EFL Statement - Club has no obligation to submit and agree business plan

[HankMarvin]

When the club knows it can only make 13m losses for this year, it makes it even harder to fathom why we have four GKs, when Ward and Iversen were clearly surplus to requirements in the summer and taking any fee and reducing the wage bill at the same time would’ve been win win. 
instead we will probably be lucky to get any offers and in that time we will have payed millions in their wages.
 

[Ric Flair]

3 minutes ago, HankMarvin said:

When the club knows it can only make 13m losses for this year, it makes it even harder to fathom why we have four GKs, when Ward and Iversen were clearly surplus to requirements in the summer and taking any fee and reducing the wage bill at the same time would’ve been win win. 
instead we will probably be lucky to get any offers and in that time we will have payed millions in their wages.
 

And yet rejected a bid for Iversen last summer. 

[trugerkem]

2 hours ago, st albans fox said:

if you knew we were desperate for money, would you pay 35m for kdh ?

 

JJ would likely bring in around £10/15m if he doesn’t have any further injury issues 

 

neslon is not exposed enough to bring in more than about £10m imo

 

Faes has £9m left on his amortisation this summer. We wouldn’t get more than £12/15m for him so that’s a possible 6m in the plus column 

 

Mads had approx 5m left on his fee. I suppose we could get £15m somewhere which brings in 10m 

 

jakub - all profit but surely no one is paying more than £3/5m for him (and that being generous) 

 

Without knowing for sure, my suspicion is that sponsorship deals run to end June ref ffp to be in line with everything else.  I would be astonished if we could make deals for 24/25 and include the income in psr accounts for 23/24. 

Mbappe won’t be signing for us any time soon then 

[ClaphamFox]

1 minute ago, HankMarvin said:

When the club knows it can only make 13m losses for this year, it makes it even harder to fathom why we have four GKs, when Ward and Iversen were clearly surplus to requirements in the summer and taking any fee and reducing the wage bill at the same time would’ve been win win. 
instead we will probably be lucky to get any offers and in that time we will have payed millions in their wages.
 

If the club believed we were likely to exceed the £13m loss this year and this was widely known (as it apparently was), it explains why Brighton were apparently so surprised that we knocked back their offer for KDH in January. They expected us to take it because they believed we were desperate for the cash, as apparently did the journalist David Ornstein. Then when we turned them down other journalists (Dorsett, Tanner, etc) started pushing a different line - ie, that although we were 'constrained' financially, we did not have to sell KDH to meet P&S rules.

 

So were Brighton and Ornstein right after all, or are we still confident about complying for the current financial year?

[DJ Barry Hammond]

4 minutes ago, HankMarvin said:

When the club knows it can only make 13m losses for this year, it makes it even harder to fathom why we have four GKs, when Ward and Iversen were clearly surplus to requirements in the summer and taking any fee and reducing the wage bill at the same time would’ve been win win. 
instead we will probably be lucky to get any offers and in that time we will have payed millions in their wages.
 

I believe the accounting period currently in question (March 22 to June 23) will include the Forfana transfer monies.

 

It may also include some of the Maddison transfer fee (accounting period was extended to the 30 June 2023), but I also note that the relating loan facility charge with Macquaire didn’t get added until September 2023, so maybe those monies show up in a later set of accounts.

 

Charges relating to Barnes & Castagne were registered in late October.

[st albans fox]

1 minute ago, ClaphamFox said:

 

 

So were Brighton and Ornstein right after all, or are we still confident about complying for the current financial year?

Depends how much they pay for him in June ! 

[st albans fox]

15 minutes ago, HankMarvin said:

When the club knows it can only make 13m losses for this year, it makes it even harder to fathom why we have four GKs, when Ward and Iversen were clearly surplus to requirements in the summer and taking any fee and reducing the wage bill at the same time would’ve been win win. 
instead we will probably be lucky to get any offers and in that time we will have payed millions in their wages.
 

Unless there was a deal in the pipeline which fell through for ward, the explanation must lie in the wages. 
either ward didn’t have a relegation clause or it was in his interest to hang around so that he would be eligible to receive his inflated  PL level wage paying again come this summer if we went back up 

 

this summer he will only have a year left so it’s odd that he would hang around on that basis. (Especially with a euros this June

[Noahfence]

I realise I’ll come across as one of those people having a different opinion just so I don’t fit in or whatever but I’m really struggling to care about all this. 
 

Whether we get a points deduction or not I just can’t find the energy to care. It’s not so much about Leicester just about football in general.
 

Can’t really sum up how I feel. Football just doesn’t seem fun anymore 

[coolhandfox]

5 hours ago, shen said:

One of many issues. If the demand is there, then I understand the players' wish to maximise their income. Don't think they are the source or cause of FFP issues.

What is then? 

[Lineker's Left Foot]

4 minutes ago, Noahfence said:

I realise I’ll come across as one of those people having a different opinion just so I don’t fit in or whatever but I’m really struggling to care about all this. 
 

Whether we get a points deduction or not I just can’t find the energy to care. It’s not so much about Leicester just about football in general.
 

