King Power

[Claudio Fannieri]

The club has given us 2 of the most amazing memories and achievements that I never ever thought I would witness. To win the league and then win the FA Cup was unbelieveable, and fully demonstrated the ambitions the owners had to disrupt the big 6, however I also feel how we reacted to those successes and our subsequent decision making showed a level of naivety, were giddy on success and on both occasions on the club lost focus and made very poor decisions. 
 

Do I want new ownership, I am not sure, as there are so many unscrupulous people out there, but it does need a massive refresh and Top needs experienced football industry leadership alongside him, the club has gone stale and needs new fresh impetus and ideas both in the football and commercial operations. 
 

My only concern is does he have the fire in his belly to make those decisions and then to recruit two respected and experienced operators to help rebuild the club.both on and off the pitch. 

[CosbehFox]

I don’t think a lot of us completely understand the operation of King Power. That’s before you even consider political pressure. 
 

However, there’s two parts to it for me. There’s Top and his lack of decision making or willingness to admit error.
 

Then there’s a whole organisation underneath what don’t want to challenge or alter in fear of upsetting Top. 
 

You can attribute Top to footballing decisions and the other part to fan issues. I’d willing to accept the footballing mess if the club wasn’t so off the mark when it comes to fan engagement. 

[foxfanazer]

It's a shame that the past few years will taint all the joy they've brought us in a lot of fans eyes. I do get it but overall the stewardship of King Power has given us the best times of our lives supporting Leicester.

 

On the flip side I've lost faith in Top as an owner. I'm just not sure he's still interested which is sad to say

[Happy Fox]

1 minute ago, foxfanazer said:

It's a shame that the past few years will taint all the joy they've brought us in a lot of fans eyes. I do get it but overall the stewardship of King Power has given us the best times of our lives supporting Leicester.

 

On the flip side I've lost faith in Top as an owner. I'm just not sure he's still interested which is sad to say

He’s just too far detached from reality, maybe his heart’s not in it?

 

We need an owner who will take more leadership and that’s why I want a change of ownership plus a change of football director etc 

[Foxmeister]

We complain about no signings, bad signings, big contracts, players leaving on frees etc., ultimately, a lot of luck is involved in running a football club.

 

Brighton have recruited and sold well for the last few years but will nose dive at some point in the next decade. 

[SemperEadem]

25 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

I don’t think a lot of us completely understand the operation of King Power. That’s before you even consider political pressure. 
 

However, there’s two parts to it for me. There’s Top and his lack of decision making or willingness to admit error.
 

Then there’s a whole organisation underneath what don’t want to challenge or alter in fear of upsetting Top. 
 

You can attribute Top to footballing decisions and the other part to fan issues. I’d willing to accept the footballing mess if the club wasn’t so off the mark when it comes to fan engagement. 

If that is the case, how disappointing. These staff members are there to do the best possible job for Leicester City Football Club and not an individual.

[VintageFox73]

10 hours ago, MattFox said:

Think the real unpopular take is that we’ve never been well ran off the field 

 

Just look at the scatter gun PL managerial appointments post Pearson

 

Ranieri - Agent driven big name appointment that they  somehow struck gold before predictably turning to crap second season

 

Shakespeare -Should never have been a permanent appointment, panic move driven by the players

 

Puel - Agent driven appointment that ended in failure 

 

Rodgers - Big Name, Big Money, flavour of the month that again turned out long term the way most people outside the club would have expected 

 

 

 

 

Not sure if a agree  100 % with your post.

 

Ranieri - Yeah ill give you that one

 

Shakey- New the club inside out, players knew his methods, short term great appointment but should never of been given the 3 year contract 

 

Puel- Brought stability back to the club and made some great signings which boded well for the next few seasons

 

Rodgers- Right appointment at the time, was pretty impressed with the clubs ambition, 2 top 5 finishes , nothing to say that would of been bettered had someone else been appointed. Yeah we bottled top 4 but was as much down to the players as well as him ( spurs home) ....But gave us the FA Cup. Was the next season it all went wrong for him, wasn't backed , strange decisions etc.

 

All the above played some part in our recent success one way or the other , nothing lasts for ever ! 

[Sly]

When we were in the Premier League, we had 19 other clubs looking trying to be succesful and operate as a business as well. Ultimately three fail every year. 
 

However, from where we were, it was the dramatic fall away that shocked many, rather than the fact it happened. 
 

I mean Everton finally dropping would be like the demise of Wilkos, it was full of guff for years and finally collapsed. 
 

If you lined up the top 20 high street shops in UK shopping, it would be like watching someone like Aldi topple, starting to punch with the big boys of Tesco, Asda, Morrisons, Sainsbury’s, then collapsed! 

