Leicester City Post Record Losses of £92.5m

[Manley Farrington-Brown]

17 hours ago, String fellow said:

Yes they have - me! Considering that M31 is about 2 million light years from Earth and M63 is more than 10 times further away, obtaining finance from either one of those two galaxies would take far too long to help with City's current plight.  

Well maybe the M1 or M69 would be better bets; both of them are just down the road.

[Stadt]

What the top 6 stuff neglects to mention is we have a much bigger wage bill than most of the league. If we can't compete with richer clubs, poorer clubs shouldn't compete with us. We've been badly ran for a while now. Biggest net spend ever culminated in Daka, Soumare and Vestergaard  

 

Nobody is expecting us to be to 6 every season but we had a huge comparative advantage to cement a top 8 place and we blew it by trusting Rodgers, Rudkin and Congerton for too long.

 

 

[fuchsntf]

3 hours ago, Simoken said:

that model may work in a lesser league but i dont see it being a sustainable model in the PL anymore for the near or longer future, Think we are entering a new era of impatient business and owners trying to rush their way up the top, and now even the Newcastles and maybe forest.... dare i say could be the next club considering the amount they have pumped into it this season. the whole Man city mess 'fingers crossed' is a red flag for the overheads and the masses moving forward but as per usual followed by a slap on the wrist without any real change, i expect that greed will win again in sport. I honestly can see this model taking us down, theres soo much risk than reward and we have seen it this season especially. But most blame Rodgers and ignore the bigger picture, its not always the managers fault.

I like this post for various reasons,including the undertones..

I want to put some ifs,and one point that doesn’t change.

 

If Man.city imploded

If financially the assumed top 3 lost their high financial backing,

if the other so called 3 from top 6, carried their humbler finances forward

Would that end the Power & influence of the PL

You know…I actually doubt it…

Foreign players,no matter what levels,still want to play in the English Leagues.

English top stars rarely roam,I think it’s great that Kane stayed loyal to Spurs.

Beckham could still have stayed longer in England,if Ferguson didn’t interfere with Beckhams off-field interest.& media untruths over his wife.

Rooney stayed.

More top English stars have stayed rather than strayed..

 

The mercenary player syndicate has grown,but foreigners, believe many would be

happy without the astronomical wages,,the average Quality star wages would drop,but still hold a good high

 

The route of the blame on Rodgers,or any manager will always stay the same..

it’s never really the results,but at the moment by city most of the performances are Grotten Shrek. We don’t perform on some days so poor like FTers post will have & can’t stop their runaway cars on toxic critic..but I have to agree we have had far too many,lack of cohesion performances,plus no improvement from coaches,for individual players or team presentation..

The academy despite Barnes,Choudhury,KDH & Thomas,has been honestly quite

pathetic,in delivering at least potential first teamers,not even developed players,that can be sold to championship clubs.
Jesus..the 50s,60s,70s,even 80s, our young reserves,at least broke through to be offloaded through the Profi-divisions,some making short or long term 1st choice

careers..

 

ps…We in a position where Seagrave could turn out to be our white Elephant…I would like to see a sort of developement manager,nothing direct to the first team,works parallel with recruitment management,but more importantly help to create & mesh the Backroom staff..and overseeing player, & coaching developement

One guy comes into thought would be Pearson,his “unfinished business” thoughts & ideas were not bad,help to build an Europe wide enviable new idea & BRoom staff,while he was here..Sort of imploded & no real legacy, Ranieri was allowed to ransack the place with the old fashioned Italian way…There was nobody who took it further..that’s where despite Seagrave we failed…

 

 

 

 

Edited 9 March 2023 by fuchsntf

[Babylon]

13 hours ago, Gamble92 said:

If the signings had been better it wouldn't have been impossible at all. A challenge of course, but more than doable.

 

I actually think we had the best chance in modern times of being the club that consistently breaks the top 6. 

 

All that was undone last summer.

Because we bought duffers, and don't have the endless pots of cash to correct it quickly. Which is exactly what was always going to happen, as the better you do, the more people want your players and staff and eventually you don't get the right replacements. 

[Gamble92]

15 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Because we bought duffers, and don't have the endless pots of cash to correct it quickly. Which is exactly what was always going to happen, as the better you do, the more people want your players and staff and eventually you don't get the right replacements. 

Was giving Bertrand 70k a week an inevitable signing that any of us would have made? Hmmm

[David Lowe]

35 minutes ago, Gamble92 said:

Was giving Bertrand 70k a week an inevitable signing that any of us would have made? Hmmm

Bertrand is an interesting one as I knew a lot of people at the time who thought he would be a solid signing. Vestergaard was a strange one, possibly a panic buy because we had injuries in that position.

[Babylon]

1 hour ago, Gamble92 said:

Was giving Bertrand 70k a week an inevitable signing that any of us would have made? Hmmm

You or anyone else has no idea what he's earning. He was meant to be nothing more than an old head for emergencies. There wasn't much point buying a player at the time as it looks like Thomas might make it and we had Justin, and Castagne and Ricardo. Buying a player just looked like it would stop the progress of a player... we've since learned Thomas isn't up to it and have bought a left back. 

