What a disgrace, something should be done about this. Leicester are cheating
I think this reads: Nothing to see here.
comment by Merseysidefox (U4842)
posted 38 minutes ago
I think this reads: Nothing to see here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It reads - lots of Leicester fans got overly excited about something they didn’t really understand and deluded themselves into thinking Top had made some kind of multi million pound gesture from his own pocket which now means we’re back on track. What a guy. What a hero. Oh hang on - it was just a bit of housekeeping after all - we’re keeping Rodgers and probably spending about £20m on 11 players from the Danish 2nd division in the summer
He’s underplaying that a bit to be fair. That they did the loan in the first place is more than most owners do, converting it to equity completely removes any risk from the club.
It’s to be commended.
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 23 minutes ago
He’s underplaying that a bit to be fair. That they did the loan in the first place is more than most owners do, converting it to equity completely removes any risk from the club.
It’s to be commended.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They gave us the loan to finance the training facilities and stadium expansion. Why did they do that? Because it’s going to generate lots of additional value (particularly the stadium expansion) they will get back when they sell it. They will get their money back and more. This changes absolutely nothing yet it’s been hailed as if it’s a game changer.
comment by 99 Problems (Top - invest in the squad and sack Rodgers) (U12353)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 23 minutes ago
He’s underplaying that a bit to be fair. That they did the loan in the first place is more than most owners do, converting it to equity completely removes any risk from the club.
It’s to be commended.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They gave us the loan to finance the training facilities and stadium expansion. Why did they do that? Because it’s going to generate lots of additional value (particularly the stadium expansion) they will get back when they sell it. They will get their money back and more. This changes absolutely nothing yet it’s been hailed as if it’s a game changer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Right, but then not all owners invest at all, let alone that much, or get loans with interest to cover it.
I get it should be the norm, but it isn’t. It’s not a game changer, it’s still commendable.
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by 99 Problems (Top - invest in the squad and sack Rodgers) (U12353)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 23 minutes ago
He’s underplaying that a bit to be fair. That they did the loan in the first place is more than most owners do, converting it to equity completely removes any risk from the club.
It’s to be commended.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They gave us the loan to finance the training facilities and stadium expansion. Why did they do that? Because it’s going to generate lots of additional value (particularly the stadium expansion) they will get back when they sell it. They will get their money back and more. This changes absolutely nothing yet it’s been hailed as if it’s a game changer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Right, but then not all owners invest at all, let alone that much, or get loans with interest to cover it.
I get it should be the norm, but it isn’t. It’s not a game changer, it’s still commendable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I know but the point is - we already knew about the loans from the King Power and what they were for. The king power group knows the debt is unlikely to be ever paid off - so converting it to equity doesn’t really change much. They will get their investment back and then some with the stadium expansion.
Yesterdays news has been announced and received by some fans as some kind of incredible gesture which reaffirms their utter commitment to the club. It doesn’t really. It clarifies a relationship between the club and parent we already knew. Doesn’t mean we’re free to spend money where it’s needed the most - the playing squad
And by the way I still think their ultimate goal here is to make a huge return when they sell the club. That’s great. Great for them and great for us - ONLY if money is invested into where it’s badly needed - the squad and not solely focussed on infrastructure to enhance re-sale value
If I had to choose between a stadium expansion and top half premier league football I kind of know which I’d be going for. If the owners aren’t careful they will end up with a championship albatross around their necks
Ah got you. This should help with that too to an extent, have to wait and see with that though.
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 54 minutes ago
Ah got you. This should help with that too to an extent, have to wait and see with that though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Absolutely - that’s really where you see the commitment. From what I read the debt write off likely won’t make a huge amount of difference in that regard - so let’s see if we get the investment where we really need it - or in fact if we get breadcrumbs in the summer and end up playing Vardy, Amartey and Evans as the spine of the squad
comment by 99 Problems (Top - invest in the squad and sack Rodgers) (U12353)
posted 2 hours, 27 minutes ago
And by the way I still think their ultimate goal here is to make a huge return when they sell the club. That’s great. Great for them and great for us - ONLY if money is invested into where it’s badly needed - the squad and not solely focussed on infrastructure to enhance re-sale value
If I had to choose between a stadium expansion and top half premier league football I kind of know which I’d be going for. If the owners aren’t careful they will end up with a championship albatross around their necks
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But surely this is a win win? They invest massively in us (thank you) and when they finally sell they make money.
