Maguire to Man Utd / Man City

[FoxinNotts]

9 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Silva is going to be part of the Tielemans deal hopefully. Slimani at best we are going to get someone to cover his wages but that doesn't help us in a transfer fee to bring in another striker, let's say we need to spend £15-20m for a good up and coming striker + £30m for Tielemans is £50m. Then we are spending around £5-10m on James Justin. We badly need a top drawer right winger who replaces or tries to replace the goals and assists that Mahrez gave us, this is the position that could potentially cost us another £25-30m or more if we are determined to get the very best prospect out there available. We are therefore looking at £70-80m on transfers and i'm not sure we have that available without cashing in on a sellable asset. Sell Maguire and we could blow £120m+ which could get us 4 next level signings.

All seems logical. I didn’t realise we were strapped for cash. Last time I read anything relating to Leicester’s finances, we’d just made a mint from our CL exploits, and we were being bankrolled by KP with loans covering the training ground etc

[Bayfox]

7 minutes ago, FoxinNotts said:

All seems logical. I didn’t realise we were strapped for cash. Last time I read anything relating to Leicester’s finances, we’d just made a mint from our CL exploits, and we were being bankrolled by KP with loans covering the training ground etc

We aren't strapped for cash but we are bound by FFP. we made massive profits on the back of winning the league and the CL yes. But our last accounts showed a much smaller profit.

 

Also because we paid out such good contracts our wages to turnover % doesn't make great reading. Competing with the big boys when based in a small town in the Midlands with only 32k stadium is difficult. The KP group can't bankroll us like clubs have done in the past.

 

That's why expansion is critical. Not for normal bums on seats. But for corporate as well.

[Chrysalis]

9 hours ago, La-li-lu-le-lo said:

If we actually get £80 million for him, we will be ****ing laughing.....

yeah 80 million buys us so many points, I will be laughing so hard.

[urban.spaceman]

25 minutes ago, splinterdream said:

Maybe we'll sell maguire to fund a new stand the Tigers takeover...

[Fightforever]

The problem is simple beacuse of our first team squads talent most the pl prize money just about covers our wage bill.

 

Therefore we need to offload players that we dont use in order to be competitive in the transfer market:

 

Jakupovic 23k 

Fuchs 50k 

James 35k 

Morgan 60k 

Slimani 80k 

Silva 80k

King 40k

Gezzal 45k 

 

 

413k a week in total

 

Those players get paid way too much for the roles they play in our squad.

 

Get their wages lowered or removed and that is easily enough for tielemans wage if he were to join, a new winger, and a new striker's wages. 

Edited 25 June 2019 by Fightforever

[ajthefox]

34 minutes ago, Bayfox said:

We aren't strapped for cash but we are bound by FFP. we made massive profits on the back of winning the league and the CL yes. But our last accounts showed a much smaller profit.

 

Also because we paid out such good contracts our wages to turnover % doesn't make great reading. Competing with the big boys when based in a small town in the Midlands with only 32k stadium is difficult. The KP group can't bankroll us like clubs have done in the past.

 

That's why expansion is critical. Not for normal bums on seats. But for corporate as well.

You what?!

[Dusty]

1 hour ago, Ric Flair said:

Or we sell and use the money to strengthen our wide areas and up front. This has been done to death but I really don't see where the £100m+ is coming from this summer to get Tielemans and then a top drawer winger, a striker and possibly another midfielder and right back. The only way to get all of that without them being cheaper additions is to cash in on an asset. Maguire is the one who we could probably afford to lose, even if he is an excellent player. I wouldn't be against him staying but it all depends on how it's viewed in terms of what players we think we need to push the top 6. We need at least another 20-30 goals on what we scored last season. We aren't going to get much better defensively under Rodgers, it's all about goals scored.

I don’t know if I agree with this, I don’t think we’re in a position where we need to sell big in order to improve our squad. Selling Harry could disrupt the squad, there’s no guarantee that the replacement will be better and it’s signals to our other important players that we’re happy to sell. I think if we offload several fringe players we could make £20m-£30m and along with our current budget we’d be able to comply with FFP and still make some big signings. 

[Gerard]

1 hour ago, FoxinNotts said:

All seems logical. I didn’t realise we were strapped for cash. Last time I read anything relating to Leicester’s finances, we’d just made a mint from our CL exploits, and we were being bankrolled by KP with loans covering the training ground etc

 

We're not strapped for cash but we don't have unlimited funds either.

 

£80m net spend is astronomical for a club like ours and is unsustainable. Only both the Manchester clubs have averaged more than an £80m net spend over the last five years. This table is net spend over the last five years:

 

Edited 25 June 2019 by Gerard

[splinterdream]

52 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

Rather have a new stand tbh

[urban.spaceman]

35 minutes ago, Fightforever said:

The problem is simple beacuse of our first team squads talent most the pl prize money just about covers our wage bill.

 

Therefore we need to offload players that we dont use in order to be competitive in the transfer market:

 

Jakupovic 23k 

Fuchs 50k 

James 35k 

Morgan 60k 

Slimani 80k 

Silva 80k

King 40k

Gezzal 45k 

 

 

413k a week in total

 

These players get paid way too much for the role they play in our squad.

 

Get their wages lowered or removed and that is easily enough for tielemans wage if he were to join, a new winger, and a new striker's wages. 

Fuchs and Morgan have renewed for one more year.

 

Everyone else can go

[Bayfox]

33 minutes ago, ajthefox said:

You what?!

Well it's hardly London or Manchester is it. If our multi millionaire players fancy a walk round bradgate park or Rutland great. But I think London has a little more to offer in terms of nightlife and being set up for VIP and not getting noticed. 

