Tielemans

[volpeazzurro]

28 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

It just doesn't compute. If I am right our revenue per year is around £120-130m? Wages account for about 75-80% of that which really doesn't leave the £75-80m fans think we'll spend on Tielemans, a striker and a winger. Not to mention the training ground project. We either sell Maguire or Ndidi (either of them wouldn't leave us in trouble) or we'll be cutting our cloth accordingly and it would be highly surprising if we get Tielemans. It is what it is.

I think that's spot on and adds some reality to the situation. It is after all a business not merely a supporters plaything. 

 

 

[Guest Cujek]

13 hours ago, chapero82 said:

Sending people on holiday to Monaco isn’t the same  

I don't think the club tells people where to go on holiday, do you? 

[Bert]

39 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

It just doesn't compute. If I am right our revenue per year is around £120-130m? Wages account for about 75-80% of that which really doesn't leave the £75-80m fans think we'll spend on Tielemans, a striker and a winger. Not to mention the training ground project. We either sell Maguire or Ndidi (either of them wouldn't leave us in trouble) or we'll be cutting our cloth accordingly and it would be highly surprising if we get Tielemans. It is what it is.

You are right. But we are going to be big spenders this summer. 

[Ric Flair]

4 minutes ago, Bert said:

You are right. But we are going to be big spenders this summer. 

Maguire will be off then...………….!

[UHDrive]

This is my first post (lifelong lcfc fan). I wanted to ask firstly, that isnt the stadium/training ground infrastructure ect all exempt from ffp rules and therefore that all associated club player transfers/salaries are separate. Secondly that regarding wages weve already had a minimum 3 decent earners (inc) Iborra/simpson/okazaki (and the rest to leave not withatanding). Also given the net spend over recent years I'd have thought we'd be as a club in a good position to easily afford to splash +100 mill this season regardless of any sales. 

 

As a newbie.....please have it in your hearts to go easy on me

[murphy]

1 hour ago, Ric Flair said:

It just doesn't compute. If I am right our revenue per year is around £120-130m? Wages account for about 75-80% of that which really doesn't leave the £75-80m fans think we'll spend on Tielemans, a striker and a winger. Not to mention the training ground project. We either sell Maguire or Ndidi (either of them wouldn't leave us in trouble) or we'll be cutting our cloth accordingly and it would be highly surprising if we get Tielemans. It is what it is.

Isn't that just the reported TV and prize money?  There are also gate receipts and sponsorship.  I think it is over £150m.

 

As for the wage bill, losing a few big earners will help (Shinji, Simpson, Nacho on loan maybe) and we need to somehow shift James, Slim and Silva.  That just might pay for Tielemans without hurting us at all.  I wouldn't sell Harry unless we got an obscene offer.

 

I think the finances will be OK for what we want this summer, the problem will be if Yourri gets a better offer.

 

 

 

Edited 17 May 2019 by murphy

[Ric Flair]

11 minutes ago, UHDrive said:

This is my first post (lifelong lcfc fan). I wanted to ask firstly, that isnt the stadium/training ground infrastructure ect all exempt from ffp rules and therefore that all associated club player transfers/salaries are separate. Secondly that regarding wages weve already had a minimum 3 decent earners (inc) Iborra/simpson/okazaki (and the rest to leave not withatanding). Also given the net spend over recent years I'd have thought we'd be as a club in a good position to easily afford to splash +100 mill this season regardless of any sales. 

 

As a newbie.....please have it in your hearts to go easy on me

Welcome!

 

Yes infrastructure is exempt from FFP if the owners are willing to fund it themselves or via other methods. However, the fact we have taken out two loans in excess of £100m that have been guaranteed against the Mahrez transfer money and PL TV rights would suggest that we might not be going down the route of Top and his family chuffing up the whole lot from their empire. Even if we don't include how that is going to be paid for and our wage bill is reduced by the loss of Iborra, Simpson, Okazaki and a few others that still probably only accounts for around £10m in wages which will be replaced if not added to by the arrival of a top drawer central midfielder like Tielemans, another striker, a winger and possibly a back up right back. Our wages will still account for the majority of our revenue so to go and spend £60-100m this summer has to revolve around us selling off one of our main assets like Maguire.