Yoink.
But as Melton says, they’ve invested loads more than they needed to on every level of the club, not just players. For me that is to be commended.
comment by Merseysidefox (U4842)
posted 8 hours, 39 minutes ago
comment by 99 Problems (Top - invest in the squad and sack Rodgers) (U12353)
posted 2 hours, 27 minutes ago
And by the way I still think their ultimate goal here is to make a huge return when they sell the club. That’s great. Great for them and great for us - ONLY if money is invested into where it’s badly needed - the squad and not solely focussed on infrastructure to enhance re-sale value
If I had to choose between a stadium expansion and top half premier league football I kind of know which I’d be going for. If the owners aren’t careful they will end up with a championship albatross around their necks
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But surely this is a win win? They invest massively in us (thank you) and when they finally sell they make money.
Yoink.
But as Melton says, they’ve invested loads more than they needed to on every level of the club, not just players. For me that is to be commended.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No one invests more than they need to out of the goodness of their heart. I think this is where some Leicester fans get a little starry eyed with the King Power group. They invest because they will get a healthy return.
When you say it’s a win win - not necessarily. If the club focusses more of investment on infrastructure to enhance future re-sale value rather than on the field then it becomes a problem. That’s exactly what’s been happening and that’s what has brought us to where we are now.
Irrespective Mersey the original point of the post is that yesterdays news, heralded by certain quarters as another incredible commitment by Top isn’t that at all. It isn’t really news. It’s housekeeping. It’s confirming they were never going to get the loan re-paid and they’re confirming that.
The position for me hasn’t changed - the King Power group under Top have focussed on re-sale value of the club and under invested in the playing squad to the detriment of the club. The group are continuing to back Rodgers and now face the prospect of championship football and a huge financial problem
There's something not quite right about this article. Before converting these loans to equity, how did Top & Co have control of the club - through existing shares?
Did they have 100% of the club before the conversion? If so, where is additional value in the club from converting the loans, it dilutes the existing shareholding value?
It may come from any buyer having to otherwise acquire the club at market value including dealing with the £194M debt; it is quite frankly ludicrous to suggest that would not be factored in by anybody wishing to buy the club for the £300-500M indicated.
This gesture should not be dismissed. The impact on the FFP assessment, depending on the interest rate being charged could presumably be of the order of a £10-20M improvement in the annual balance sheet. Also it removes an awful sword of Damocles hanging over the club, if Top & Co were to simply walk away then the debt would have been a disaster in waiting. I'm very happy they've done the conversion, just as I was when they did it previously.
The above doesn't mean that they shouldn't be investing in the squad, sacking Brendan etc, all the things we have been in heated agreement with in recent threads. None of us want to see us with the best shiny new stadium and training facilities in League 1. Or worse still with a shiny new supermarket where the KP Stadium used to be!
Nuneaton - I think the article answers those questions
The interest payments on the loan were not cash pavements - they were added to the value of the debt so cancelling the debt makes no difference at all to FFP.
Any serious buyer wouldn’t be concerned about £194m of debt. It makes little difference to the sale of the club - it simply gets factored into the sale price. Someone would have paid £300m and acquired £194m of debt. Now they will pay £494m instead for example - makes little difference to the seller and wouldn’t put off a serious buyer
There was no sword of Damocles hanging over our heads in the same way that there isn’t if your dad “lends” you £20 knowing full well he’s not getting it back.
It’s a tidy up exercise that changes very little. KPI own Leicester City football club. They loaned it money to increase the clubs value that they won’t get back. The club aren’t even paying cash interest on the loan. They convert the debt into shares instead - safe in the knowledge everyone gets a healthy return when the stadium is expanded resale value of the club is increased.
The big gesture was giving us the money to build the training ground and stadium in the first place, but of course they are only doing that to get a healthy return. In the meantime - it’s meant far less investment can go into the squad which is hurting the club massively
The whole point about the debt not making a huge difference when selling the club is because you are selling potential value.