Can’t really sum up how I feel. Football just doesn’t seem fun anymore 

Yep summed it up exactly the same.  Don’t think it will always be like this though 

[Holly B]

3 hours ago, Vestan Pance said:

Keep taking the King Power kool-aid 

So you are saying it costs in excess of £20M to run the training ground every year ?

 

[DJ Barry Hammond]

2 hours ago, Ricey said:

So as I understand it, we are at risk of two sanctions. One for this season in the EFL, which if we get promoted will probably only be a fine as the EFL's hands will be tied, and a second sanction for the 3 PL seasons ending in 22/23, which will become clearer later this month.

 

On the latter, the Merc article states this:

 

We lost a combined total of £120.5m for the first two years of this period, but not all of that will count towards PSR. Important to factor in that both of those seasons included European competition money.

 

With the sales of Fofana and Maddison coming within the 22/23 period, it sounds like it could be tight. The fact the club spent so much in January 23 and didn't force through the Barnes sale by the end of June suggests that we might be ok. Either that or the club is run by idiots, which come to think of it, is more likely.

There’s some significant entries in the 2021 accounts that will likely effect the PS&R calculations.

 

Losses due to Covid were entered as £36 million(!) for that year and I believe clubs can deduct these for PS&R.

 

It also looks like £25 odd million is attributed to Seagrave within the accounts for that year - something that’s been reported to have cost £100 million in total.

 

As you say - the Fofana monies then come into play for the period going to June 2023, plus the King Power debt to equity swap happened removing a significant expense item from forward accounts.

 

The club also leases the stadium via a Hire Purchase agreement with King Power with the cost based on turnover - so potentially another deductible from the headline figures.

 

LCWFC - Associated costs quoted as a £1.6 million cost in 2021, £4.3 million in 2022 - these are definitely deductible figures for PS&R calcs.

 

The one deductible I can’t find any firm costings for is the clubs Academy - but that has to have a significant expense behind it, you’d think at least £10 million a season if not more.

 

Combine these together and you start to think - maybe we’re not too far off for this current year.

 

Perhaps the problem becomes when 2021’s allowable losses drop off the reporting period alongside the reduced Championship allowance and revenue.
 

 

Edited 7 March 2024 by DJ Barry Hammond

[K789]

The ladies budget is much more this year too

[Jazzy_Jeff]

18 minutes ago, Noahfence said:

I realise I’ll come across as one of those people having a different opinion just so I don’t fit in or whatever but I’m really struggling to care about all this. 
 

Whether we get a points deduction or not I just can’t find the energy to care. It’s not so much about Leicester just about football in general.
 

Can’t really sum up how I feel. Football just doesn’t seem fun anymore 

I’m with you on this. No real excitement anymore, my passion for Leicester will never waiver but the rest of football just doesn’t bother me 

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

14 minutes ago, K789 said:

The ladies budget is much more this year too

I think you can deduct that whilst the sport is scaling up.

[Lionator]

Just a £210million loss for Chelsea over the past two years. Let's see what happens there.

[Jazzy_Jeff]

1 minute ago, Lionator said:

Just a £210million loss for Chelsea over the past two years. Let's see what happens there.

Nowt. 

[Dames]

1 hour ago, Ric Flair said:

And yet rejected a bid for Iversen last summer. 

The Rudkin special that is. Reject bids for out of favour players hoping to get a higher offer which never comes. 
 

He’s still dining out in the Maguire sale.

[RoboFox]

.

Edited 7 March 2024 by RoboFox

[filbertway]

Wonder how much we paid to the Aussie bank this year, or have we just said, add the interest and you can have a big chunk of our TV money next season.

[gw_leics772]

19 hours ago, Tielemans63 said:

There seems to be a lot of smoke, which usually means one thing....

****ing vapers

[WardyisPukka]

[gw_leics772]

19 hours ago, HUNTA84 said:

Based on this, wouldn't most clubs that get relegated from the premier league be in breach? If the EFL then require a business plan from the relegated clubs because they propose they're going to be in breach, wouldn't the responses from those relegated clubs be exactly the same... somewhere along the lines of, we will sell players to cover this breach, unless we get promoted at the first time of asking, then it doesn't apply.

Sounds like they are changing the rules because of us to penalise relegated clubs for not.meeting efl criteria when they were in the epl. That should help to stop the 3 promoted teams going straight back up. Shame we'll have escaped but then (just like administration points deductions - one for tye cov and forest fans to discuss 😀)

[Ric Flair]

18 minutes ago, Dames said:

The Rudkin special that is. Reject bids for out of favour players hoping to get a higher offer which never comes. 
 

He’s still dining out in the Maguire sale.

Which the press reported at the time that Susan Whelan had to get involved to get the deal done.

[ClaphamFox]

8 minutes ago, WardyisPukka said:

Here's the link to this story: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/leicester-city-sale-financial-breaches-points-deduction-championship-5mh07hjfc

 

They're presenting it as a new development, but in reality it's just a rehash of what we already know. When we submit our accounts for 2022/23 later this month, the PL MIGHT charge us for breaking the rules IF our accounts over the past three years show we are in breach.