[Ric Flair]

3 minutes ago, murphy said:

Isn't that just the reported TV and prize money?  There are also gate receipts and sponsorship.  I think it is over £150m.

 

As for the wage bill, losing a few big earners will help (Shinji, Simpson, Nacho on loan maybe) and we need to somehow shift James, Slim and Silva.  That just might pay for Tielemans.  I wouldn't sell Harry unless we got an obscene offer.

 

I think the finances will be OK for what we want this summer, the problem will be if Yourri gets a better offer.

Gate money and sponsorship isn't as much as you'd think, only worth about £25-30m I think. All in all it's not much over £130m revenue if I remember correctly. Babylon remembers shit like this, back me up pal!!!

 

Just checked, you're right it is more like £150m. Right, there's £20 extra million for fcukin Tielemans!!!

[Ric Flair]

Very interesting read if you want to see how our finances have been heading.

 

http://financialfootballnews.com/leicester-city-fcs-2018-finances-european-hangover/

[st albans fox]

1 hour ago, Ric Flair said:

If we can't afford Tielemans, a back up striker and a new winger then we have to sell. No point depriving ourselves just to keep face by refusing to sell our best players. Maguire leaving wouldn't hurt us as much as other key assets and not getting Tielemans would massively, certainly if we harbour any intentions of top 6. We were still 15+ points off top 6 and we'd stand no chance of closing that without a player of Tielemans skillset and calibre. Anyway, I doubt we will walk away from £40m if that's non-negotiable. 

 

1 hour ago, Babylon said:

No debt? We’ve just taken out two massive deals to secure finance for the infrastructure projects. The debt might not be on the last books, but it’s there.

 

£1m profit hardly screams loads to spend, and that’s before all the upcoming payments on said projects.

 

Spending on the proviso of something maybe happening in the future is a dangerous game we are unlikely to do. Injuries, loss of form etc

Others have answered for me 

 

I suggest nett spend of 70/80m is not unreasonable this year (do we already have a surplus from January?) 

[Ric Flair]

5 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

 

Others have answered for me 

 

I suggest nett spend of 70/80m is not unreasonable this year (do we already have a surplus from January?) 

Do the maths, rough and ready.

 

Revenue based on last years accounts - £160m

Player sales YTD 18/19 - £9m

Total - £169m

 

Wages based on last years accounts (we are reducing the squad but also still increasing salaries for existing players and signing new players) - £119m

 

That leaves £50m and doesn't include any other operating costs.

[Babylon]

33 minutes ago, UHDrive said:

This is my first post (lifelong lcfc fan). I wanted to ask firstly, that isnt the stadium/training ground infrastructure ect all exempt from ffp rules and therefore that all associated club player transfers/salaries are separate. Secondly that regarding wages weve already had a minimum 3 decent earners (inc) Iborra/simpson/okazaki (and the rest to leave not withatanding). Also given the net spend over recent years I'd have thought we'd be as a club in a good position to easily afford to splash +100 mill this season regardless of any sales. 

 

As a newbie.....please have it in your hearts to go easy on me

Welcome... 

 

Losing a few players salaries doesn't suddenly make £100m appear. We made a profit of £1m in the last accounts, we still owe huge amounts on previous transfers, and we've had to secure loans to fund all the infrastructure. Whether it falls in FFP is irrelevant, the club and not the owners are paying for it. It's not a Man City scenario whereby we'll just find a way of the owners pumping money in, the money has to come out of what we earn moving forwards. Cash in the bank fell between the previous accounts and the current one, wages up, we've spent more cash.  There is absolutely nothing in the accounts to suggest we are capable of spending £40-50m nett, let alone £70/80/90/100m

 

We've only come close to a £40m net spend twice and they were in exceptional seasons. 

 

2018-2019 - Net Spend £18,80m

2017-2018 - Net Spend £39,95m

2016-2017 - Net Spend £25,55m

2015-2016 - Net Spend £40,45m 

2014-2015 - Net Spend £22,86m

 

[Clarkey123]

55 minutes ago, volpeazzurro said:

I think that's spot on and adds some reality to the situation. It is after all a business not merely a supporters plaything. 