If I acquire a £300m club for £500m because it has a £200m debt, then I’m doing so safe in the knowledge that the £200m debt is paying for a massive infrastructure development which is going to generate serous cash revenue for years to come. It means I could resell the club for £800m one day. No brainer
If the club writes off the debt and is in the middle of a £200m infrastructure development then if I believed it was going to be worth £800m one day, I’d increase my buy price to the required £500m the seller could rightfully ask for
The best thing to do is create yet another thread about it and then bang on endlessly, boring everyone to death, while jumping up and doen crying and screaming because some people dare have the audacity to have a different opinion to you.
Give it a bloody rest now. You're killing this board.
comment by See The Stars (U21395)
posted 12 minutes ago
The best thing to do is create yet another thread about it and then bang on endlessly, boring everyone to death, while jumping up and doen crying and screaming because some people dare have the audacity to have a different opinion to you.
Give it a bloody rest now. You're killing this board.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
😂😂😂
Killing the board? Before I came back here there was about a post a week! But ok - you’ve made what might be a valid point. So let’s put it to the others, because you’re just one person right? (I mean I’m presuming so, but maybe you share your username with your older 12 year old brother who knows). Honestly I’m not offended by the response from people at all….
Who is bored? Who wants me to stop posting as much or on this topic? Does everyone want me to give it a rest on trying to convince people that the KP maybe aren’t running the club brilliantly after all? Is it all getting a bit Tielemans with TB? Am I killing the board?!
I’ll go with the consensus - if everyone agrees with See the Stars (he may be right) then I’ll tone it down no problem. Might be a little quieter though unless others get posting more - which I’d be happy to see.
Agree 99. Keep posting because you keep this board interesting.
But yeah, I’ll keep debating so be prepared 🙃
I don’t agree that football owners are only ever in it for the money. They’re not. Some are in it for the glory and enjoyment of football. I think our owners fall into the latter camp.
Yes they won’t make stupid business decisions but they bought our club to progress their love of football, and have invested in building a premier league winning team, one of if not the best training facilities in the country, expansion and amazing plans for the stadium to increase revenue, and up until 18 months ago, large bug sensible investment in the team.
Before Rodgers ballsed up wanting a European squad and ended up with a championship one bloated at the seams.
So yes stop has made mistakes, but unlike you I still believe we’re being invested in for the right reasons, albeit not always with the right decisions.
Cheers Mersey! I don’t doubt the owners have secondary goals other than a return on investment. I wouldn’t say they are cold hearted business people - far from it, the family have done some great stuff for the club and local community. But I believe these are secondary to their primary aim - to make invest and make a return.
Nothing wrong with that as long as they get the balance right. They haven’t. For quite a long time. What I believe you get wrong so many times is laying 99,9% of the blame on Rodgers door. Like every bad signing is his personal responsibility and every good signing isn’t
It’s a very odd selective thinking in my view. We’ve spent next to nothing for 18 months (bringing in 1 player) because of the owners - not Rodgers. Because the owners have prioritised infrastructure to enhance the value of the club. We’ve ended up with a championship squad because of decisions and appointments Jon Rudkin has made - not just Rodgers. And guess who keeps both in post?
Interesting reading this thread being someone that’s married into a Leicester family and been to a few games over the years.
Personally I don’t think either of your owners or Rodgers are doing particularly a bad job. Your recruitment hasn’t been as good as it was and you’re amongst a set of clubs where getting there right or wrong in just one or two windows can mean the difference between a comfortable top ten finish or a bit of a battle in the lower half.
Interesting view point Melton - good to get a neutrals view. I certainly agree we are in that group of clubs where you have to get everything consistently right to compete near the top. Trouble is we’ve been getting most things consistently wrong
99P - ignore STS, this board has been revitalised and far more interesting since you came back, so keep on posting please.
I still don't agree on the owners, I don't think they are in it for investment purposes, I'm going with the love of the game scenario, maybe with a dash of ego trip added. Putting money into football in the expectation of turning in significant profits is generally a mug's game, and the owners don't strike me as idiots.
