Who is in charge?

[UniFox21]

6 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Another topic to add to the other 6 since losing 3 on the spin and still sitting pretty at the top of the league. We're up there with Cov in terms of weird fanbases

But that's the same attitude we had last season, we need to actually address the underlying issues that had us in this mess 

[Tommy G]

Just now, UniFox21 said:

But that's the same attitude we had last season, we need to actually address the underlying issues that had us in this mess 

But this topic is about who's in charge of the club. Just look at the club webiste or companies house for 5 minutes and it's there, the rest is just hearsay thats covered in 5+ other threads on the forum. 

[Chocolate Teapot]

10 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

But this topic is about who's in charge of the club. Just look at the club webiste or companies house for 5 minutes and it's there, the rest is just hearsay thats covered in 5+ other threads on the forum. 

Applying publicly owned logic to a company that's effectively privately owned (by a family) doesn't really apply here though.

[foxinsocks]

12 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

But this topic is about who's in charge of the club. Just look at the club webiste or companies house for 5 minutes and it's there, the rest is just hearsay thats covered in 5+ other threads on the forum. 

Its about who is really in charge... my worry is that it's not the shareholder....   

[Chocolate Teapot]

40 minutes ago, Babylon said:

People want to look for an easy answer, or a boogie man. The reality is exceptionally complex, from the death of Vichai, to the ultimate power now being with his wife, and not Top (who knows what differences that made in terms of backing). To covid smashing the finances, and the powers that be at UEFA and the Premier league deciding to change FFP rules again. To the club (Top and KP ultimately) deciding to back Rodgers with money rather than sell an asset, which had been our MO for some time.

 

Chuck in the training ground and ground expansion hoovering up money, hiring Rodger's mate as head of recruitment, to not sacking Rodger's early enough. All clubs facing a squeeze financially so that it makes it harder to shift players. To players now being so rich, they will happily just sit out contracts to get the moves (or money) they want. 

 

A load of things all added together that will then create other knock on problems. It's a swirling mess of issues, that no one person is to blame for, with many external factors playing a huge part. 

 

In terms of who is in charge, ultimately it's the KP board and Vichai's wife. We can't possibly know what influence, if any they have. What we do know is Top personally lent the club money out of his own pocket and not that of KP. So it does somewhat hint at a disconnect there in terms of appetite, but again we will likely never know unless someone breaks ranks.

"We can't possibly know what influence"

 

Except we can - the ownership is detailed here:

 

https://www.lcfc.com/club/company-details?lang=en

Edited 5 March by Chocolate Teapot

[Tommy G]

9 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

Applying publicly owned logic to a company that's effectively privately owned (by a family) doesn't really apply here though.

Well it does, ultimately the directors of the business discharge what is happening in 99% of businesses. We know who runs the club, just not sure how much influence they have is a separate topic - which is al just purely speculation. 

[Chocolate Teapot]

11 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Well it does, ultimately the directors of the business discharge what is happening in 99% of businesses. We know who runs the club, just not sure how much influence they have is a separate topic - which is al just purely speculation. 

I mean there's loads of stuff on how family run businesses can defy logic in how they're operated as there's fewer people they answer to and aspirations can completely vary. But yes, complete speculation, if we're ignoring account from those that have ever worked or come close to the club.

[coolhandfox]

I'm Spartacus...

[CrispinLA in Texas]

We really need to get someone who knows the club to run it properly.. ..there's only one option get in a tough character in Nigel Pearson in the boardroom somehow and maybe Puel in as overseas recruitment role....just thinking 

[Babylon]

1 hour ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

"We can't possibly know what influence"

 

Except we can - the ownership is detailed here:

 

https://www.lcfc.com/club/company-details?lang=en

Two different things. King Power are the ultimate power (no pun intended). It is they who lend money and right it off etc, they who own the ground through another company controlled by them K Power Holdings Company Ltd.  Ultimately it's they who own the club. As the parent undertaking they will liekly hold the voting rights and the ability to remove the baord etc. Hence we don't really know what power or sway they exercise, if any. 

