Globalfox

12 hours ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

21% of ST holders giving up their tickets is pretty mad.

I hear a lot who did not renew have been back to rescind their decision which is really strange.

We need to go back to basics we just have no front men of any use whatsoever so the priority is 3 (yes 3) out and out goal scorers. Then build the rest. Without these we can just forget things as it’s irrelevant who is the manager we will fail. Yes the garbage needs to be removed. All the aging idiots, winks and Choudray the club disaffected fools, assume Monga and Fatawu are gone to fill the pot. Kristensen waste of space. We will not get rid of Skipp so we have to get a role for him. Souttar will stay so we need to build a central defense around him and Nelson. We need aright back left I am assuming will still be Thomas and at this level may be OK. We will need a pact wide man or n excellent deliverer like Albrighton.

2 hours ago, Foxmeister said:

That’s a turnover of £2m+. Given the number of concession seats in the Family stand, it is likely that the 430 seats in executive boxes are creating more revenue than those 5,000 seats.

Yeah you are the new commercial director - you get it pity many at the club don’t. Our hospitality offering has declined in line with the teams performance. Last season it was better at Lincoln for 90 quid a game. This season it’s all sold out at Lincoln. The club cannot seem to understand the various market dynamics and tailor appropriately.

1 hour ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

They could lower the costs to get people in

1 hour ago, Vlad the Fox said:

Speaking to someone a couple of weeks back and at that point only one box had renewed from last season. People didn’t renew after relegation from the prem because they didn’t drop prices, assuming the same now, people aren’t going to pay prem prices for league 1 football. 

That’s a common tale we know multiple groups who have made it clear they will not be renewing their hospitality season tickets. I have renewed my Derby, Man City, Chelsea and Bournemouth hospitality tickets. Waiting on the call from Leicester to explain what they will do better than last year.. I agree maybe drop prices in Fosse to go for volume with Premier go the other way design a really high end offering as Bournemouth have done next year exploiting maximum revenue streams leave Champions Club as is maybe a little lower.. stop using 10 person tables and ending up with away scum sitting at a Leicester table main reason I will not use Champions Club although I love Ally’s handling of the Lounge. Wonder where Walsh goes now the Gallery is closed hope he host the Premier Lounge. Across the board the food has to be better.

1 hour ago, RoboFox said:

You have to be mental to pay for this shit individually. It only ever seems to be for corporate jollies and now they’re probably all going to Forest or Cov.

Hate to say it but Derby is better, food is better the package includes more like free parking, alcohol included for same and similar prices. The new caterer OVG was not an improvement last year. We use hospitality at every away game and the pricing difference in League 1 is substantial. I understand them reducing the options as they did not sell out last year.

The club sent out this morning a letter outlining hospitality offerings. There will only be the Fosse, Champions Club and Premier League Lounges plus the Executive Boxes. Surprised they closed the Gallery as last season it was probably the best food. Clear indication they are not expecting us to be as attractive to deep pocket spenders.

2 hours ago, Terraloon said:

I really don’t know where to start.

 

I had my car serviced on Thursday.  All the boxes were ticket to prove work had been carried out . One of the boxes ticked was that windscreen washer had been topped up.

 

Yesterday some 8 miles after I picked the car up no washer fluid .

 

My point is that just like the garage that serviced my car it seems to me the FAB meetings are no more than putting a few ticks in the boxes.

 

The whole process is amateurish. Of course there may well have been a bit more to it but in terms of substance but there really is little detail around things that matter. Throw away facts such as a large number of the 4500 new ST holders are under 18 and the limit for sales 22k have been met are interesting but there is little detail around SCMP something that really needed more comment.

 

I am not having a pop at those that represent the supporters but supporters are not being told anything in the meetings that couldn’t be fed back by say a monthly newsletter.

 

 

 

At the FCC meeting the new fiscal rules were raised but noting the CEO stating they were aware nothing of real use was shared. Personally I felt that they were still unsure despising their initial SMCPsubmittal being due 6 days ago. What the CEO did say was that he was confident we are clear of any sanctions for past fiscal non compliance and that he believed he was now being listened to. These were two items I see as key to holding him accountable for as we move forward. As far as who was not listening in the past you can only assume it was the owner.the season ticket sales bode well for the ability to have a useful spend.

9 hours ago, Freeman's Wharfer said:

So it’s basically a sledge hammer to crack a nut then, isn’t it?!
 

Why should many supporters be inconvenienced because a) the club won’t re-vamp the away priority system and b) there’s the old trouble maker in an away end (which happens at every club)?

