hour, it pretty much costs him three hours wages for a match ticket. If they earn say £300 a week then that’s a 10% outlay. I don’t know how much Steve is worth now, I remember a figure of around £1.3 billion mentioned? A quick calculation makes me think 10% of that would be £130m he would have to invest if you compare it to our fan on £10 an hour. So Steve invests £130m for example. Yes there might be a few duff deals where he won’t get his money back on players, but the land he has purchased and the stadium redevelopment not only generates income but it’s a very sellable asset too. Compare that to our low wage fan, once they have spent £30 on a ticket their money has gone. All they have are memories and the rest of the week to try and scrape by. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyderInACan Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 18 minutes ago, RedM said: I guess it’s easier to be successful with a rugby club, and Bristol Bears have been slated by other fans for buying their way to success. At least we’re not Saracens. Bit rich of other clubs to suggest we buy success (which we haven’t, have we). A spot of jealousy there I’d suggest. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveInSA Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 3 hours ago, Davefevs said: Nail on head Dave (St Annes or South Africa?). Along with the accounts for 20/21, I’d really like a clear statement of at least the short / mid-term plan, and how the finances allow or constrain that. We need to know what it means. Does Nige have to trim more costs? What is the plan to achieve, e.g. not re-contracting or trying to sell high earners, bring in younger, lower wages players and / or retain the best young players like Massengo. Sustainability is a buzzword not a plan. Scroll down - he has a twin! I was in South Africa for 15 years. Now back in the West Country. And suitably bemused by almost everything in the UK. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy1968 Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 4 hours ago, BigAl&Toby said: The blind still lead the blind…. Lansdown never wanted to relocate to Ashton Vale. Twas a smokescreen to get what he really wanted. His cake and the crumbs after he’d devoured it…. Ashton Vale was only ever wanted for it’s true development potential. Houses. Not a sports stadium. And bugger me he got them both. The cash cow keeps mooing as Steve’s hands are massaging it’s teats. Meanwhile we’ve got a footballing feast to look forward to on Saturday……. The more I think about it, the more obvious it becomes that no one was overlooking the village green angle when they faield to fence off the ashton value land. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledAjax Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 16 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said: It's difficult to know with the Lansdowns, and it's probably time to recognise them as a collective. Whether it's in terms of day to day decision-making or a horrible worst case scenario, it's not just Steve that is, or would, make decisions involving the football club, it is also Maggie and Jon. Some may consider it inappropriate to speculate in this way, but should the worst happen to Steve, I believe Maggie would inherit his shares. And so forth. Therefore, it is important to recognise that Bristol City FC, RFC, WFC and Flyers are owned by "The Lansdowns". Steve owns 99% shares in Bristol City FC, yet I still see people banging on about there being "a board". The board is Steve, Maggie and Jon, because guess what? They own 99% of the club. Brian Tinnion, Lee Johnson, Mark Ashton, Nigel Pearson, Richard Gould - employees, nothing more. Their say, pretty much subservient with their level of power at the club. For the bit in bold, I guess it is hard to say for certain. You'd need to know not only the terms of his will, but also the transmission terms contained within the articles of association (or equivalent) of Pula Sport, the Channel Islands company that I believe is the only one in which any Lansdown actually directly holds shares (all the rest of the companies being subsidiaries of that ultimate holdco). I don't believe that Steve and Maggie own all of the shares jointly, as the PSC register for Bristol City Holdings Limited list them separately, and lists Steve as having 75% or more of the shares and voting rights, plus the right to appoint/remove the directors, whereas Maggie holds between 25% and 50% of the shares. For that maths to work out they must own some shares jointly, but others separately. Steve must also hold some shares that carry different rights than those held by Maggie. I suspect that Maggie does not have voting rights for example, as she can't affect the make up of the boards. You can assume that Steve's shares go to Maggie upon death, but you cannot know for sure that all of them do without seeing Steve's will and the corporate documents of Pula Sport. The second point that you make here is effectively accusing the group of companies of pretty piss poor corporate governance, bordering on negligent disregard for the proper role of directors and shareholders and a breach of fiduciary duties. The only Lansdown currently