 

So, the signing itself made sense. I had no issue with it and still don't. 

[Ric Flair]

5 hours ago, Simoken said:

that model may work in a lesser league but i dont see it being a sustainable model in the PL anymore for the near or longer future, Think we are entering a new era of impatient business and owners trying to rush their way up the top, and now even the Newcastles and maybe forest.... dare i say could be the next club considering the amount they have pumped into it this season. the whole Man city mess 'fingers crossed' is a red flag for the overheads and the masses moving forward but as per usual followed by a slap on the wrist without any real change, i expect that greed will win again in sport. I honestly can see this model taking us down, theres soo much risk than reward and we have seen it this season especially. But most blame Rodgers and ignore the bigger picture, its not always the managers fault.

I don't see much difference to what is happening now, than previous. The chasing clubs are pushing things to the maximum and we've done so within reason too, attempting to remain successful.

 

Whilst we've done that we've still cashed in on players, which even if you don't have as the forefront of the business model is likely to happen as all but a select few clubs will have players that want to move on. History suggests it's foolish to dismiss this but what clubs ought to do is carefully assess where and whom they can cash in on and the risk if they don't, as well as the reward.

 

I see no reason why this model becomes ineffective, what jeopardises it is bad decision making and the more you sell and buy, you increase the possibility it doesn't work but that's no different to any decisions football clubs make. 

[Gamble92]

1 hour ago, Babylon said:

You or anyone else has no idea what he's earning. He was meant to be nothing more than an old head for emergencies. There wasn't much point buying a player at the time as it looks like Thomas might make it and we had Justin, and Castagne and Ricardo. Buying a player just looked like it would stop the progress of a player... we've since learned Thomas isn't up to it and have bought a left back. 

 

So, the signing itself made sense. I had no issue with it and still don't. 

Well you're a moron then 

[Babylon]

32 minutes ago, Gamble92 said:

Well you're a moron then 

If you don’t understand that signing an old free player, over a younger player, whose going to command a large fee, was the sensible option at the time, then I’m afraid it’s you who is the moron. 
 

The signing didn’t work out, but then neither have loads of ones we spent money on. 

[Gamble92]

5 minutes ago, Babylon said:

If you don’t understand that signing an old free player, over a younger player, whose going to command a large fee, was the sensible option at the time, then I’m afraid it’s you who is the moron. 
 

The signing didn’t work out, but then neither have loads of ones we spent money on. 

It was more that we clearly overruled our previous model of signing players with resale value to get Vestegaard and Bertrand in. Both of whom Southampton fans weren't very sad to see go. 

 

It was a completely disasterous window that's cost us everything.

[LCFCJohn]

7 hours ago, Simoken said:

that model may work in a lesser league but i dont see it being a sustainable model in the PL anymore for the near or longer future, Think we are entering a new era of impatient business and owners trying to rush their way up the top, and now even the Newcastles and maybe forest.... dare i say could be the next club considering the amount they have pumped into it this season. the whole Man city mess 'fingers crossed' is a red flag for the overheads and the masses moving forward but as per usual followed by a slap on the wrist without any real change, i expect that greed will win again in sport. I honestly can see this model taking us down, theres soo much risk than reward and we have seen it this season especially. But most blame Rodgers and ignore the bigger picture, its not always the managers fault.

Not disagreeing with your assessment but basically what is comes down it, is football but particularly English football at the top level is broken beyond repair. 
 

I saw you posted elsewhere, not sure if tongue in cheek or not, something like we will all need billionaire Arab owners. I’m paraphrasing and can’t remember where I saw that so apologies if incorrect.

 

Problem is, that model would fail too as only one team can win and only 4 can qualify for CL. 
 

I do think the model we have tried to use and Brighton use of definitely preferable to what we have done more recently where we have over stretched ourselves. 
 

Not really sure what the answer is but it’s the reason I’m not too bothered if we leave the Premier League (nice way of saying relegation of course) as we might get ‘football’ back!

[Babylon]

5 minutes ago, Gamble92 said:

It was more that we clearly overruled our previous model of signing players with resale value to get Vestegaard and Bertrand in. Both of whom Southampton fans weren't very sad to see go. 

 

It was a completely disasterous window that's cost us everything.

There was no model like that. Fuchs was older, Huth was older, Cambiasso was older, the likes of Okazaki, Morgan, Simpson were hardly spring chickens.

 

Our model was always based on a mix of players. Sometimes we needed a lot of young players, sometimes we needed a few older players. 
 

Yeah it was a disaster, but Bertrand who we were discussing cost us a damn site less than the rest. Soumare might have a bit of resale value but is likely to have cost us far more in the long run.

[Tommy Fresh]

18 minutes ago, Gamble92 said:

It was more that we clearly overruled our previous model of signing players with resale value to get Vestegaard and Bertrand in. Both of whom Southampton fans weren't very sad to see go. 

 

It was a completely disasterous window that's cost us everything.

I don't think signing someone on a free really counts as straying from a selling on model, it's turned out to be a bad signing, but in theory it made more sense than Vestergaard for instance. Despite Bertrand actually turning out to be shit.