 

It doesn’t really matter what the reasons are that people are against it when there’s such a small percentage in favour of it. I’d sooner find out why people are actually for inconveniencing their fellow fans.

 

The hilarious thing is that this is introduced as we plummet to League One. The first time round they tried it was supposedly because of Premier League guidance/advice (well it’ll be a while before that applies) and this time round it’s brought in as there really won’t be a hot black market for tickets to see Leicester away in the third tier.

 

IMO it’s about nothing other than control and clamping down on a profile of fan the club considers undesirable.

At the 90.minute session on this topic it was revealed that of a selection of 110 tickets over 50% went uncollected. The assumption being that they were not the original purchaser. This means that supporters who should be getting tickets in high demand situations are denied. The mood at the session changed in favour of reinstating sample and targeted checks. I am not surprised the Foxes Trust survey paints a different picture as the question is posed without context. Leicester is not the only club facing this issue and implementing checks with as we see here with mixed reactions. There is no doubt that loyal supporters at times cannot get tickets while those not deserving get around the system. Depending whether you win or lose in that scenario will influence your perspective. The other statistic is that not just a Leicester but more widely is those found to be causing trouble turn out to not be the original ticket purchaser so yes it is to some degree about control.

3 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

Discussion from a long time ago but can anyone remember what the Belvoir Dr land was worth? That could certainly be of interest to property developer owners. 

Belvoir Drive has too many covenants and sharing agreements to be of interest to a property developer unless it was a low price. Seagrave is more viable but will need change of use permission however talk in the property world is that the club has been inviting proposals. How that translates into investment in the club seems unclear.

4 hours ago, Wymsey said:

David Wilson Homes?

Does not exist brand is owned by Baratts

Voted no the man is a disgrace and should be getting a lifetime ban from football.

11 hours ago, danhaw said:

I live in Grantham and see quite a lot of City shirts tbf. Expect a drop off in the amount of Forest shorts seen in the wild as all the fans convert back to Man United/City, now that they are not going to Istanbul 

Yes we are just outside Grantham and always pleased to see the shirt. Of course we can technically claim JV is closer to Grantham than Leicester at Stainby so I claim this as a Leicester stronghold.

He was only here one season but everyone forget Alan Clarke 50% goal to game ratio that season and we made a profit on him. Everyone focuses on his Leeds Career

Right now who knows. By my calculations if we do well then we might generate 25.8 M in matchday revenue under League 1rulrs. We can then spend 7.5million on the team plus any player sales revenue which I see as ma ing around 20M at best. The balance 7.5 M with Seagrave etc will need significant cost management as will many other parts of the club. What the owner could put in is unclear. If we cannot manage to 25M a year we deserve gointoadministration

We fought corruption on 4 occasions and were found to be right on 3 out of the 4. Corruption cannot go unchallenged. Unfortunately the corruption continues at all levels of football and is  leading to the eventual destruction of the game as real supporters will discover. The corruption and our esteemed owners incompetence are two different things. However the obscene player contracts, agents fees etc are all part of the overall demise of the game.The next TV deal may be the final watershed in football destruction as ordinary supporters are finally pushed out leaving tourists and sycophants. Football is already struggling to sell live attendance. I bought tickets for Arsenal today at face value with ease for tomorrows Champions League and there is plenty of hospitality unsold. In the evening of my supporting life it is sad to see but unavoidably true.in2016 our club raised hope but unleashed the fear and wrath of the money people. Never again will they let true hope shine again. That is the only certain thing you can predict for football.;

The issue is not so much the manager but the structure above them don’t believe any manager can be successful until the current structure is destroyed. That includes the owner interfering when he knows nothing about football. Once that is agreed then maybe a manager will have a chance

Serious question now the men’s team is in League 1 the EFL Handbook seems incomplete about women’s teams. It generally says there is encouragement for the women’s game but then explicitly prevents any claim against revenue from women’s matches into our Squad cost ratio. This is unlike PSR where all women’s losses are deductible. Is having a women’s team going to be a significant encumberence. Not sure the club have investigated this. anyone with any insights?

11 hours ago, Clogger_ said:

Kudos pal. It is absolutely unfair to suggest all of our older fans are KPFC or happy clappers!

 

It is however impossible not to notice that KPFC and happy clappers tend to be older! There's something generational about deference that plays a role here. I write this as no spring chicken myself, albeit with a shorter memory than you! Would no doubt like to share a pint and discuss the history of our great club.

Lots of the delusional ones are the ‘family’ group I don’t want my children hearing bad things. This is not related to age that’s a miss perception. 