appointed to the board of any of the relevant companies registered at Companies House is Jon*. He is on the board of Bristol Sport Limited, Bristol Flyers Limited, Bristol Rugby Club Limited, BCFC Limited, Ashton Gate Limited, Bristol City Football Club Limited, and Bristol City Holdings Limited. So, the only member of the Lansdown family that should be involved in the day to day operations of the companies, is Jon. His duty as a director is to run those companies for the benefit of the shareholders, and yes ultimately that is his mum and dad. However he also has a duty in law to act independently and without his discretion being fettered by anyone else. If, as you say, the shareholders are involved in day to day to decisions, well then Jon (and all the other directors) are sailing pretty close to the wind in terms of fulfilling their duties properly and correctly. At the very least you'd expect conflict of interests and the like to be declared (privately, that sort of thing doesn't need to be public), or we'd expect some sort of shareholders' agreement (a private document). Now the confusion comes when Jon is described as 'chairman', but then acts in very much an executive role, including being head of kit design. He is clearly not really a chairman in the traditional sense of the word - a director who makes sure the other directors abide by their duties. This is all without even mentioning the chain of board and shareholder resolutions you'd need to pass if Steve and Maggie, via Pula Sport, actually wanted to make a controlling decision in one of the lower subsidiary companies. Just as one example the articles of association of Bristol Sport Limited says that the members may by special resolution, direct the directors to do something. Ok, that's a carve out from the general rule that the directors act independently. However, that special resolution would then have to be filed at Companies House, and so we would all be able to see it - there is no such resolution currently showing on the Companies House page.** You can say that I am naïve and that there is a difference between day to day reality and the legal framework within which they should be operating. However, if the operation of the board and club are as you allege, then the whole stack is pretty possibly in breach of a whole bunch of laws and regulations. As others have said, the corp gov generally is a bit of a mess, and needs clearing up. Ultimately, there's an awful lot to unpick. Bristol City has far from the most complicated corporate structure, but the devil is in the detail. *Note that Steve is a designated member, with Jon, of Vence LLP, the LLP that owns the Ashton Vale land, but my understanding is that this entity sits outside of the main Bristol Sport structure. **As an aside, if they do want to sell the club then Burges Salmon really want to be updating the articles of Bristol City Holdings Limited as they are from 2005 and still talk about stuff like bearer shares. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledAjax Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 3 hours ago, Red-Robbo said: Yup. Listed twice for some reason. My point about having employees as directors still stands though. I think one of the problems with BCFC is the composition of the board: the owner's son and a bloke who has the profile of the invisible man, plus two people employed by the owner. Where's the oversight? Where's the expertise? Who was there to say, "I don't think Dean Holden is ready to manage at this level", for example? Where is an independent voice? We'd be much better with it, which is why I welcome new investment in the club. New stakeholders should mean the cosy consensus is challenged. To be honest, as private companies there is no requirement for an independent director to be on the boards. It's only with PLCs that you start to get into legal and regulatory requirements for non-execs and proper chairmen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 45 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said: To be honest, as private companies there is no requirement for an independent director to be on the boards. It's only with PLCs that you start to get into legal and regulatory requirements for non-execs and proper chairmen. This is true. It would just be handy at a football club. Not suggesting they are breaking company law or owt. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledAjax Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 1 minute ago, Red-Robbo said: This is true. It would just be handy at a football club. Not suggesting they are breaking company law or owt. I agree completely. I'm hoping we see the 'fan-led review' recommend a regulator, and I'd certainly think that part of that regulator's role would be to ensure that there was uniform corp gov standards across professional football. To my mind including a requirement to have an independent element on the board would be a good thing. Football clubs aren't like normal companies, but currently they dance to the same tune. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledAjax Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 39 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said: I agree completely. I'm hoping we see the 'fan-led review' recommend a regulator, and I'd certainly think that part of that regulator's role would be to ensure that there was uniform corp gov standards across professional football. To my mind including a requirement to have an independent element on the board would be a good thing. Football clubs aren't like normal companies, but currently they dance to the same tune. Would not normally quote myself, but @Red-Robbo I just looked up the interim findings of the review - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1004891/TC_letter_to_Oliver_Dowden_Accessible_Format.pdf Couch states in her letter that "I have stated publicly that there is a strong case for a new independent regulator, and I have heard nothing in evidence that has dissuaded me from this view. I believe that IREF should be established to address issues that are most relevant to the risks to the game and already at least partially a matter of English law - particularly financial regulation, corporate governance and ownership. The related requirements are likely to include cost controls, real time financial monitoring, minimum governance requirements (including a requirement for independent non-executive directors on club boards) and revised separate tests for owners and directors of clubs on an initial and ongoing basis." So yeh, should a regulator be founded, it's almost certain that the Lansdowns would be required to broaden the board, and provide greater transparency. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigAl&Toby Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 4 hours ago, Port Said Red said: So the old joke is "how do you become a millionaire?, Start with a billion and invest it in a football club." right? So my view is that Lansdown is too smart to allow that to happen to him but, everything else he has invested in and has planned will only allow him to get his money back. I don't believe there is a massive profit in this unless something surprising happens in the future to the football, the womens game, rugby or UK basketball sides that we can't foresee. Even reaching the premier League is only going to allow some investment on the playing side without further input from him. I don't think this is a bad thing, we have a ground the majority of us appreciate, the team is currently out of form, but the consensus of opinion on here in the last 10 years was that we wanted an extended spell in the Championship, and we have had that. In another post @BigAl&Toby suggested that he was never interested in Ashton Vale, I am not sure why he spent 10 years fighting for it, spent a large sum on buying land for it then. It would have definitely been cheaper starting from scratch and the income from match days would have been higher due to no disruption while the build was going ahead. There is also the peripheral benefits to the City that people seem to overlook, regeneration of the Ashton area, new jobs in hospitality, conferencing etc, it all comes from the investment of one man. He has also done this with little help, and in some cases downright opposition from Bristol City Council over the years. Why should that cost him a large percentage of his fortune? Over the last 55 years I have seen so much lip service paid by successive Chairmen since Harry Dolman to the progression of this club. At every turn they either took more money out of the club than the put in, or suggested investment that never came. Lansdown has done pretty much the opposite, when he has added money from the sale of shares just to keep us afloat, there has been little or no fanfare about it. Forget red herrings like "% of income invested" and "I pay through the turnstiles" rhetoric, combined we would do well to match what he has put into this club over his time here. I should think that he feels his £150 - 200m investment is pretty unappreciated right now, no wonder he wants to pass it on to some other sucker. If that’s what I said that’s not what I meant. Mr L hedged his bets with Ashton Vale. If he got consent for a stadium then that would have been ok. He’d then have redeveloped Ashton Gate. The real value though was in getting resi consent on Ashton Vale. That’s what he really wanted. Never mind a consent to develop a sporting and entertainment complex. The value in that land was always resi. And guess what? He’s got it. Hook, line and sinker. He tried “his best” to make us proud. But guess what? He’s got his cash cow in BS3 and he’s milking her teats. He’s also got his resi consent on Ashton Vale. Who says he can’t have his cake and eat it? But we’re ok. And eternally grateful. Aren’t we? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Constant Rabbit Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 Goodness, this seems familiar. If only someone had posted this exact same stuff, ooh, say 2 weeks ago... 