I think the main problem occurred with the loss of Vichai, forcing a situation where Top took over perhaps 10 years earlier than planned without the guidance of his dad in the background; I suspect that is the main reason we're in the mess we have today (the pandemic hasn't helped obviously, particularly with the impact on the main KP business). I don't think for a second that we'd be where we are if he was still around - for a start I doubt very much that Brendan would still be managing the club.
I don't wholly agree with the investment argument either, you don't necessarily get equivalent enhancement in value of the club by shelling out large sums of £££ for infrastructure.
Thanks Nuneaton! I think you raise a valid point - I’ve provided a very simple calculation to show why I think the conversion of debt to equity may not affect a serious buyer, but I suspect you’re right - it’s not quite as simple as infrastructure investment = equivalent return
What’s worth considering though is the acquisition of Leicester is very much like buying a large but very run down house. It has a lot of potential if you spend the money on it and although you may do it because you love the house - you’ll enhance its value 10 fold as opposed to buying a modern nearly new house which doesn’t need much doing
I think that may have been the business appeal for them. The stadium expansion will be come a cash cow because of the revenues from the planned entertainment and retail complex. It will allow them to host more events at the King Power and it should generate a lot of cash which can go back into the club if it comes off
So for that reason I think the King Power group have always seen the potential. I think basically you can be both in terms of motivation. You can love football and want to make a positive difference and want to make a return.
No doubt about the mixed development making sense from an investment perspective, although non-football matters outside the stadium would presumably not be part of the football club finances, hence any monies put into the club from this source would be subject to FFP rules?
comment by Nuneaton_fox (U7936)
posted 5 hours, 10 minutes ago
No doubt about the mixed development making sense from an investment perspective, although non-football matters outside the stadium would presumably not be part of the football club finances, hence any monies put into the club from this source would be subject to FFP rules?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s not anything to do with ffp, that only looks at the p&l.
Sign in if you want to comment
What the debt write off is really about…
Page 1 of 2
posted on 2/2/23
What a disgrace, something should be done about this. Leicester are cheating
posted on 2/2/23
I think this reads: Nothing to see here.
posted on 2/2/23
comment by Merseysidefox (U4842)
posted 38 minutes ago
I think this reads: Nothing to see here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It reads - lots of Leicester fans got overly excited about something they didn’t really understand and deluded themselves into thinking Top had made some kind of multi million pound gesture from his own pocket which now means we’re back on track. What a guy. What a hero. Oh hang on - it was just a bit of housekeeping after all - we’re keeping Rodgers and probably spending about £20m on 11 players from the Danish 2nd division in the summer
posted on 2/2/23
He’s underplaying that a bit to be fair. That they did the loan in the first place is more than most owners do, converting it to equity completely removes any risk from the club.
It’s to be commended.
posted on 2/2/23
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 23 minutes ago
He’s underplaying that a bit to be fair. That they did the loan in the first place is more than most owners do, converting it to equity completely removes any risk from the club.
It’s to be commended.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They gave us the loan to finance the training facilities and stadium expansion. Why did they do that? Because it’s going to generate lots of additional value (particularly the stadium expansion) they will get back when they sell it. They will get their money back and more. This changes absolutely nothing yet it’s been hailed as if it’s a game changer.
posted on 2/2/23
comment by 99 Problems (Top - invest in the squad and sack Rodgers) (U12353)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 23 minutes ago
He’s underplaying that a bit to be fair. That they did the loan in the first place is more than most owners do, converting it to equity completely removes any risk from the club.
It’s to be commended.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They gave us the loan to finance the training facilities and stadium expansion. Why did they do that? Because it’s going to generate lots of additional value (particularly the stadium expansion) they will get back when they sell it. They will get their money back and more. This changes absolutely nothing yet it’s been hailed as if it’s a game changer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Right, but then not all owners invest at all, let alone that much, or get loans with interest to cover it.
I get it should be the norm, but it isn’t. It’s not a game changer, it’s still commendable.
posted on 2/2/23
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by 99 Problems (Top - invest in the squad and sack Rodgers) (U12353)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 23 minutes ago
He’s underplaying that a bit to be fair. That they did the loan in the first place is more than most owners do, converting it to equity completely removes any risk from the club.
