or to join or start a new Discussion

31 Comments
Article Rating 5 Stars

Leicester post £215m combined loss

Leicester City have reported a loss of £89.7m for the 2022-23 season - taking total losses for their last three Premier League campaigns to over £215m.

The Foxes were charged last month for allegedly breaching profit and sustainability rules (PSR) relating to the figures they have now released. Top-flight rules permit clubs to lose £105m over a rolling three-year period.

It comes despite the Foxes, who were relegated at the end of last season, making a £74.8m profit in player sales.

The Championship club's chief executive Susan Whelan said: "After a sustained period of growth and success for the club during the last decade, the 2022-23 season was a significant setback, the consequences of which will be felt for some time. "We must now focus on rebuilding and seeking to return to and re-establishing ourselves in the Premier League"

Having achieved finishing positions in the Premier League of fifth, fifth and eighth in the three preceding seasons, our targets and associated budgets for 2022-23 were entirely reasonable.

However, for a club such as ours, whose sustained sporting achievements have justified the levels of investment required to compete with the most established clubs and pursue our ambition, a season of such significant under-performance on the pitch presents financial challenges, particularly from the perspective of the game's current Profitability and Sustainability rules."

Leicester are also the subject of a separate financial probe by the English Football League (EFL), who then followed up the Premier League charge by imposing a registration embargo on the East Midlands club.

Wow.

That is some breach. No wonder the PL are so angry and that statement from Whelan is absolutely laughable. It basically says ‘hey, we were entirely right to spend beyond our means and sail close to the win cos we wanted to mix it with the big boys"

We’re looking at a significant points deduction if we get promoted and god help what the EFL have in store for us if not because the only way we don’t breach this season is with a huge fire sale of basically everyone

What a mess this ownership have gotten us into

posted 1 week, 6 days ago

I'm probably a little late to the party with this thread - but my humble opinion:

I think all of us expected this type of news and a potential points deduction, but for me personally, the biggest issue beyond the scope of the total amount (there are several other clubs 'projected' for similar losses but hopefully for the benefit of their supporters they can arrest potential problems earlier than us) is more the money that has been wasted on poor assets.

I get the punt at top 4. In fact I think we were all excited about the potential to break into it even intermittently. For me, that isn't an issue, but rather a calculated and expected risk.

And whilst the situation is always going to be nuanced in terms of the different things that led to us being in this situation, the body blow was the summer without sale. This, and perhaps it's with some hindsight, I think was a needless gamble. It's one where I feel the ownership believed they needed to make a show of not selling to 'prove' that we were challenging the upper echelons rather than actually consider the value in it. Perhaps this was affected by our accelerated progress over the past decade and I almost can accept the idea of getting lost in the fantasy of some sort of regular challenge for CL football.

If that was a direct hit into the side of our ship, the slow flooding and resulting rot was the way we, almost flippantly, abandoned our wage structure.

This sits at the feet of Rudkin. Again, I can accept the gamble on high-cost players who didn't work out - this is going on at the vast majority of PL clubs and, particularly with our generally good ability to get top dollar for high-end sales, is never going to have a significant impact from a financial perspective. The issue was the ludicrous wages given out and contracts being allowed to run down. In particular, to players who had little to no impact and/or are still on the books now! Whilst this was Rudkin's fault, Top needs to have taken ownership (literally!) and either sacked Rudkin or been far more hands-on with this situation.

I do think Top is a loyal owner, we have seen this with his continued funds into the club to help cancel out debt and ease any concerns from this perspective. Therefore, it seems natural that he would be loyal to his employees - but this should not be at the expense of his business or a football club he is clearly linked to emotionally. And in particular, Rudkin has been a repeat offender. Get him gone.

I've read frustrations about Man City and Everton - "if Man City had been charged and deducted we'd have been in the top 4...if Everton had been done last season we wouldn't have come down" - both of these are factually true but my gut feeling is that this frivolous aspiration was always going to happen at some point after the taste of such unprecedented success (particularly with Rudkin involved).

Brighton have been highlighted this week as a stark contrast and Villa have been referenced as the next team to challenge the status quo - although looking at the latter's finances, CL football can quite suddenly go from aspirational to a necessity.

I appreciate the idea behind FFP in terms of protecting clubs from going out of business. Whilst I have doubts about it being this pure in terms of its implementation and the 'top six' , I do get the theory and appreciate that there is a recognition of allowances for growth to business in order to help 'smaller' clubs becoming more competitive financially and on the pitch.