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 35 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said: So yeh, should a regulator be founded, it's almost certain that the Lansdowns would be required to broaden the board, and provide greater transparency. It's a recommendation certainly. The question is, will the government accept it? My guess is the Premier League will oppose it. The big clubs especially do not like any threat to them doing whatever the hell they like. So, especially having been forced to back down on the ESL, they may be spoiling for a fight. The most likely scenario imo is that Crouch's proposal will be watered down as a result. I hope I'm wrong though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pezo Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 6 hours ago, Robbored said: A major worry would be if SL sold up who would buy the club? We could end up with a dodgy ownership and suffer the consequences of that. SL is a Bristolian and to me that’s vitally important and in my view he’s achieved a great deal so far. Started Bristol Sport, Revamped AG, brand spanking new training facilities. The only thing missing is a squad capable of reaching the riches of the PL. Sure, he’s made mistakes not only with managers but with senior members of staff at AG but I’m more than happy to forgive for those errors - I really wish more City fans shared my view. SL has top drawer business acumen - hence his billionaire status and fair play to him but City is not his only interest. Fairly recently he bought up a hotel complex and golf club in Guernsey and who knows what other interests he has. I’d be seriously concerned if he ever sold up. While I agree if you take those achievements you could easily pick them apart. Started Bristol sport - how has a sports management and service business helped the football club. Revamped Ashton gate - that had been talked about since Scott Davison was here, it needed doing and who let it get in the state it was in after 20 plus years of ownership? Brand spanking new training facilities that are similar to Crystal palace u23s and as you know should have been done under Danny Wilson and be 20 years old by now. 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledAjax Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 7 minutes ago, chinapig said: It's a recommendation certainly. The question is, will the government accept it? My guess is the Premier League will oppose it. The big clubs especially do not like any threat to them doing whatever the hell they like. So, especially having been forced to back down on the ESL, they may be spoiling for a fight. The most likely scenario imo is that Crouch's proposal will be watered down as a result. I hope I'm wrong though. Agreed, it will be a hard sell. We only have the interim report right now - the full one is due to be published soon I believe. That report will be a starting wish list of recommendations, and you're correct that they will be negotiated until something is agreed between the government and the stakeholders. Of the three things that Couch recommends the regulator have oversight for - financial regulation, corporate governance and ownership, I would expect corp governance to be the least controversial. I've worked for regulators before, and my wife worked for the FCA when we were in London. I'm well aware of the testy relationships that regulators and their industries have, and when you have an industry with the resources that football has...blimey it's going to be tough to get something in place. I'm genuinely kind of excited by the prospect of the full report. There's a lot of nerdy corporate law type stuff that will come out of it. All this 'golden share' stuff, fan share schemes etc. There's a real possibility of defining a new class of company or legal entity within English law. Or it could all just be farts in the wind. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 3 minutes ago, Pezo said: While I agree if you take those achievements you could easily pick them apart. Started Bristol sport - how has a sports management and service business helped the football club. Revamped Ashton gate Scot Davidson didn’t have access the resources to pay for a professional assessment of the AG stadium back then but it was obvious to all that ground space around BS3 was very limited. When SL took over he did have the resources for a professional assessment and subsequently three sides of AG were redeveloped. Until then AG had been slowly deteriorating over quite a number of years - it wasn’t down to SL that AG had become such a dump. Brand spanking new training facilities that are similar to Crystal palace u23s and as you know should have been done under Danny Wilson and be 20 years old by now. SL said fairly recently that he’d asked Danny Wilson what he spend a million on - he replied ‘the training facilities’ and that has finally happened. The fact that the new facilities are similar to those of the Palace u23s means nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Red Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 17 minutes ago, Pezo said: While I agree if you take those achievements you could easily pick them apart. Started Bristol sport - how has a sports management and service business helped the football club. Revamped Ashton gate - that had been talked about since Scott Davison was here, it needed doing and who let it get in the state it was in after 20 plus years of ownership? Brand spanking new training facilities that are similar to Crystal palace u23s and as you know should have been done under Danny Wilson and be 20 