It’s to be commended.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They gave us the loan to finance the training facilities and stadium expansion. Why did they do that? Because it’s going to generate lots of additional value (particularly the stadium expansion) they will get back when they sell it. They will get their money back and more. This changes absolutely nothing yet it’s been hailed as if it’s a game changer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Right, but then not all owners invest at all, let alone that much, or get loans with interest to cover it.
I get it should be the norm, but it isn’t. It’s not a game changer, it’s still commendable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I know but the point is - we already knew about the loans from the King Power and what they were for. The king power group knows the debt is unlikely to be ever paid off - so converting it to equity doesn’t really change much. They will get their investment back and then some with the stadium expansion.
Yesterdays news has been announced and received by some fans as some kind of incredible gesture which reaffirms their utter commitment to the club. It doesn’t really. It clarifies a relationship between the club and parent we already knew. Doesn’t mean we’re free to spend money where it’s needed the most - the playing squad
posted on 2/2/23
And by the way I still think their ultimate goal here is to make a huge return when they sell the club. That’s great. Great for them and great for us - ONLY if money is invested into where it’s badly needed - the squad and not solely focussed on infrastructure to enhance re-sale value
If I had to choose between a stadium expansion and top half premier league football I kind of know which I’d be going for. If the owners aren’t careful they will end up with a championship albatross around their necks
posted on 2/2/23
Ah got you. This should help with that too to an extent, have to wait and see with that though.
posted on 2/2/23
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 54 minutes ago
Ah got you. This should help with that too to an extent, have to wait and see with that though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Absolutely - that’s really where you see the commitment. From what I read the debt write off likely won’t make a huge amount of difference in that regard - so let’s see if we get the investment where we really need it - or in fact if we get breadcrumbs in the summer and end up playing Vardy, Amartey and Evans as the spine of the squad
posted on 2/2/23
comment by 99 Problems (Top - invest in the squad and sack Rodgers) (U12353)
posted 2 hours, 27 minutes ago
And by the way I still think their ultimate goal here is to make a huge return when they sell the club. That’s great. Great for them and great for us - ONLY if money is invested into where it’s badly needed - the squad and not solely focussed on infrastructure to enhance re-sale value
If I had to choose between a stadium expansion and top half premier league football I kind of know which I’d be going for. If the owners aren’t careful they will end up with a championship albatross around their necks
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But surely this is a win win? They invest massively in us (thank you) and when they finally sell they make money.
Yoink.
But as Melton says, they’ve invested loads more than they needed to on every level of the club, not just players. For me that is to be commended.
posted on 3/2/23
comment by Merseysidefox (U4842)
posted 8 hours, 39 minutes ago
comment by 99 Problems (Top - invest in the squad and sack Rodgers) (U12353)
posted 2 hours, 27 minutes ago
And by the way I still think their ultimate goal here is to make a huge return when they sell the club. That’s great. Great for them and great for us - ONLY if money is invested into where it’s badly needed - the squad and not solely focussed on infrastructure to enhance re-sale value
If I had to choose between a stadium expansion and top half premier league football I kind of know which I’d be going for. If the owners aren’t careful they will end up with a championship albatross around their necks
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But surely this is a win win? They invest massively in us (thank you) and when they finally sell they make money.
Yoink.
But as Melton says, they’ve invested loads more than they needed to on every level of the club, not just players. For me that is to be commended.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No one invests more than they need to out of the goodness of their heart. I think this is where some Leicester fans get a little starry eyed with the King Power group. They invest because they will get a healthy return.
When you say it’s a win win - not necessarily. If the club focusses more of investment on infrastructure to enhance future re-sale value rather than on the field then it becomes a problem. That’s exactly what’s been happening and that’s what has brought us to where we are now.
Irrespective Mersey the original point of the post is that yesterdays news, heralded by certain quarters as another incredible commitment by Top isn’t that at all. It isn’t really news. It’s housekeeping. It’s confirming they were never going to get the loan re-paid and they’re confirming that.
The position for me hasn’t changed - the King Power group under Top have focussed on re-sale value of the club and under invested in the playing squad to the detriment of the club. The group are continuing to back Rodgers and now face the prospect of championship football and a huge financial problem
posted on 3/2/23
There's something not quite right about this article. Before converting these loans to equity, how did Top & Co have control of the club - through existing shares?