 

 

You’d think we have Mike Ashley for an owner

[Babylon]

1 minute ago, Clarkey123 said:

You’d think we have Mike Ashley for an owner

The owners no longer put their own money into the club and haven't since we got promoted. Ok technically you can argue it's their money as they own the club, but the money comes from what we earn. 

 

I can't help bit think people are under the illusion we've got mage rich owners pumping money in to run the club. 

[Clarkey123]

1 minute ago, Babylon said:

The owners no longer put their own money into the club and haven't since we got promoted. Ok technically you can argue it's their money as they own the club, but the money comes from what we earn. 

 

I can't help bit think people are under the illusion we've got mage rich owners pumping money in to run the club. 

I don’t think we are mega rich but I do think we’ll be doing some business this summer 

[Shane]

52 minutes ago, Bert said:

You are right. But we are going to be big spenders this summer. 

In terms of Net spend ? 

[Babylon]

4 minutes ago, Clarkey123 said:

I don’t think we are mega rich but I do think we’ll be doing some business this summer 

So do I, the owners are good because they don't take a huge amount out and we always put back in anything we make. But unless we do something either very creative or shunt the problem down the line (ie. we have 0 to spend for a few seasons after), then we are most likely to continue investing in a similar manner to how we have before. 

[Horibbly Wrong]

8 minutes ago, Babylon said:

The owners no longer put their own money into the club and haven't since we got promoted. Ok technically you can argue it's their money as they own the club, but the money comes from what we earn. 

 

I can't help bit think people are under the illusion we've got mage rich owners pumping money in to run the club. 

If this is the case maybe we shouldn't hold the owners in such high esteem........

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(only joking)

[Clarkey123]

9 minutes ago, Babylon said:

So do I, the owners are good because they don't take a huge amount out and we always put back in anything we make. But unless we do something either very creative or shunt the problem down the line (ie. we have 0 to spend for a few seasons after), then we are most likely to continue investing in a similar manner to how we have before. 

I hope Brendan gets an injection this summer to build the squad we need then hopefully we can do a spurs and don’t have to spend any more to make the top 6/7

[UHDrive]

44 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Welcome!

 

Yes infrastructure is exempt from FFP if the owners are willing to fund it themselves or via other methods. However, the fact we have taken out two loans in excess of £100m that have been guaranteed against the Mahrez transfer money and PL TV rights would suggest that we might not be going down the route of Top and his family chuffing up the whole lot from their empire. Even if we don't include how that is going to be paid for and our wage bill is reduced by the loss of Iborra, Simpson, Okazaki and a few others that still probably only accounts for around £10m in wages which will be replaced if not added to by the arrival of a top drawer central midfielder like Tielemans, another striker, a winger and possibly a back up right back. Our wages will still account for the majority of our revenue so to go and spend £60-100m this summer has to revolve around us selling off one of our main assets like Maguire.

Much appreciated! I didn't realise the loans were tied in that way which makes that awkward, but I'm hardly in the know in the bigger scheme of things. I know we have a youthful, dynamic and talented squad but it would be a shame to sell Maguire (who I think this year would be his last either way) in order to fund players. I dont want clubs above us thinking they can just buy Maguire because if not then they know that our summer recruitment plans are bugered, ultimately bringing down his price too (being touted much lower against other CB's of his calibre on the market right now anyway)

 

I'd like to see 2/3 substantial signings this year. I guess from the maths in this feed that we'd be looking at tielemans, Augustus and an ibe type player (hopefully not ibe!)

 

Thanks again. 

[North Leeds Fox]

Cheers for the update babylon and ric. What I would take from the above is our business in the summer will have to be very similar to dortmund in the last few seasons, in that they lose a big name for mega money and buy 3-4 better players in their weak positions so it improves the overall squad. For example, get a bidding war started for maguire with utd, city both needing CBs and then go and get the likes of sarr, augustin, and youri with clever additions like milner supplementing that. Next year maddison and repeat the process. 