years old by now. Indeed. The redevelopment of Ashton Gate has long long been coming. As you said Scott Davidson was looking at doing it. Anyone remember the plans for the stadium at Hengrove Park? Again as you have said the training ground is something that should have been done a very long time ago. An absolute embarrassment that we were sharing QEH school grounds for how many years? The new facilities we have got are decent but thats all they are decent, they are the bog standard minimum requirement for most proper clubs at this level. I mean you can even go as far as saying they aren’t actually overly that great, no indoor pitches on site is not ideal is it? I would say the Bears facility is actually more head turning and impressive than ours actually. KITR is bang on with his opening post, a good summary and for what it’s worth i think he has taken us as far as he wants too now. The championship ‘’will do’’ for the Lansdown family IMO. Time to push the Flyers and the Rugby club on and the let the football club just tick along as lets be honest even keeping us in the Championship is costing a fortune (in the eyes of the Lansdown family).. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 15 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said: Agreed, it will be a hard sell. We only have the interim report right now - the full one is due to be published soon I believe. That report will be a starting wish list of recommendations, and you're correct that they will be negotiated until something is agreed between the government and the stakeholders. Of the three things that Couch recommends the regulator have oversight for - financial regulation, corporate governance and ownership, I would expect corp governance to be the least controversial. I've worked for regulators before, and my wife worked for the FCA when we were in London. I'm well aware of the testy relationships that regulators and their industries have, and when you have an industry with the resources that football has...blimey it's going to be tough to get something in place. I'm genuinely kind of excited by the prospect of the full report. There's a lot of nerdy corporate law type stuff that will come out of it. All this 'golden share' stuff, fan share schemes etc. There's a real possibility of defining a new class of company or legal entity within English law. Or it could all just be farts in the wind. Interesting, thanks. Some will see these things as nerdy but they are critical to the future of the game. I understand the report will be published this month btw. In my experience what tends to happen when regulation is threatened in other areas is you end up with a voluntary code of practice and alleged self regulation. A sop in other words. Fingers crossed it will not be so this time. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pezo Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 4 minutes ago, Robbored said: On your first point - there is a good 20+ years between Scott Davidson and the SL funded redevelopment of Ashton gate. It wasn't like Davison left SL came in and the ground was redeveloped, I cut him some slack that the AV debacle cost him about 3 years but 3 in 20+ years! Like you say with the training facilities it's finally happened. The comparison to Palace u23s shows how far we are behind, we should have had these facilities ages ago and I'm fairly sure SL would agree. Why did both of these things take so long? What are we going to do next that's 20 years behind the cutting edge? Sorry we're ahead of our time because we bought a TV that goes on a trailer, we have drones and a player app, the problem with those things is that they don't take more than a couple weeks to sort out (there's virtually zero barriers to entry for others to copy). There's a saying in business that you have to be first, biggest or cheat - SL won't cheat, we do ok (not spectacular) when we're one of the biggest in the third tier, our only way to compete at this level is be first and as you say under SL we have a timeline of it happens eventually. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pezo Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 27 minutes ago, bris red said: Indeed. The redevelopment of Ashton Gate has long long been coming. As you said Scott Davidson was looking at doing it. Anyone remember the plans for the stadium at Hengrove Park? Again as you have said the training ground is something that should have been done a very long time ago. An absolute embarrassment that we were sharing QEH school grounds for how many years? The new facilities we have got are decent but thats all they are decent, they are the bog standard minimum requirement for most proper clubs at this level. I mean you can even go as far as saying they aren’t actually overly that great, no indoor pitches on site is not ideal is it? I would say the Bears facility is actually more head turning and impressive than ours actually. KITR is bang on with his opening post, a good summary and for what it’s worth i think he has taken us as far as he wants too now. The championship ‘’will do’’ for the Lansdown family IMO. Time to push the Flyers and the Rugby club on and the let the football club just tick along as lets be honest even keeping us in the Championship is costing a fortune (in the eyes of the Lansdown family).. I'm not sure about your last point if it's trying to say he is choosing, I don't think he is choosing one over the other he can easily afford to fund everything - it's what he has time to dedicate himself to I guess, maybe? He knows we're not going to challenge because of our FFP constraints, he has taken us as far as FFP will allow him to for the next couple of years, maybe? So the wording could be that the championship is where he is stuck due to FFP and parachute payments I think. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Port Said Red Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, BigAl&Toby said: If that’s what I said that’s not what I meant. Mr L hedged his bets with Ashton Vale. If he got consent for a stadium then that would have been ok. He’d then have redeveloped Ashton Gate. The real value though was in getting resi consent on Ashton Vale. That’s what he really wanted. Never mind a consent to develop a sporting and entertainment complex. The value in that land was always resi. And guess what? He’s got it. Hook, line and sinker. He tried “his best” to make us proud. But guess what? He’s got his cash cow in BS3 and he’s milking her teats. He’s also got his resi consent on Ashton Vale. Who says he can’t have his cake and eat it? But we’re ok. And eternally grateful. Aren’t we? So you would be more impressed id he had pissed multi millions up the wall without building in a way of protecting his investment? One minute he is being lambasted for being the worlds most inept billionaire, the next he is criticised for being a clever businessman, that's typical of this forum. Edited November 18, 2021 by Port Said Red Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid in the Riot Posted November 18, 2021 Author Share Posted November 18, 2021 1 hour ago, bris red said: Indeed. The redevelopment of Ashton Gate has long long been coming. As you said Scott Davidson was looking at doing it. Anyone remember the plans for the stadium at Hengrove Park? Again as you have said the training ground is something that should have been done a very long time ago. An absolute embarrassment that we were sharing QEH school grounds for how many years? The new facilities we have got are decent but thats all they are decent, they are the bog standard minimum requirement for most proper clubs at this level. I mean you can even go as far as saying they aren’t actually overly that great, no indoor pitches on site is not ideal is it? I would say the Bears facility is actually more head turning and impressive than ours actually. KITR is bang on with his opening post, a good summary and for what it’s worth i think he has taken us as far as he wants too now. The championship ‘’will do’’ for the Lansdown family IMO. Time to push the Flyers and the Rugby club on and the let the football club just tick along as lets be honest even keeping us in the Championship is costing a fortune (in the eyes of the Lansdown family).. 26 minutes ago, Pezo said: I'm not sure about your last point if it's trying to say he is choosing, I don't think he is choosing one over the other he can easily afford to fund everything - it's what he has time to dedicate himself to I guess, maybe? He knows we're not going to challenge because of our FFP constraints, he has taken us as far as FFP will allow him to for the next couple of years, maybe? So the wording could be that the championship is where he is stuck due to FFP and parachute payments I think. Agree Pezo, I don't think the Lansdowns are choosing Flyers/Bears over City. They are simply waiting for the proposals at Ashton Vale and the sporting quarter to gain planning permission. Once that is achieved, they have their exit strategy. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YGBjammy Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 (edited) I imagine he's planning to sell once the sports quarter/village is built. These things take a long time though so he's on the look out for investors now and testing the waters a little? As others, and The Athletic article, have highlighted there are a lot of foreign owners in the championship who I imagine were seen as very exciting and promised a lot when they came in; only to now be stuck in the championship with only a ton of debt to show for it. We've seen SL's managerial appointments; doesn't bode well for appointing someone to take over from him... Edited November 18, 2021 by YGBjammy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pezo Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 7 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said: Agree Pezo, I don't think the Lansdowns are choosing Flyers/Bears over City. They are simply waiting for the proposals at Ashton Vale and the sporting quarter to gain planning permission. Once that is achieved, they have their exit strategy. I think they will have it built - that will probably coincide nicely with the end of our FFP mess, having a small squad and thus good looking books making us quite attractive as long as we don't get relegated, I accept probably small fry in the grand scheme of things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.