Did they have 100% of the club before the conversion? If so, where is additional value in the club from converting the loans, it dilutes the existing shareholding value?
It may come from any buyer having to otherwise acquire the club at market value including dealing with the £194M debt; it is quite frankly ludicrous to suggest that would not be factored in by anybody wishing to buy the club for the £300-500M indicated.
This gesture should not be dismissed. The impact on the FFP assessment, depending on the interest rate being charged could presumably be of the order of a £10-20M improvement in the annual balance sheet. Also it removes an awful sword of Damocles hanging over the club, if Top & Co were to simply walk away then the debt would have been a disaster in waiting. I'm very happy they've done the conversion, just as I was when they did it previously.
The above doesn't mean that they shouldn't be investing in the squad, sacking Brendan etc, all the things we have been in heated agreement with in recent threads. None of us want to see us with the best shiny new stadium and training facilities in League 1. Or worse still with a shiny new supermarket where the KP Stadium used to be!
posted on 3/2/23
Nuneaton - I think the article answers those questions
The interest payments on the loan were not cash pavements - they were added to the value of the debt so cancelling the debt makes no difference at all to FFP.
Any serious buyer wouldn’t be concerned about £194m of debt. It makes little difference to the sale of the club - it simply gets factored into the sale price. Someone would have paid £300m and acquired £194m of debt. Now they will pay £494m instead for example - makes little difference to the seller and wouldn’t put off a serious buyer
There was no sword of Damocles hanging over our heads in the same way that there isn’t if your dad “lends” you £20 knowing full well he’s not getting it back.
It’s a tidy up exercise that changes very little. KPI own Leicester City football club. They loaned it money to increase the clubs value that they won’t get back. The club aren’t even paying cash interest on the loan. They convert the debt into shares instead - safe in the knowledge everyone gets a healthy return when the stadium is expanded resale value of the club is increased.
The big gesture was giving us the money to build the training ground and stadium in the first place, but of course they are only doing that to get a healthy return. In the meantime - it’s meant far less investment can go into the squad which is hurting the club massively
posted on 3/2/23
The whole point about the debt not making a huge difference when selling the club is because you are selling potential value.
If I acquire a £300m club for £500m because it has a £200m debt, then I’m doing so safe in the knowledge that the £200m debt is paying for a massive infrastructure development which is going to generate serous cash revenue for years to come. It means I could resell the club for £800m one day. No brainer
If the club writes off the debt and is in the middle of a £200m infrastructure development then if I believed it was going to be worth £800m one day, I’d increase my buy price to the required £500m the seller could rightfully ask for
posted on 3/2/23
The best thing to do is create yet another thread about it and then bang on endlessly, boring everyone to death, while jumping up and doen crying and screaming because some people dare have the audacity to have a different opinion to you.
Give it a bloody rest now. You're killing this board.
posted on 3/2/23
comment by See The Stars (U21395)
posted 12 minutes ago
The best thing to do is create yet another thread about it and then bang on endlessly, boring everyone to death, while jumping up and doen crying and screaming because some people dare have the audacity to have a different opinion to you.
Give it a bloody rest now. You're killing this board.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
😂😂😂
Killing the board? Before I came back here there was about a post a week! But ok - you’ve made what might be a valid point. So let’s put it to the others, because you’re just one person right? (I mean I’m presuming so, but maybe you share your username with your older 12 year old brother who knows). Honestly I’m not offended by the response from people at all….
Who is bored? Who wants me to stop posting as much or on this topic? Does everyone want me to give it a rest on trying to convince people that the KP maybe aren’t running the club brilliantly after all? Is it all getting a bit Tielemans with TB? Am I killing the board?!
I’ll go with the consensus - if everyone agrees with See the Stars (he may be right) then I’ll tone it down no problem. Might be a little quieter though unless others get posting more - which I’d be happy to see.
posted on 3/2/23
Agree 99. Keep posting because you keep this board interesting.
But yeah, I’ll keep debating so be prepared 🙃
I don’t agree that football owners are only ever in it for the money. They’re not. Some are in it for the glory and enjoyment of football. I think our owners fall into the latter camp.