 

Before Vichai's death, it was never an issue. He's basically in total control of both, Top certainly isn't in control of both. 

 

"Leicester City Football Club Limited's immediate parent undertaking is King Power International Company LTD (KPI), a company incorporated in Thailand."

 

http://story.kingpower.com/en/executives-en/

 

 

Edited 5 March by Babylon

[Tommy G]

50 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

I mean there's loads of stuff on how family run businesses can defy logic in how they're operated as there's fewer people they answer to and aspirations can completely vary. But yes, complete speculation, if we're ignoring account from those that have ever worked or come close to the club.

The majority of ''family run business'' are SME's though, this isn't. Most of the directors will also very likely be the majority or 100% shareholders, so they don't have to answer to anyone. Slightly different in this case, much bigger business - has a governing body to answer to, banks to answer to, a board of directors with NEDs who aren't shareholders. I get your point but I think we can agree its speculation. 

[Tommy G]

4 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Two different things. King Power are the ultimate power (no pun intended). It is they who lend money and right it off etc, they who own the ground through another company controlled by them K Power Holdings Company Ltd.  Ultimately it's they who own the club. As the parent undertaking they will liekly hold the voting rights and the ability to remove the baord etc. Hence we don't really know what power or sway they exercise, if any. 

 

"Leicester City Football Club Limited's immediate parent undertaking is King Power International Company LTD (KPI), a company incorporated in Thailand."

 

http://story.kingpower.com/en/executives-en/

 

 

Correct. The majority shareholders appoint the directors, so effectively in LCFC's case Top could sack the lot tomorrow and reinstate. 

[Tommy G]

46 minutes ago, CrispinLA in Texas said:

We really need to get someone who knows the club to run it properly.. ..there's only one option get in a tough character in Nigel Pearson in the boardroom somehow and maybe Puel in as overseas recruitment role....just thinking 

Why on earth would you want to get Nigel Pearson appointed to the board. I presume this is a wind up?

[Chocolate Teapot]

49 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Two different things. King Power are the ultimate power (no pun intended). It is they who lend money and right it off etc, they who own the ground through another company controlled by them K Power Holdings Company Ltd.  Ultimately it's they who own the club. As the parent undertaking they will liekly hold the voting rights and the ability to remove the baord etc. Hence we don't really know what power or sway they exercise, if any. 

 

Before Vichai's death, it was never an issue. He's basically in total control of both, Top certainly isn't in control of both. 

 

"Leicester City Football Club Limited's immediate parent undertaking is King Power International Company LTD (KPI), a company incorporated in Thailand."

 

http://story.kingpower.com/en/executives-en/

 

 

The company of which he's both president and CEO? Added to the fact he has majority control at Leicester?

 

No. Its WAY more complicated than that isn't it....

 

He's clearly in charge of the day to day running of the football club. 

Edited 5 March by Chocolate Teapot

[foxinsocks]

2 hours ago, Tommy G said:

But this topic is about who's in charge of the club. Just look at the club webiste or companies house for 5 minutes and it's there, the rest is just hearsay thats covered in 5+ other threads on the forum. 

It's the heresy that might point to who's really calling the shots 

[foxinsocks]

1 hour ago, CrispinLA in Texas said:

We really need to get someone who knows the club to run it properly.. ..there's only one option get in a tough character in Nigel Pearson in the boardroom somehow and maybe Puel in as overseas recruitment role....just thinking 

Please dont repeat these ideas...

[Pita]

4 hours ago, foxinsocks said:

My though too.  But I cant figure out if top is in or out... and if out then who is in charge?

Don’t think the club know either 

[st albans fox]

2 hours ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2023/08/04/leicester-championship-pre-season-tour-premier-league/

 

Percy has more insight than most and there was some telling stuff in here.

 

I'd add to this - only one member of the board was invited to tops wedding and other members have been sidelined since the internal review.