However, it will simply not work for any substantial amount of time. Even if you forget about any shenanigans that, at best, have involved the bending of rules, it's just not set up to be effective for the majority of clubs. If you look at the larger clubs, their ability to spend is contributed to significantly by their global marketing and turnover. Even if a smaller club invests significantly through funds that can be written off by FFP it will take years, possibly decades to reap effective financial benefits. And even then, the larger clubs will have continued to have accelerate their own growth as well as likely continued to reap financial rewards through success on the field.

There are really only two options, bulldoze your way through the status quo and financial restraints like Man City did or, for the majority of clubs even with billionaire owners: take a leap. Unfortunately, the distance continues to increase as you take that leap.

The smaller clubs are therefore left with the options of :

Accept your place and maintain your own position in the PL with some moderate/intermittent success

Accept your place and, through luck and/or bad decisions eventually slide down towards relegation

Gamble on FFP and take a punt for some short lived success


The system is broken but that doesn't mean we should be able to avoid the rules of the system - even if only for the other clubs who, perhaps at least for now, are looking to adhere.

I expect us to, if we go up - and after negotiations about circumstances/money used for long-term investment - get a points deduction of around 8 - 10 points.

Some positives...kind of:

This has occured whilst we have an owner who, at the moment, is still invested in the club and has cleared our recent debts

If we get promoted, with some potential in terms of finances coming through from delayed payments for transfers, and looking to adhere to FFP as much as possible, future deductions may be avoidable

It looks like everything going belly up at the minute has pulled the players together and hopefully that mentality will continue and be coupled by the fans attitude for the remainder of the season to help get us promoted.

Sorry - I struggle not to ramble on and I am terrible at proof reading.

As a post script -

Asking Top to resign is ludicrous, in my opinion , unless there is another owner who would be willing to invest as much and is guaranteed to stick around for the foreseeable. Unlikely.


posted 1 week, 6 days ago

Some good points there KTF and mostly agree. When I say im ’King Power Out’ I mean for the long term - not next week. I’m fully aware that the ownership and board have placed us in a situation where in the short to medium term the club has become devalued in terms of its footballing and financial status. It Top had sold and walked away while we were riding high in 2021, it could have been a great solution for him and everyone. Instead - there is little option now but to fix the mess of his own creation because he’s overseen a staggering drop in revenue, huge sporting underachievement and incoming sanctions. LCFC wouldn’t exactly rank high on most prospective investors lists of football clubs to take on right now

What I want him to do in an ideal world is to restructure the club and put people in position that can turn this around. I think if that was going to happen then last season would have been the catalyst. Instead he’s kept Rudkin firmly in post and that’s why I believe we will continue to be unsuccessful in the long term under the ownership of the King Power group. They simply are not learning the key lessons - get the structure right at the top of the club

Ideally now, the best I can hope for is promotion to stem the bleeding. Then when we go down again and take even more points deductions, the financial impact won’t be so hard. Eventually once the club is stablilised, maybe then he will have the good sense to either source alternative investment and take a back seat or to sell up completely

posted 1 week, 6 days ago

Yes, I think you are right. If we were to steady the ship somehow and stay up, it would be interesting to see what they did about the stadium plans. Less so the additional seats and more so the facilities being built around the ground. Although, any money they brought in would be years down the line and I'm not sure would be substantial enough to impact anything in terms of significant revenue and turnover contribution.

As you suggest, Rudkin being let go or even his role being 'revised' would probably add some confidence for the supporters. I guess bringing in a new director when you are an owner who isn't in the country a lot of the time is a concern for him. Rudkin must be an excellent talker though.

posted 1 week, 4 days ago

comment by Keep_the_faith1 (U8129)
posted 1 day, 12 hours ago
I'm probably a little late to the party with this thread - but my humble opinion:

I think all of us expected this type of news and a potential points deduction, but for me personally, the biggest issue beyond the scope of the total amount (there are several other clubs 'projected' for similar losses but hopefully for the benefit of their supporters they can arrest potential problems earlier than us) is more the money that has been wasted on poor assets.

I get the punt at top 4. In fact I think we were all excited about the potential to break into it even intermittently. For me, that isn't an issue, but rather a calculated and expected risk.

And whilst the situation is always going to be nuanced in terms of the different things that led to us being in this situation, the body blow was the summer without sale. This, and perhaps it's with some hindsight, I think was a needless gamble. It's one where I feel the ownership believed they needed to make a show of not selling to 'prove' that we were challenging the upper echelons rather than actually consider the value in it. Perhaps this was affected by our accelerated progress over the past decade and I almost can accept the idea of getting lost in the fantasy of some sort of regular challenge for CL football.

If that was a direct hit into the side of our ship, the slow flooding and resulting rot was the way we, almost flippantly, abandoned our wage structure.