Edited 25 March by Sly

[Sly]

If Rodger’s had gone after Forest away (when he should have), he’d be looked at far for fondly on here. 

[foxfanazer]

8 minutes ago, Sly said:

If Rodger’s had gone after Forest away (when he should have), he’d be looked at far for fondly on here. 

This is true. I'd only think of him as a cvnt

[LCFCJohn]

10 hours ago, MattFox said:

Think the real unpopular take is that we’ve never been well ran off the field 

 

Just look at the scatter gun PL managerial appointments post Pearson

 

Ranieri - Agent driven big name appointment that they  somehow struck gold before predictably turning to crap second season

 

Shakespeare -Should never have been a permanent appointment, panic move driven by the players

 

Puel - Agent driven appointment that ended in failure 

 

Rodgers - Big Name, Big Money, flavour of the month that again turned out long term the way most people outside the club would have expected 

 

 

 

 

Puel is the only manager since Pearson who actually had us running well off field. On the pitch may have been dull but in hindsight and with what we had to put up with from Rodgers, I am seeing Puel’s time in an even more positive light! 

[HarryTheGenie]

The reality is that Top inherited a business and a football club in tragic circumstances before he was ever ready to do so. I personally think he just doesn't have the business acumen, nous and motivation that his Father (a self-made man) had. He ultimately is the son of a rich man and like most spoilt rich kids you see in your day to day lives. Entitled, unmotivated and living off his Father's name...

[Lako42]

2 hours ago, HarryTheGenie said:

The reality is that Top inherited a business and a football club in tragic circumstances before he was ever ready to do so. I personally think he just doesn't have the business acumen, nous and motivation that his Father (a self-made man) had. He ultimately is the son of a rich man and like most spoilt rich kids you see in your day to day lives. Entitled, unmotivated and living off his Father's name...

Then he needs to put qualified people in place.

 

He hasn't only not done that, but he has allowed unqualified bits of furniture to get away with complete and utter failure with zero action other than writing a little boy piece in the programme whilst watching us get relegated. 

 

It's a shame, but it sits with him for allowing a few individuals to destroy much of the work his dad did. Quite simply he needs to grown a pair of bollocks and snap out of this entirely predictable nosedive by removing some key personnel and hiring competent people from outside the inner circle. 

 

 

Everthing goes stale without new input and we are the perfect example of that.  

Edited 25 March by Lako42

[ElusiveEd]

I think Leicester City Football Club was Vichai's baby and he treated it as such.

 

I just don't get the same feeling and vibes from Top.

 

Feels more like we are a distant uncle.

[MPH]

13 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

The last few years they’ve had to deal with the death of Vichai, an unprecedented global pandemic that directly attacked their previously successful business model and wiped out a third of Top’s wealth in one go, and highly restrictive financial rules designed by corrupt leagues in favour of corrupt clubs.
 

Despite all that they delivered an FA Cup, two seasons of European football thst would have been Champions League if Brendan hadn’t bottled it or Manchester City’s ban hadn’t been overturned, and showed real ambition by building a world class training facility and getting planning permission for a stadium expansions, hotel, residential complex and arena. 

 

They have a lot to be held responsible for but I don’t think it’s a good idea to change an ownership at all. I’m not a KP fanatic or anything but options for “good” new owners are very slim. 
 

Our relegation and our current situation is an aberration. The hostility shown to us to the Premier League, its “big six” clubs and its pet EFL cannot be ignored.

 

I don’t think we’ll end up unpunished but I do believe the court case and the employment of de Marco shows they we have an opportunity to make a point about the state of football as it is.

 

 

]Let's not forget wiping out our debt... twice!

[Sol thewall Bamba]

6 minutes ago, MPH said:

Let's not forget wiping out our debt... twice!

Not the debt they saddled us with from Macquarie though, absolute masterstroke that's turning into.

[MPH]

9 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

Not the debt they saddled us with from Macquarie though, absolute masterstroke that's turning into.

 

 

It's something they have done several times with it only proving problematic recently.. and im pretty sure all clubs do the same thing - borrow against transfer installments so they can use  the money  immediately. the problem here is that we  didnt have a plan B when things started to go wrong..

 

 

 

EDIT ahem..... please excuse the fact this is the Daily mail... it was just the top link in a google search of many saying the same thing..

 

 

A number of Premier League clubs have increasingly used so-called bridging loans from investment companies to provide up-front access to cash they are owed in transfer instalments from rivals, but Palace’s deal with MGG indicates they are planning for future sales. 

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-13235431/Crystal-Palace-loan-American-lenders-summer-transfer-market-Michael-Olise-Marc-Guehi-Eberechi-Eze-demand.html

 

 

 EDIT again this is probably a better read as to what goes on...