10 hours ago, HankMarvin said:

If they got some dodgy £50m sponsorship over 5/10 year deal could they get all the money straight away and then the 75 percent revenue is a lot bigger.

is there any guidance about maximum sponsorship.

 

edit 

must be FMV

Yes must be assessed as FMV and you can take the cash but you cannot account for it in one year they would divide by five. 

1 hour ago, Babylon said:

The clowns should have taken that hit when we got promoted. Should have banked the money, taken the hit and started the championship in a better position. 

At last weeks FCC I asked that the club could as they publish each accounts publish a simple statement reflecting the key points, debt, earnings, cost, losses, loans etc. My Herlihy did promise to look into this. Not holding my breath.

43 minutes ago, Terraloon said:

Why I ask is because in the SMCP guidance it says this. I would add I am not sure what the definition of forward finance is although this is what AI says”

Forward financing (or forward funding) in football refers to a financial structure where clubs borrow money against guaranteed future revenues—such as transfer installments, central broadcasting funds, or parachute payments—to secure immediate cash flow for operations or player acquisitions

 

 

1.16 Forward Financing:

1.16.1 Distributions - If Premier League Distributions which are relevant to the Reporting Period (a

Parachute Payment for example) have been received by the Club in Cash in a prior Reporting

Period as a result of ‘forward financing’’, the amounts received in the earlier period may not be

included in the calculation of Relevant Turnover.

Guidance:

If a Club is relegated from the Premier League at the end of Season;

Competes in the Championship is Season 2024/25 but is relegated to League One at the end of that

Season; and

Forward finances 100% of its Year 1 Parachute Payment from the Premier League and 70% of its Year 2

Parachute Payment, receiving those amounts during Season 2025/26

IT FOLLOWS THAT

The Club will only be able to include 30% of the Year 2 Parachute Payment within the calculation for

Relevant Turnover for Season 2026/27, its first in League One.

 

 

Yes it may be a percentage as per the books the bit we do not know is actual dates or amounts. I have my own doubts but he was emphatic about it. Be sure if later it turns out not to be true I will be the first to call him out.

1 hour ago, Terraloon said:

Did he specifically mention that the 26/27 parachute payments will count? 
 

Why I ask is because my interpretation is  because the 26/27 part a payment has been “ leveraged” then I am far from sure it will count in terms of revenue in 26/27

Yes he specifically said the last payment would count. I think it’s in the subtlety of the advance wording the bank provided an agreed facility. That means that funds are available to drawdown against. Now when you read the EFL manual (yes I know it’s 240 pages) it does address parachute payments as being allowed as revenue. I will say that there is a lot of differences from the Championship so not sure even the club will know. The telling words for me was when he made it clear only some revenue counts. I believe they have only weeks to provide their SMCP projection so I am sure much scrambling going on.

18 minutes ago, CL Fox said:

I didn't renew my foxes trust membership as I think they've been too slow and too diplomatic. I will rejoin but think they've got to be way more aggressive towards the club now. Diplomacy is getting them nowhere.

Cannot disagree but the big thing is the club are dismissive of all the groups due to low numbers. If we can for once mobilize 7000 to 10000 responses it has impact no one has managed to achieve. Now is the moment to be not for or against the trust, no booers or happy clappers but realists. Come together It’s needed to shake up the current malaise.

1 hour ago, Foxes_Trust said:

We're about to hit 2,000 responses but, even more encouragingly, we're seeing a flow through of new members to the Trust (which will only make us stronger)

 

Come on folks now is the time to be engaged whether pro or anti trust raise a voice through the survey engage everyone at every level make the numbers undeniable.

22 hours ago, CUJimmy said:

I took it directly from the EFL documentation on their website so I am pretty confident what I said is correct.  We can spend all of what we get in from transfers but only a percentage of other income/investment.  The percentage we can spend drops still further if we were relegated to league 2.  I am not sure what happens to the loan advance either but as the basis for compliance is not spending more than 75% of revenue on player related items rather than overall losses it probably just falls into the other 25% so might not be relevant.  Obviously there is a huge risk in using transfer money to pay wages because you can only do that once.  It’s like selling your family silver to pay the leccy bill.  Whichever way you cut it though it’s a shitshow.

You are not wrong but it gets complex. We cannot use any revenue generated outside of match days. We cannot include revenue from women’s games but women’s team cost seems murky. Inputs by owner are restricted. Using sales revenue as one year cash flow would be tricky and yes if we do not get promoted it gets harder. The CEO alluded to these challenges and only ‘certain’ income counting at last week’s FCC meeting. The will be relying on the last parachute payments that they are already leveraging. Right now they should be focusing on maximizing revenue but I think they are lost.