This sits at the feet of Rudkin. Again, I can accept the gamble on high-cost players who didn't work out - this is going on at the vast majority of PL clubs and, particularly with our generally good ability to get top dollar for high-end sales, is never going to have a significant impact from a financial perspective. The issue was the ludicrous wages given out and contracts being allowed to run down. In particular, to players who had little to no impact and/or are still on the books now! Whilst this was Rudkin's fault, Top needs to have taken ownership (literally!) and either sacked Rudkin or been far more hands-on with this situation.

I do think Top is a loyal owner, we have seen this with his continued funds into the club to help cancel out debt and ease any concerns from this perspective. Therefore, it seems natural that he would be loyal to his employees - but this should not be at the expense of his business or a football club he is clearly linked to emotionally. And in particular, Rudkin has been a repeat offender. Get him gone.

I've read frustrations about Man City and Everton - "if Man City had been charged and deducted we'd have been in the top 4...if Everton had been done last season we wouldn't have come down" - both of these are factually true but my gut feeling is that this frivolous aspiration was always going to happen at some point after the taste of such unprecedented success (particularly with Rudkin involved).

Brighton have been highlighted this week as a stark contrast and Villa have been referenced as the next team to challenge the status quo - although looking at the latter's finances, CL football can quite suddenly go from aspirational to a necessity.

I appreciate the idea behind FFP in terms of protecting clubs from going out of business. Whilst I have doubts about it being this pure in terms of its implementation and the 'top six' , I do get the theory and appreciate that there is a recognition of allowances for growth to business in order to help 'smaller' clubs becoming more competitive financially and on the pitch.

However, it will simply not work for any substantial amount of time. Even if you forget about any shenanigans that, at best, have involved the bending of rules, it's just not set up to be effective for the majority of clubs. If you look at the larger clubs, their ability to spend is contributed to significantly by their global marketing and turnover. Even if a smaller club invests significantly through funds that can be written off by FFP it will take years, possibly decades to reap effective financial benefits. And even then, the larger clubs will have continued to have accelerate their own growth as well as likely continued to reap financial rewards through success on the field.

There are really only two options, bulldoze your way through the status quo and financial restraints like Man City did or, for the majority of clubs even with billionaire owners: take a leap. Unfortunately, the distance continues to increase as you take that leap.

The smaller clubs are therefore left with the options of :

Accept your place and maintain your own position in the PL with some moderate/intermittent success

Accept your place and, through luck and/or bad decisions eventually slide down towards relegation

Gamble on FFP and take a punt for some short lived success


The system is broken but that doesn't mean we should be able to avoid the rules of the system - even if only for the other clubs who, perhaps at least for now, are looking to adhere.

I expect us to, if we go up - and after negotiations about circumstances/money used for long-term investment - get a points deduction of around 8 - 10 points.

Some positives...kind of:

This has occured whilst we have an owner who, at the moment, is still invested in the club and has cleared our recent debts

If we get promoted, with some potential in terms of finances coming through from delayed payments for transfers, and looking to adhere to FFP as much as possible, future deductions may be avoidable

It looks like everything going belly up at the minute has pulled the players together and hopefully that mentality will continue and be coupled by the fans attitude for the remainder of the season to help get us promoted.

Sorry - I struggle not to ramble on and I am terrible at proof reading.

As a post script -

Asking Top to resign is ludicrous, in my opinion , unless there is another owner who would be willing to invest as much and is guaranteed to stick around for the foreseeable. Unlikely.



----------------------------------------------------------------------

I think I’m in love with this post more than our owners. Which for 99 must feel incomprehensible 😂

posted 1 week, 4 days ago

The affection is unsurprising Mersey - I think you could have written it. It’s a very good articulate post but still misses the point around Rudkin in my opinion - in particular the fact that he is still in post clearly demonstrates that Top and the ownership have not learned the lessons from our financial and sporting failures and that it’s further proof we cannot succeed in the long term under their ownership. To be fair to KTF, he does acknowledge that in the follow up - something you do tend to actively avoid acknowledging if I can say that

posted 1 week, 4 days ago

comment by 99 Problems (King Power OUT) (U12353)
posted 29 minutes ago
The affection is unsurprising Mersey - I think you could have written it. It’s a very good articulate post but still misses the point around Rudkin in my opinion - in particular the fact that he is still in post clearly demonstrates that Top and the ownership have not learned the lessons from our financial and sporting failures and that it’s further proof we cannot succeed in the long term under their ownership. To be fair to KTF, he does acknowledge that in the follow up - something you do tend to actively avoid acknowledging if I can say that
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Well I couldn’t have written it, it was far more articulate than anything I would write. But I actually think we’re all more aligned than you think on Rudkin.

