Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
happy85

LEICESTER POSTS £67M PRE-TAX LOSS

By happy85, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

st albans fox

st albans fox

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

Without reading anything about this isn't most of this the training ground construction?

has a fair amount to do with it but this cost wasn’t planned to feed directly into a big loss ......if you take out the effects of the pandemic then I suspect there would have been a pre tax loss for that period of around 20m .....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Fox85

Fox85

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

Almost 17 clubs in the premier league are suffering similar costs.

 

Yes it's a lot of money but look at it as a business.

 

Leicester are one of the only clubs that's financial loss has included in a new training ground and buying new land and paying towards new infrastructure for extra 8000 fans.

 

Leicester have spent wisely on the development of the club the majority of the other clubs are on player sales etc wages. Come the end of the season we have a lot of players out of contract as well

 

No need to panic the future is looking fantastic for Leicester and if we do manage to get champions league as well we are going to be in a great position in the next 2 years.

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stadt

Stadt

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, dobbylcfc said:

Maybe now the wollys who’s were very vocal in Jan saying sign this player sign that player will understand why we couldn’t now but I doubt it lol

So we couldn’t have signed anybody on loan? 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Freeman's Wharfer

Freeman's Wharfer

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

Read the article on the official website:

 

Principal costs such as the majority of the Club’s contribution to the Premier League’s broadcaster rebate, were borne in the accounts before the year-end, while the extension of the season’s conclusion has meant almost a quarter of Premier League revenues, prize money and sponsorship revenue will be not recognised as income until the 2020/21 financial year.

 

Such timing variances contributed to a decrease in turnover to £150M (from £178.4M in 2019).

 

It’s quite clearly saying that these figures don’t include 1/4 of the premier league prize money and a load of sponsorship and do include the rebate clubs had to pay to the tv companies (which will be the biggest loss for all of them - ticket revenue is a drop in the ocean in comparison). 
 

To come out of that just £67m down is a very reassuring outcome. In terms of turnover, the difference year on year is £28.4m (hardly a huge deficit to need to make up in today’s world).

 

The £67m headline can look scary but look at it a bit closer and it doesn’t seem so bad. Yes, champions league football

will help but it’s not critical like some are making out.

 

Sell a Hamza Choudhury and get Fuchs and Morgan off the wage bill and you’ve probably covered that £28.4m deficit in turnover. When the tv money comes along for next season it will be there to spend and we’ll still be able to invest in players.

  • Like 19
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Babylon

Babylon

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Freeman's Wharfer said:

Read the article on the official website:

 

Principal costs such as the majority of the Club’s contribution to the Premier League’s broadcaster rebate, were borne in the accounts before the year-end, while the extension of the season’s conclusion has meant almost a quarter of Premier League revenues, prize money and sponsorship revenue will be not recognised as income until the 2020/21 financial year.

 

Such timing variances contributed to a decrease in turnover to £150M (from £178.4M in 2019).

 

It’s quite clearly saying that these figures don’t include 1/4 of the premier league prize money and a load of sponsorship and do include the rebate clubs had to pay to the tv companies (which will be the biggest loss for all of them - ticket revenue is a drop in the ocean in comparison). 
 

To come out of that just £67m down is a very reassuring outcome. In terms of turnover, the difference year on year is £28.4m (hardly a huge deficit to need to make up in today’s world).

 

The £67m headline can look scary but look at it a bit closer and it doesn’t seem so bad. Yes, champions league football

will help but it’s not critical like some are making out.

 

Sell a Hamza Choudhury and get Fuchs and Morgan off the wage bill and you’ve probably covered that £28.4m deficit in turnover. When the tv money comes along for next season it will be there to spend and we’ll still be able to invest in players.

Strange as the rebate was deferred to this season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fox92

Fox92

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, dobbylcfc said:

Maybe now the wollys who’s were very vocal in Jan saying sign this player sign that player will understand why we couldn’t now but I doubt it lol

Omg you mean they couldn't use the £70 from Season ticket renewals?

 

Though if you're using that attitude then explain why, as it clearly states in the report, we still bought in Perez, Praet, Justin and Tielemans...

 

Damn wollys :facepalm:

Edited by Fox92
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest ttfn

Guest ttfn

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Strange as the rebate was deferred to this season. 

Cash wise maybe but if it related to 2019/20 income it needs to be in the 19/20 accounts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest ttfn

Guest ttfn

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

Which accounts did the Maguire money feature in as I thought it was meant to be this one? It didn't feature in 2019 I believe?

Yes should be 19/20 as he was sold after 31 May.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest ttfn

Guest ttfn

Posted
Posted

I wouldn’t read too much into the headline loss figures, if anything the cash flow will be what I’m looking at.

 

Even that is fairly pointless - the Balance Sheet is already 9 Months old and in the Covid world that is a lifetime. The P&L is based off an accounting period that started nearly 2 years ago now.

 

Also worth remembering the enormous cost to our P&L of Slimani and Silva - say we were paying them each £60k/week when they were on loan, plus we’re amortising their transfer fees - that’s got to be a “loss” of £15-20m last year on those two alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest ttfn

Guest ttfn

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

Mad then that turnover was 150m and over half of that would be accounted for by Maguire?

It won’t be classed as turnover

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ozleicester

ozleicester

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, SemperEadem said:

The club said the settlement of a legal dispute also contributed to admin expenses increasing by £5.7 million to £23.9 million.

 

Any ideas?

Fighting Barca to hold onto Tavares

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...