 

https://www.farrer.co.uk/news-and-insights/the-money-game-debt-financing-in-football/

Edited 25 March by MPH

[Sol thewall Bamba]

8 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

 

It's something they have done several times with it only proving problematic recently.. and im pretty sure all clubs do the same thing - borrow against transfer installments so they can use  the money  immediately. the problem here is that we  didnt have a plan B when things started to go wrong..

 

 

 

EDIT ahem..... please excuse the fact this is the Daily mail... it was just the top link in a google search of many saying the same thing..

 

 

A number of Premier League clubs have increasingly used so-called bridging loans from investment companies to provide up-front access to cash they are owed in transfer instalments from rivals, but Palace’s deal with MGG indicates they are planning for future sales. 

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-13235431/Crystal-Palace-loan-American-lenders-summer-transfer-market-Michael-Olise-Marc-Guehi-Eberechi-Eze-demand.html

 

 

 EDIT again this is probably a better read as to what goes on...

 

https://www.farrer.co.uk/news-and-insights/the-money-game-debt-financing-in-football/

At least some of it was borrowed against future TV money which we are now not getting. That's what I was referring to.

[Chocolate Teapot]

4 hours ago, SemperEadem said:

If that is the case, how disappointing. These staff members are there to do the best possible job for Leicester City Football Club and not an individual.

Someone very senior admitted (to someone I know very well) that their job was to keep things out of the way of Top.

[Costock_Fox]

4 hours ago, Sly said:

If Rodger’s had gone after Forest away (when he should have), he’d be looked at far for fondly on here. 

Originally agreed with this but we still would have failed the Prems rules so I don’t completely agree.

 

By Forest away we had made many of the mistakes which have led to this point, but yeah ultimately I would still have expected us to have been a Premier League club.

[Sly]

8 minutes ago, Costock_Fox said:

Originally agreed with this but we still would have failed the Prems rules so I don’t completely agree.

 

By Forest away we had made many of the mistakes which have led to this point, but yeah ultimately I would still have expected us to have been a Premier League club.

I was more on about Rodger’s, rather than our current predicament. 

[st albans fox]

I put this in the embargo thread but it’s relevant here too 

 

whilst it doesn’t tell you everything, it should be noted that the nett asset value of the club over the previous accounting years was 

2017 £143m

2018 £144m
2019 £133m

2020. £72m

2021. £39m

2022  £-44m 

 

there’s a pattern but no doubt someone studying them could advise if we’ve moved assets elsewhere or if this drop of value is down to players who were valued in the books as an asset leaving for nowt in the end 

[Guesty]

I've worked in two toxic organisations.

 

Both had a leader who was a nice person, but totally incapable of the job. Failed to make tough decisions; would just accept what the managers directly underneath them said without questioning or investigating themselves. Just seemed to cross their fingers and hope everything would be alright. The problem was: underneath them were a lot of unethical/untalented managers who would lie - or at the very least, not tell the full story. And the problem with unethical/untalented people is: they attract more unethical/untalented people.

 

Unethical/untalented managers have two main skills. Very good at arse covering and they're very good at taking credit for other peoples work. Which means they have an uncanny ability to hire people who are talented; and like parasites, they ride the wave of successes.

 

In each organisation though the problem came when talented people disagreed with their superiors or wanted a promotion. Unethical/untalented managers never want to be shown up or threatened (and they rarely leave because they might be found out elsewhere). So the talented people would always be forced out sooner or later - or they'd leave for a promotion somewhere else. Then more and more unethical/untalented people would rise within each organisation.

 

And then sooner or later unethical/untalented managers would make wrong appointments. The person/people they'd employed weren't as talented as they'd hoped. Then they'd be in the position of actually having to do their own job and fix mistakes with no help. But they weren't capable. And they made terrible decisions. Both organisations imploded, very quickly, very fast.

 

I obviously have no idea if LCFC is like those organisations, but the more I look at us, the more we're starting to resemble them. It really is a worry.

[lcfc278]

40 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

Someone very senior admitted (to someone I know very well) that their job was to keep things out of the way of Top.

'Out of the way of Top' in terms of so he doesn't have to deal with them like admin-type, run of the mill stuff that he shouldn't have to deal with or 'Out of the way of Top' as in make sure he doesn't find out about them / things he doesn't need to know about kind of thing?

[Chocolate Teapot]

5 minutes ago, lcfc278 said:

'Out of the way of Top' in terms of so he doesn't have to deal with them like admin-type, run of the mill stuff that he shouldn't have to deal with or 'Out of the way of Top' as in make sure he doesn't find out about them / things he doesn't need to know about kind of thing?

Makes sure criticism / noise doesn't reach him.