I agree with your views that he oversaw the overspending, the poor recruitment and wage structure failure. He oversaw the errors in not selling players when we could command a fee. He is culpable for a lot of the damage and we should restructure the leadership of the playing side under new leadership. We all agree on that I think.

Where we differ is I still think Whelan and Top are the right people to lead the club. I really like Whelan and I feel that she is a very accomplished executive that understands business and the personal battier of football and its link to the fans. And I still see Top trying to invest in our club for the long term future with stadium and training ground plans. Yes we’ve made some bad mistakes in the short term and they could hurt us for a very long time, but I hope the longer term stability can be brought back by Top and Whelan under stronger leadership on the playing side.

posted 1 week, 4 days ago

comment by Merseysidefox (U4842)
posted 31 minutes ago
comment by 99 Problems (King Power OUT) (U12353)
posted 29 minutes ago
The affection is unsurprising Mersey - I think you could have written it. It’s a very good articulate post but still misses the point around Rudkin in my opinion - in particular the fact that he is still in post clearly demonstrates that Top and the ownership have not learned the lessons from our financial and sporting failures and that it’s further proof we cannot succeed in the long term under their ownership. To be fair to KTF, he does acknowledge that in the follow up - something you do tend to actively avoid acknowledging if I can say that
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Well I couldn’t have written it, it was far more articulate than anything I would write. But I actually think we’re all more aligned than you think on Rudkin.

I agree with your views that he oversaw the overspending, the poor recruitment and wage structure failure. He oversaw the errors in not selling players when we could command a fee. He is culpable for a lot of the damage and we should restructure the leadership of the playing side under new leadership. We all agree on that I think.

Where we differ is I still think Whelan and Top are the right people to lead the club. I really like Whelan and I feel that she is a very accomplished executive that understands business and the personal battier of football and its link to the fans. And I still see Top trying to invest in our club for the long term future with stadium and training ground plans. Yes we’ve made some bad mistakes in the short term and they could hurt us for a very long time, but I hope the longer term stability can be brought back by Top and Whelan under stronger leadership on the playing side.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All very good points Mersey, but why is Rudders still in place? Only because Top can't see he's the problem.

posted 1 week, 4 days ago

comment by Nuneaton_fox (U7936)
posted 55 minutes ago
comment by Merseysidefox (U4842)
posted 31 minutes ago
comment by 99 Problems (King Power OUT) (U12353)
posted 29 minutes ago
The affection is unsurprising Mersey - I think you could have written it. It’s a very good articulate post but still misses the point around Rudkin in my opinion - in particular the fact that he is still in post clearly demonstrates that Top and the ownership have not learned the lessons from our financial and sporting failures and that it’s further proof we cannot succeed in the long term under their ownership. To be fair to KTF, he does acknowledge that in the follow up - something you do tend to actively avoid acknowledging if I can say that
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Well I couldn’t have written it, it was far more articulate than anything I would write. But I actually think we’re all more aligned than you think on Rudkin.

I agree with your views that he oversaw the overspending, the poor recruitment and wage structure failure. He oversaw the errors in not selling players when we could command a fee. He is culpable for a lot of the damage and we should restructure the leadership of the playing side under new leadership. We all agree on that I think.

Where we differ is I still think Whelan and Top are the right people to lead the club. I really like Whelan and I feel that she is a very accomplished executive that understands business and the personal battier of football and its link to the fans. And I still see Top trying to invest in our club for the long term future with stadium and training ground plans. Yes we’ve made some bad mistakes in the short term and they could hurt us for a very long time, but I hope the longer term stability can be brought back by Top and Whelan under stronger leadership on the playing side.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All very good points Mersey, but why is Rudders still in place? Only because Top can't see he's the problem.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mersey will not answer this point Nuneaton, I must have asked him nearly 10 times. All he will say is ‘I still trust Top and I really like Whelan and think they are the right people to lead us forward’. Whenever you counter that with the logical argument that Top and Whelan are themselves still failing by keeping Rudkin in post - he stops responding. He won’t respond to this

posted 1 week, 4 days ago

When he says ‘I hope the longer term stability can be bought back by improvements on the playing side’ he fails to understand that his argument falls flat given the fact that he’s acknowledged himself that the person responsible for the playing side who is still in post isn’t competent

posted 1 week, 4 days ago

You see? He’s scarpered!

Sign in if you want to comment
RATE THIS ARTICLE
Rate Breakdown
5
2 Votes
4
0 Votes
3
0 Votes
2
0 Votes
1
0 Votes

Average Rating: 5 from 2 votes

ARTICLE STATS
Day
Article RankingNot Ranked
Article ViewsNot Available
Average Time(mins)Not Available
Total Time(mins)Not Available
Month
Article Ranking235/500
Article Views526
Average Time(mins)1.28
Total Time(mins)680.92