Yes they won’t make stupid business decisions but they bought our club to progress their love of football, and have invested in building a premier league winning team, one of if not the best training facilities in the country, expansion and amazing plans for the stadium to increase revenue, and up until 18 months ago, large bug sensible investment in the team.
Before Rodgers ballsed up wanting a European squad and ended up with a championship one bloated at the seams.
So yes stop has made mistakes, but unlike you I still believe we’re being invested in for the right reasons, albeit not always with the right decisions.
posted on 3/2/23
Cheers Mersey! I don’t doubt the owners have secondary goals other than a return on investment. I wouldn’t say they are cold hearted business people - far from it, the family have done some great stuff for the club and local community. But I believe these are secondary to their primary aim - to make invest and make a return.
Nothing wrong with that as long as they get the balance right. They haven’t. For quite a long time. What I believe you get wrong so many times is laying 99,9% of the blame on Rodgers door. Like every bad signing is his personal responsibility and every good signing isn’t
It’s a very odd selective thinking in my view. We’ve spent next to nothing for 18 months (bringing in 1 player) because of the owners - not Rodgers. Because the owners have prioritised infrastructure to enhance the value of the club. We’ve ended up with a championship squad because of decisions and appointments Jon Rudkin has made - not just Rodgers. And guess who keeps both in post?
posted on 3/2/23
Interesting reading this thread being someone that’s married into a Leicester family and been to a few games over the years.
Personally I don’t think either of your owners or Rodgers are doing particularly a bad job. Your recruitment hasn’t been as good as it was and you’re amongst a set of clubs where getting there right or wrong in just one or two windows can mean the difference between a comfortable top ten finish or a bit of a battle in the lower half.
posted on 4/2/23
Interesting view point Melton - good to get a neutrals view. I certainly agree we are in that group of clubs where you have to get everything consistently right to compete near the top. Trouble is we’ve been getting most things consistently wrong
posted on 4/2/23
99P - ignore STS, this board has been revitalised and far more interesting since you came back, so keep on posting please.
I still don't agree on the owners, I don't think they are in it for investment purposes, I'm going with the love of the game scenario, maybe with a dash of ego trip added. Putting money into football in the expectation of turning in significant profits is generally a mug's game, and the owners don't strike me as idiots.
I think the main problem occurred with the loss of Vichai, forcing a situation where Top took over perhaps 10 years earlier than planned without the guidance of his dad in the background; I suspect that is the main reason we're in the mess we have today (the pandemic hasn't helped obviously, particularly with the impact on the main KP business). I don't think for a second that we'd be where we are if he was still around - for a start I doubt very much that Brendan would still be managing the club.
I don't wholly agree with the investment argument either, you don't necessarily get equivalent enhancement in value of the club by shelling out large sums of £££ for infrastructure.
posted on 4/2/23
Thanks Nuneaton! I think you raise a valid point - I’ve provided a very simple calculation to show why I think the conversion of debt to equity may not affect a serious buyer, but I suspect you’re right - it’s not quite as simple as infrastructure investment = equivalent return
What’s worth considering though is the acquisition of Leicester is very much like buying a large but very run down house. It has a lot of potential if you spend the money on it and although you may do it because you love the house - you’ll enhance its value 10 fold as opposed to buying a modern nearly new house which doesn’t need much doing
I think that may have been the business appeal for them. The stadium expansion will be come a cash cow because of the revenues from the planned entertainment and retail complex. It will allow them to host more events at the King Power and it should generate a lot of cash which can go back into the club if it comes off
So for that reason I think the King Power group have always seen the potential. I think basically you can be both in terms of motivation. You can love football and want to make a positive difference and want to make a return.
posted on 4/2/23
No doubt about the mixed development making sense from an investment perspective, although non-football matters outside the stadium would presumably not be part of the football club finances, hence any monies put into the club from this source would be subject to FFP rules?
posted on 4/2/23
comment by Nuneaton_fox (U7936)
posted 5 hours, 10 minutes ago
No doubt about the mixed development making sense from an investment perspective, although non-football matters outside the stadium would presumably not be part of the football club finances, hence any monies put into the club from this source would be subject to FFP rules?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s not anything to do with ffp, that only looks at the p&l.
Page 1 of 2