Susan didn’t attend his wedding ????

[leatherhead32]

3 hours ago, indierich06 said:

Genuinely think Top just defers to Rudkin, and Rudkin basically runs most of the show.

 

If I was the owner I would be looking at the likes of Brighton and doing everything in my power to replicate how they're run - Top just seems happy to coast along without any real long term strategy as to what we should be doing.

yes good point brighton steadily moving forward on pitch

[Babylon]

8 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

The company of which he's both president and CEO? Added to the fact he has majority control at Leicester?

 

No. Its WAY more complicated than that isn't it....

 

He's clearly in charge of the day to day running of the football club. 

First and foremost at no moment did anyone suggest he's not in charge of the day to day at Leicester. 

 

If you've been looking at their roles on the website, Top's has been in a state of flux for some time. He was initially Chairman, then CEO and CCO. The change to President and CEO is something that's happened recently. His position moving about was discussed this time last year (President change is since then)

 

Ultimately, he was and is answerable to the board of directors and the Chairwoman of KP; they have to sign it off. Susan Whelan is CEO and board member, but you've recently wanted to boil her power down to being nothing more than commercial. 

 

The point is, Vichai was Chairman and CEO of the controlling company. Top is not. We simply do not know the power makeup at Kingpower currently, how his estate and controlling companies got distributed between the family. It's very hard to find the info. So yes, it COULD be a lot more complicated if opinions on the board and the appetite for LCFC differ oat KP. 

 

King Power is the parent company, they ultimately own the club. So they are ultimately in charge, that doesn't mean Top isn't running it. I repeat "In terms of who is in charge, ultimately it's the KP board and Vichai's wife. We can't possibly know what influence, if any they have".  They might stay out of it entirely, they might not like wasting hundreds of millions of pounds, and use their positions to over rule. 

 

With Top's ups and downs at KP in terms of position, him personally lending the club money rather than KP, it would hint at something going on there.... could also be nothing. 

 

 

 

 

 

[CosbehFox]

42 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Susan didn’t attend his wedding ????

My understanding no. Read from that what you will. 
 

It’s like Succession this club at the upper echelons. Would make a cracking series 

Edited 5 March by CosbehFox

[Chocolate Teapot]

14 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

My understanding no. Read from that what you will. 
 

It’s like Succession this club at the upper echelons. Would make a cracking series 

But how do you know that? You can't prove it.

[Chocolate Teapot]

23 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Ultimately, he was and is answerable to the board of directors and the Chairwoman of KP; they have to sign it off. Susan Whelan is CEO and board member, but you've recently wanted to boil her power down to being nothing more than commercial. 

1. That wasn't suggested by me. It was initially suggested by John Percy and several other reliable media members.

2. Rudkin does not report into Susan Whelan, he reports directly into Top as has also been reported.

3. Rudkin also sits next to Top at every match, which is their in plain sight. Whelan sits on the row behind.

4. This is addition to several other anecdotal accounts both said on here, in the press and lots of other stuff I've heard.

[cruzFOX]

During our hay days vichai was a constant presence at the ground. Not just in meetings but he was everywhere! Changing rooms, meeting players before and after games, charity events etc he properly led by example no matter what. He still had a global empire to control but he made himself available. Now I don’t know Top and I’m not going to blame him for recent times as I don’t know what’s happening behind the scenes. Maybe be we are unrealistic is expecting Top to be just like his dad. Even if he tried to he simply can’t. Just goes to show the magnitude of what vichai did for our club. He was larger than life. Top maybe struggling to lead. It’s a huge responsibility that he’s taken on. Times are now challenging and he doesn’t have the experience of his dad. 
 

Only Top can re-engage if he’s lost focus and only Top can reconnect with the fans and the city during these challenging times.

[CosbehFox]

20 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

But how do you know that? You can't prove it.

Saw the wedding table plan. Putting the Birch next to one of the only two daughters the King of Thailand has was an error considering the other is in a coma. 

Edited 5 March by CosbehFox