Edited 9 March 2023 by Tommy Fresh

[Chrysalis]

On 08/03/2023 at 13:46, Babylon said:

So, you suggest what exactly as a business model?

For a start I would stop the pay day loans to clear 20m a season interest costs of our books.

 

The manager is a big part of the problem as well, he is overpaid, and has caused us to change our player policy, previously we supplied players to the manager and told the manager to work with the tools he had, the manager likely of course had some input, but if the manager couldnt get the best out the tools he had he would likely be sacked.  Instead Rodgers cant organise defending to save his life, so he has persuaded our board to keep buying him player after player to try and fix it and the club cannot afford his failure.

Edited 9 March 2023 by Chrysalis

[Babylon]

53 minutes ago, Chrysalis said:

For a start I would stop the pay day loans to clear 20m a season interest costs of our books.

 

The manager is a big part of the problem as well, he is overpaid, and has caused us to change our player policy, previously we supplied players to the manager and told the manager to work with the tools he had, the manager likely of course had some input, but if the manager couldnt get the best out the tools he had he would likely be sacked.  Instead Rodgers cant organise defending to save his life, so he has persuaded our board to keep buying him player after player to try and fix it and the club cannot afford his failure.

Where on earth are you getting us paying Macquarie £20m in interest?

[HankMarvin]

4 hours ago, Babylon said:

You or anyone else has no idea what he's earning. He was meant to be nothing more than an old head for emergencies. There wasn't much point buying a player at the time as it looks like Thomas might make it and we had Justin, and Castagne and Ricardo. Buying a player just looked like it would stop the progress of a player... we've since learned Thomas isn't up to it and have bought a left back. 

 

So, the signing itself made sense. I had no issue with it and still don't. 

Every search on his wage has him listed on 78- 80k at Leicester.

He was on 62k ish at Southampton so it's a fairly good indicator for a player that then leaves on a Bosman to increase his wages.

[Chrysalis]

On 09/03/2023 at 18:41, Babylon said:

Where on earth are you getting us paying Macquarie £20m in interest?

The accounts, or do you think that interest is going to another entity?

[Babylon]

13 hours ago, Chrysalis said:

The accounts, or do you think that interest is going to another entity?

Please do show us where it says that. It’s clearly listed in the accounts and it’s not all them.

Edited 12 March 2023 by Babylon

[smudger63]

On 09/03/2023 at 17:11, Gamble92 said:

It was more that we clearly overruled our previous model of signing players with resale value to get Vestegaard and Bertrand in. Both of whom Southampton fans weren't very sad to see go. 

 

It was a completely disasterous window that's cost us everything.

Bertrand was brought in to replace Fuchs, he got a higher wage due to him being a free transfer. That's why players, especially of his age and time in his career will run their contract down, for one last big payday.  At the time replacing Fuchs with Bertrand seemed a sensible transfer. It's easy to be wise in retrospect. Vestagaard for me was a strange one, because yes we signed him because of the injury to Fofana, but we had actively been pursuing him for 18 months before that, and yet he was never going to fit into Rodgers high defensive line of playing.  That transfer for me at least, was utterly bizarre.

Edited 12 March 2023 by smudger63

[Babylon]

On 09/03/2023 at 19:13, HankMarvin said:

Every search on his wage has him listed on 78- 80k at Leicester.

He was on 62k ish at Southampton so it's a fairly good indicator for a player that then leaves on a Bosman to increase his wages.

“Every search” You mean every single made up guess, yeah? And you don’t know what he was on at Southampton either, and no “search” is going to show it, unless someone leaked his payslip. 
 

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

52 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Please do show us where it says that. It’s clearly listed in the accounts and it’s not all them.

Says we paid 19m in interest on loans so I'm not sure what point you're making?

 

https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/status/1633216579541389318?t=eSuwTju-V6yB_UFzpPEC-w&s=19

Edited 12 March 2023 by Chocolate Teapot

[Oldblueyes]

As has been shown, the Southampton model  of selling their prize assets  to balance the books has hardly been a major success in their football league position.  Our feeder options from youth teams has backfired due to a lack of talent or coaching. With this in mind, because we failed to sell one of our major assets,  we suddenly end up £93 million in the red. This surely is sailing too close to the wind and unsustainable.

Edited 12 March 2023 by Oldblueyes

[Babylon]

2 hours ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

Says we paid 19m in interest on loans so I'm not sure what point you're making?

 

https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/status/1633216579541389318?t=eSuwTju-V6yB_UFzpPEC-w&s=19

It also lists where the interest payments go. And the interest is 9.7m on bank loans. So the point I’m making is that he’s wrong to say £20m is going on pay day loans ie. Mcquarrie.

Edited 12 March 2023 by Babylon

[Pliskin]

On 09/03/2023 at 16:29, Gamble92 said:

Well you're a moron then 

@Babylon is absolutely right. At the time Bertrand seemed like a good signing. You can’t foresee any issues. I mean, Maddison is proving to be an issue with injuries, he could quite easily be ruled out for the season again. 

Bertrand was a good idea that ultimately turned into a disaster.