[UHDrive]

23 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Welcome... 

 

Losing a few players salaries doesn't suddenly make £100m appear. We made a profit of £1m in the last accounts, we still owe huge amounts on previous transfers, and we've had to secure loans to fund all the infrastructure. Whether it falls in FFP is irrelevant, the club and not the owners are paying for it. It's not a Man City scenario whereby we'll just find a way of the owners pumping money in, the money has to come out of what we earn moving forwards. Cash in the bank fell between the previous accounts and the current one, wages up, we've spent more cash.  There is absolutely nothing in the accounts to suggest we are capable of spending £40-50m nett, let alone £70/80/90/100m

 

We've only come close to a £40m net spend twice and they were in exceptional seasons. 

 

2018-2019 - Net Spend £18,80m

2017-2018 - Net Spend £39,95m

2016-2017 - Net Spend £25,55m

2015-2016 - Net Spend £40,45m 

2014-2015 - Net Spend £22,86m

 

Thanks for this. Gives me a lot better understanding. Cheers.

[Ric Flair]

1 minute ago, North Leeds Fox said:

Cheers for the update babylon and ric. What I would take from the above is our business in the summer will have to be very similar to dortmund in the last few seasons, in that they lose a big name for mega money and buy 3-4 better players in their weak positions so it improves the overall squad. For example, get a bidding war started for maguire with utd, city both needing CBs and then go and get the likes of sarr, augustin, and youri with clever additions like milner supplementing that. Next year maddison and repeat the process. 

Bang on and we'd be silly not to cash in if the opportunity presents itself for a player that we could manage without. Maguire or even Ndidi would raise funds to strengthen elsewhere and have younger players waiting in the wings to fill the void. It is a risk, we think Benkovic or Soyuncu can come in alongside Evans and do well and likewise we think Choudhury could operate the Ndidi role and free up the finances to sign Tielemans as well as give us enough leeway to strengthen other areas and try and move us on to challenging the top 6. It's a balancing act, some fans will kick off and say we stand no chance of getting in the top 6 if we look to sell out top assets without fighting tooth and nail for them but we can't magic money out of thin air so if fans really think we are going to have a net spend of £50-100m then A) pass me the sniff or B) there's tom foolery going on.

[North Leeds Fox]

2 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Bang on and we'd be silly not to cash in if the opportunity presents itself for a player that we could manage without. Maguire or even Ndidi would raise funds to strengthen elsewhere and have younger players waiting in the wings to fill the void. It is a risk, we think Benkovic or Soyuncu can come in alongside Evans and do well and likewise we think Choudhury could operate the Ndidi role and free up the finances to sign Tielemans as well as give us enough leeway to strengthen other areas and try and move us on to challenging the top 6. It's a balancing act, some fans will kick off and say we stand no chance of getting in the top 6 if we look to sell out top assets without fighting tooth and nail for them but we can't magic money out of thin air so if fans really think we are going to have a net spend of £50-100m then A) pass me the sniff or B) there's tom foolery going on.

Yeah definitely. I understand the fans that say that we wouldn't get top 6 without a player like maguire, the only real response is that we also won't get top 6 with gray playing right mid or mendy playing centre mid. We can sort those issues this summer and use players that we have already bought to replace maguire, even though he is a player I have loved playing for us as he really understands the club. My other feeling is it is hard to attract players like youri if he feels we would then be a nightmare to get out of when he is ready to move on. We need to be seen as the best club for players that want to come to england but are not ready for a utd etc and we sell them on for 3 times the price 

[Kopfkino]

30 minutes ago, Babylon said:

 

 

2018-2019 - Net Spend £18,80m

2017-2018 - Net Spend £39,95m

2016-2017 - Net Spend £25,55m

2015-2016 - Net Spend £40,45m 

2014-2015 - Net Spend £22,86m

 

Your figures are wrong. The subsequent events section of the accounts every year basically tells us our net spend.

18/19 - 43.3m

17/18 - 57.7m

16/17 - 47.9m

15/16 - 33.7m

14/15 - 13m

 

Of course they may still show what you say they show but they are quite different.