 

**** Vardy went in the casino and it made national news. 

 

Sometimes we need to stop thinking like fans and realise there is life outside our county and these players aren't picking us because we would.

[Bayfox]

5 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

Fuchs and Morgan have renewed for one more year.

 

Everyone else can go

Only if we pay up. All have time left on their deals and I'm sure I've read Brendan has told kingy and James they are welcome to stick around

 

The only way we lose the others are to take loans or pay up contracts.

[st albans fox]

49 minutes ago, Fightforever said:

The problem is simple beacuse of our first team squads talent most the pl prize money just about covers our wage bill.

 

Therefore we need to offload players that we dont use in order to be competitive in the transfer market:

 

Jakupovic 23k 

Fuchs 50k 

James 35k 

Morgan 60k 

Slimani 80k 

Silva 80k

King 40k

Gezzal 45k 

 

 

413k a week in total

 

Those players get paid way too much for the roles they play in our squad.

 

Get their wages lowered or removed and that is easily enough for tielemans wage if he were to join, a new winger, and a new striker's wages. 

How does that work then ?

 

 

[WarehamFox]

16 minutes ago, Gerard said:

 

We're not strapped for cash but we don't have unlimited funds either.

 

£80m net spend is astronomical for a club like ours and is unsustainable. Only both the Manchester clubs have averaged more than an £80m net spend over the last five years. This table is net spend over the last five years:

 

If that's real we have spent less Euro's than Wet Spam, Boremouth, Palace and even Brighton! Even only 10 million more than Wolves and they are only one season in the Prem.

[murphy]

15 minutes ago, WarehamFox said:

If that's real we have spent less Euro's than Wet Spam, Boremouth, Palace and even Brighton! Even only 10 million more than Wolves and they are only one season in the Prem.

That's a good point.  In fact, when you look at the clubs below us, I believe all have had spells outside the PL since we've been up which obviously means they have spent less.  That makes us one of the lowest spenders in the division .

 

The exceptions being Spurs (massive stadium to pay for) and Southampton who have sold lots of players for big money.

 

 

Edited 25 June 2019 by murphy

[murphy]

7 hours ago, Ginger_Filbert said:

Manchester United are willing to pay more than Manchester City for Leicester City centre-back Harry Maguire, 26, but the England international would prefer a move to Premier League champions City. (Sun)

 

Off the BBC gossip page. Let the bidding war commence...

It does seem to be Man City's modus operandi to show interest, bid low and rely on the pull of being such dominant champions to get the player to force through the move.  Mahrez again.

 

If we do get bids, I hope the club hold firm and don't entertain a lower bid from Man City regardless of Harry's preference.

[Babylon]

2 hours ago, FoxinNotts said:

All seems logical. I didn’t realise we were strapped for cash. Last time I read anything relating to Leicester’s finances, we’d just made a mint from our CL exploits, and we were being bankrolled by KP with loans covering the training ground etc

The loans are against the club, we'll be paying that back ourselves. There has been little indication it's being financed by KP, even if it was we'd pay them back like we do the ground. The champions league was a long time, that money is either long spent or put towards the infrastructure projects. 

[Ric Flair]

2 hours ago, Dusty said:

I don’t know if I agree with this, I don’t think we’re in a position where we need to sell big in order to improve our squad. Selling Harry could disrupt the squad, there’s no guarantee that the replacement will be better and it’s signals to our other important players that we’re happy to sell. I think if we offload several fringe players we could make £20m-£30m and along with our current budget we’d be able to comply with FFP and still make some big signings. 

Sell it to me, tell me how we can bring in around £100m worth of players without selling a key player like Maguire. Which fringe players are going and for what price? 

[Ric Flair]

19 minutes ago, Babylon said:

The loans are against the club, we'll be paying that back ourselves. There has been little indication it's being financed by KP, even if it was we'd pay them back like we do the ground. The champions league was a long time, that money is either long spent or put towards the infrastructure projects. 

What people also forget is we are still paying off previous transfers as a lot of them are phased over a number of years. We aren't suddenly going to spend £50-100m net spend, it astonishes me why this doesn't compute.

[Dr The Singh]

2 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Sell it to me, tell me how we can bring in around £100m worth of players without selling a key player like Maguire. Which fringe players are going and for what price? 

Take a loan out, I here quickquid offer good rates.

[st albans fox]

1 minute ago, Ric Flair said:

What people also forget is we are still paying off previous transfers as a lot of them are phased over a number of years. We aren't suddenly going to spend £50-100m net spend, it astonishes me why this doesn't compute.

I love the way people seem to know stuff ...... you may be right but then again .........(by the way, there is a huge difference between 50 and 100!)

[Fightforever]

1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

How does that work then ?

 

 

Players getting sold and contract renegotiations.

[Ric Flair]

5 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

I love the way people seem to know stuff ...... you may be right but then again .........(by the way, there is a huge difference between 50 and 100!)

There is a big difference but baring in mind we haven't to date spent anywhere near that, it's a fair statement to make. 

[st albans fox]

3 minutes ago, Fightforever said:

Players getting sold and contract renegotiations.

A) selling a player (downwards) doesn’t generally change what you owe them. Those we want to sell have limited fee value and clubs they would go to won’t pay them what we are - hence we have to pay them the shortfall over the balance of their LCFC contract period.

 

b) why would a player renegotiate their contract downwards ?

[st albans fox]

6 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

There is a big difference but baring in mind we haven't to date spent anywhere near that, it's a fair statement to make. 

It’s fair on the 9th August .....until then it isn’t ..... last summer, Claude wasn’t trusted to spend big beyond mahrez fee .....the summer before, neither was shakey.  

 

Brendan is trusted and will be backed .......