Chrysalis

Wasnt the previous almost decade stint not good enough then? Feels like an excuse, the best time to do it is now so it doesnt impact a EPL season. That is of course if KP actually do have money to spend on this.

Good financial management?

I can see it now. LCFC press statement. "The bank holiday was not forthcoming, and we are the victims of continued unforeseen problems Our legal team is on the case".

It would lower the costs all the way down the leagues.

You dont recognise the fundamental reason for the flawed FFP is that the big teams you want to keep wont accept a flat spending cap (they insist on it being based on revenue) and they the prime driver of the big financial gulf between the EPL and the championship? They not the best teams for everyone either, I very rarely watch games they play in unless they involve Leicester City. You a closet glory supporter?

He needs an overhaul of players for his vision of the game, we wont be able to deliver on that even with promotion. If we dont go up he is gone I think, if we get promoted I am not sure, as the lure of being an EPL manager will be strong, but even if we keep him in the EPL he wont survive the season.

The lack of action here is just another list on the mismanagement of the club lately sadly. How this has dragged on is ridiculous.

There would be problems during transition years yes, but the sport would come out of it better. I value better and fairer competition in England vs us attracting players over Spain, Italy etc. I expect the majority of EFL fans agree with me, and the majority of the big 6 fans disagree with me.

That big drop in money is the correction the game needs. Why do we need all this money in the game?

The loan's suggest club needs cash not just profit. Until someone with clout (not unfounded press speculation) says otherwise, I will believe the club has cashflow issues alongside the permitted spending issues.

Question. What is the benefit of the FT meeting with the club directors, when you not allowed to say anything? all it does is give a few VIP members of the trust some insider knowledge but doesnt benefit the wider supporters as a whole. I can understand not being able to talk about specifics but if the extremity of the NDA is you not even allowed to post an opinion, I dont see the point of the meetings. I have read the club statement 3 times now, and it doesnt deny any guilt in regards to the league rules, in fact it actually specifically says the clubs issue is how severe the charges will be and when they applied, its effectively admitting guilt. If the legal action is merely just to piss of the EPL/EFL and delay punishment, its not something I think the club should be allowed to do without any kickback from the fan base, sadly most of the fan base seems up KP **** and those who are not are heavily split. I have little doubt now we need new owners and I would like to see the Foxes Trust pushing for this.

I was moaning about the early pay day loans and the wage bill, the FA cup is deffo after problems were surfacing I think. We had also already let a lot of analytic staff, scouting staff go by then as well. Happy days was the EPL win, won it with a playing budget not much higher than championship level and posted world record profits the year after. Also did it with counter attacking football, best I ever seen at the club in my life time. Scouting and recruitment was on another level. Squad fitness astounding.

Top was very happy to be interviewed by English TV at the start, now nowhere to be seen in the public profile, Whelan seemingly always has been a quiet one. I think they both hold blame, but ultimately Top wins out as he is the one with the most power.

Pretty crazy this thread exists with 95 pages and not a whisper on Top, if I start a Top thread will it get locked.

If we promoted assuming EPL dont issue an embargo after 1 July we can register new players.

Clubs sell players for low fees all the time, we only have ourselves to blame for our inability to shift players we dont want. If we think someone is worth 20 million and we paying them 5 million in wages. We get an offer for 10 million, we turn it down, but if we didnt turn it down we have offset half of that 20 million and removed the 5 million wages, a 15 million gain. I have seen some mention that if we sell for less than amortised value its a loss, I disagree. If you have a player who e.g. is on the books for 20 million per year, so e.g. 60 million purchase 3 year contract. You then sell that player for 10 million in their final year, so half of the amortised value, its not a further loss, its just reducing the 20 million accounting cost down to 10 million (plus the wages saved). Combination of short contracts, high wages, and stubbornness on player values have contributed significantly to the PSR breach. Then the bad footballing decisions like insisting on tippy tappy football managers and sacking Rodgers way too late are the icing on the cake. The training ground I also consider a mistake, and how we didnt take advantage of winning the EPL and several years of top flight football to not expand the stadium by now I dont know, all shambolic management. We even accepted KP as a shirt sponsor for 2 million a season whilst we were EPL champions, thats how bad our approach has been.

Should we merge the threads, two discussions on one thing.

Drawing the lines, those competing against us for the top 2 have lobbied the EFL for action as they think we are breaching the PSR, then EFL then attempted to get us to submit a plan, but we successfully fended it off due to a weakness in the rules, the EPL then jumped in on the basis we successfully argued the EFL didnt have the right to do it, but given the chance of a points deduction being remote, we now have this embargo which may or may not be within the rules, yet to be decided. Leeds and co will be very happy this is flooding the news as its a distraction, and likely not good for the mentality of the squad. The timing I agree is suspect, but I also have the opinion, the club have brought it on themselves, two self imposed embargo's, whilst knowing we would fail FFP anyway, and then deciding to do an approach which is the opposite of cooperation, why on earth would the club cripple ourselves in two windows when we not going to go for cooperative mitigation and fail FFP anyway, this is all bonkers, its very inconsistent actions jumping from side to the other, kind of like a cat who cant decide if it wants in or out of a room.

Whats stopping us calling them now, 100m for them to get the insider view of the upcoming battle.

I think it would be like Silva, the purchase would go through as is already done deal, but unable to register the player in the squad so unable to play. However if promoted after 1 July could register him.

I think so yes, but if promoted we can do so after July 1.

Top and Whelan fighting for their status now in my opinion, if they did a Forest they would be seen as tarnished unable to manage the finances within the rules, so we now have this siege mentality with both of them still refusing to put their names to any statements. We on a lose lose as fans, either we get punished pretty heavily over the next year or two, or somehow they win and we avoid the normal punishments but we would then be tarnished a second time as cheaters like when we went into admin.

This is the real solution, but whats stopping it? The bigger clubs. These clubs feel their historical success gives them the right to have a built in embedded long term advantage in the form of FFP. Propose a simple playing budget cap or wage cap to these clubs, and they will throw a hissy fit saying its not fair, they wont be able to compete in Europe blah blah. The UEFA competitions take it even further, not only do they have FFP, but they give out money based on historical success in the form of coefficient payments. The biggest leagues get the most clubs that dont have to go through qualifiers, the biggest clubs get paid extra simply for taking part based on coefficient, I remember doing the maths when we was in the CL, which wasnt long after they introduced this system, if we won the competition we would have got less prize money than Real Madrid if they went out in the group phase. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2206.11746.pdf Clubs who regularly qualify, win a game or two every year, will have more coefficient than a club that qualifies once and wins the competition.

A owner could choose to stick two fingers up at FFP and simply take any fines and points as a cost of doing business, there is different approaches to the problem, a new owner might also have the ability to better boost our turnover and not require us to take out pay day loans further improving our situation. Another option is to run the club differently, longer contracts on lower wages (less pressure to rise them to keep players), sign from lower leagues etc or from clubs where they castoffs. for more efficient expenditure whilst complying. Our initial strategy from KP was like this that built the EPL title winning squad..

It needs 14 votes to drop it, all the clubs not being penalised will likely support its existence as the enforcement effectively makes them stronger. Given the farce of the EPL not voting to punish the ESL breakaway clubs I am not going to assume any common sense changes will happen moving forward.