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
HUNTA84

Seagrave

By HUNTA84, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

westernpark

westernpark

Posted
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, sacreblueits442 said:

...as I stated, brinkmanship, Top getting Rodgers to the table to lower his payoff, as he was not prepared to pay him( Rodgers) the contracted amount!!!

I have never been to Seagrave but the feedback regarding the build suggests that we have added a lot more than swimming pools. This was money spent on capital expenditure, not money we could have used to improve the playing squad.

Outstanding brinkmanship that meant we had no replacement, and the timing of his departure ultimately compounded our relegation woes!

Yes I know what capital expenditure is, but surely it eventually comes from the same pot? 

Edited by westernpark
Added
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sacreblueits442

sacreblueits442

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, westernpark said:

Outstanding brinkmanship that meant we had no replacement, and the timing of his departure ultimately compounded our relegation woes!

Yes I know what capital expenditure is, but surely it eventually comes from the same pot? 

...no, only monies from trading, that is Gate receipts, Merchandising, sponsorship and Premier League remuneration in regards to final league position can be used to spend on the acquisition of players!!!

  Anything else, such as a cash injection by the owners or loans can be used for infrastructure without affecting FFP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rusko187

Rusko187

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, fox_up_north said:

Fundamentally it's a good plot of land and a saleable asset. Half expect it to be gone within a decade, once we're sold. 

No way, build a stadium there and move us in... Got the whole place in one compound! It's also just up the road from me so there's a selfish element to that suggestion lol 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sacreblueits442

sacreblueits442

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Rusko187 said:

No way, build a stadium there and move us in... Got the whole place in one compound! It's also just up the road from me so there's a selfish element to that suggestion lol 

...you would think the logistics and the road used to access the training facilities have not engendered any good feelings from the motorist that use those roads to and from their place of work!!!

 There would have to be a major change to the access of a stadium and a long drawn out enquiry by the local council be resolve this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
westernpark

westernpark

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, sacreblueits442 said:

...no, only monies from trading, that is Gate receipts, Merchandising, sponsorship and Premier League remuneration in regards to final league position can be used to spend on the acquisition of players!!!

  Anything else, such as a cash injection by the owners or loans can be used for infrastructure without affecting FFP.

I am sure a cash injection from ownership to a limit could be used for transfer funds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sacreblueits442

sacreblueits442

Posted
Posted
Just now, westernpark said:

I am sure a cash injection from ownership to a limit could be used for transfer funds.

...totally against FFP!!!

In the covid era, we could make a loss of £30m a year and our owners had to cover this, from their own pocket. Manchester City got around their cash injection with supposed sponsorship.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
westernpark

westernpark

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, sacreblueits442 said:

...totally against FFP!!!

In the covid era, we could make a loss of £30m a year and our owners had to cover this, from their own pocket. Manchester City got around their cash injection with supposed sponsorship.

Yes so we can have a cash injection of 30 million.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
justfoxes

justfoxes

Posted
Posted
54 minutes ago, sacreblueits442 said:

...totally against FFP!!!

In the covid era, we could make a loss of £30m a year and our owners had to cover this, from their own pocket. Manchester City got around their cash injection with supposed sponsorship.

And a few well filled brown envelopes landing on the right desks😉

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
lcfc_forever

lcfc_forever

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, westernpark said:

The FFP line from the club has been complete nonsense. The issue was a complete lack of available funds, unless a loan was taken out. They will of course be separated in accounts, but ultimately King Power pays for both! So this investment will have been partly (not completely) contributing to the detriment of investing in our squad. 
I agree that FFP in the future will be helped by home grown talent, but can you explain how it helps with current FFP situation?

Kieran Maguire explained it. FFP have certain rules around matching expenditure to income. However, that expenditure doesn't include investment in footballing infrastructure, like academies, so spend there can be used to offset our overall expenditure. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CosbehFox

CosbehFox

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, sacreblueits442 said:

...we have to move on, we cannot use the training ground as a weapon to harpoon the owners and state that we give no acknowledgement of our heritage!!!

We had outgrown Belvoir Drive, which had been developed to the point where any further additions would require extra space in order to incorporate it. We have still held on to it, the ladies' team now has it as their training ground. We could quickly have sold it and used Seagrave for all the football training for males and females Anywhere we had chosen to move to was not going to have a connection to this club. 

   Onwards and upwards.

Can’t sell Belvoir Drive that easy. It’s connected to sporting covenants and the YMCA organisation have the freehold on parts of (if not most of the land). 
 

 

Edited by CosbehFox
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chrysalis

Chrysalis

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, lcfc_forever said:

Completely disagree.

 

It wasn't a choice between Seagrave or extra players - investment in footballing infrastructure is treated differently in accounting. 

 

Seagrave is a massive attraction when trying to attract younger players - you can see the direction of the club with the focus more on developing home-grown talent. The club also know they need to grow the commercial side to drive more revenue so we avoid having summer windows like we did in 2022 to avoid breaching FFP, which made this season a slog. Sadly, they didn't grow it quickly enough, wages ballooned and the marketing has been pretty crap as well - we should be massive in south-east Asia and getting more commercial success there but they haven't done no way near enough. 

 

That's what makes this season so frustrating - we've got so many fundamentals in place or in development, like the stadium expansion - but the people running the club are simply not good enough. The likes of Rudkin and Petty are stealing a living, and Top's naivety has backfired massively. 

 

Developing younger talent and growing our commercial revenue has to be the way forward for sustainable success. 

Its clear we have had cash flow issues, the spout about FFP last summer was nonsense in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hebangsthedrums

hebangsthedrums

Posted
Posted
19 hours ago, sacreblueits442 said:

...we have to move on, we cannot use the training ground as a weapon to harpoon the owners and state that we give no acknowledgement of our heritage!!!

We had outgrown Belvoir Drive, which had been developed to the point where any further additions would require extra space in order to incorporate it. We have still held on to it, the ladies' team now has it as their training ground. We could quickly have sold it and used Seagrave for all the football training for males and females Anywhere we had chosen to move to was not going to have a connection to this club. 

   Onwards and upwards.

Someone has said we can't sell it due to covenants etc, even if that were the case I wouldn't want us to - keep it for some kind of grassroots use etc.

I think there is mileage in moving the ladies team to Seagrave, if anything to reduce the 'rattling around in an airport hangar' feeling that it apparently has.

But I guess there prob isn't space for both now, at least not without reconfiguring a freshly built site which we can ill afford.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ashley

Ashley

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, SemperEadem said:

I don’t see that as a bad thing. Great pitch there and helps keep money in the local scene.

Holmes Park is one of the worst pitches I've ever played on especially for the home of our County FA. 

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...