Accounts 22/23

[tickler28]

1 hour ago, Pliskin said:

They’ve both been injured, and now they’re unlikely to be used because of our situation, there no was Enzo will risk playing them at the minute. 

And if we get promoted to the Premier League there's about a 95% chance that they are not PL standard. You can't throw 2 players who've been out injured for so long and not played any 1st team football at a level above U23 and expect them to perform in the EPL....lambs to the slaughter springs to mind

Edited 3 April by tickler28

[cityfanlee23]

Looks like we are going to need to find a new Pearson esque manager who can come in and build the foundations again on a shoestring and get a team who will run through brick walls for eachother. 
 

This is such a mess, promotion this season is the most important goal of our clubs recent history. 
Go up this season, cut the cloth and accept a hard relegation battle next season, probably resulting in relegation but on a much sounder financial footing. If we go up and Ipswich bottle it, I’d 100% take McKenna and allow him to get relegated and rebuild. 

[Chelmofox]

6 minutes ago, tickler28 said:

And if we get promoted to the Premier League there's about a 95% chance that they are not PL standard. You can't throw 2 players who've been out injured for so long and not played any 1st team football at a level above U23 and expect them to perform in the EPL....lambs to the slaughter springs to mind

Why i replied previously to claims that if we go up we could deal with a points deduction and relegation by leveraging the youth team as part of the rebuild process. It's a situation that could ruin youth players careers and feels massively irresponsible. 

[ClaphamFox]

1 minute ago, cityfanlee23 said:

Looks like we are going to need to find a new Pearson esque manager who can come in and build the foundations again on a shoestring and get a team who will run through brick walls for eachother. 
 

This is such a mess, promotion this season is the most important goal of our clubs recent history. 
Go up this season, cut the cloth and accept a hard relegation battle next season, probably resulting in relegation but on a much sounder financial footing. If we go up and Ipswich bottle it, I’d 100% take McKenna and allow him to get relegated and rebuild. 

I can't see us sacking Maresca if we go up, so unless he decides to quit I think he'll be in charge next season, playing the same style of football. In which case I really hope our scouting department has been putting in the hard yards because we're going to need some inspired player recruitment to stand any chance of staying up.

[JimmyC74]

36 minutes ago, filbertway said:

Well they're still signing 18-22 year olds with high potential so no worries for them there.

 

When they start signing average premier league players on 80-90k a week in their late 20s then they need to start worrying.

Fair point. What I was getting at was they have generated large incoming fees for Potter, Cucarella, Caicedo and McCallister and the prospects of continuing this are remote.

 

Where they are head and shoulders above us in scouting and recruitment (esp. South America) young talent at affordable fees. It is reminiscent of us buying Kante and Mahrez and what we need to get back to.

[Chelmofox]

9 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

I can't see us sacking Maresca if we go up, so unless he decides to quit I think he'll be in charge next season, playing the same style of football. In which case I really hope our scouting department has been putting in the hard yards because we're going to need some inspired player recruitment to stand any chance of staying up.

I'm not sure i understand all the bluster about Enzo needing to spend big. Next year the only goal would be survival, and this would be hamstrung by points deductions anyway.  He is probably the only person in the management team who could come out with any credit next season.

[st albans fox]

Our wage approach is astonishing 

take Bouba and patson 

 

they would likely have been earning. 20k/week in France and Austria 

 

who on earth thought it made sense to give them 80k/week ?  Surely you max at 50k and if they turn out to be mustard then you can give them a new deal 18 months later 

 

vestergaard at 80k is more understandable given his experience and that he was likely already on 50k at soton. Even then surely he would have signed at 65k.  
 

bertrand at 80k/week is often pointed at for being nuts.  But he was a free and considered himself worth a £3m s/o few. So over two years that 3m is 30k/week.  We’ve effectively bought him for 3m on a two year deal and paid him 50k/week.  We have no idea if there was an option for us to extend his two year deal to three at 50k if he’d worked out. 

 

Our general transfer policy was ridiculous. When players are half way through their contracts you

a) offer them a new deal on a reasonable increase if they have excelled

b)  you sell them and cut your losses if necessary 

you don’t have a policy which doesn’t match the commercial size of the club when there is a psr structure in place that prevents you from spending much more than you can earn.   We won’t know if there was resistance in place from some board members and they were over ruled or out voted. To assume that all of them were fully on board (pardon the pun) isn’t something we can second guess. 

 

 

 

[Foxmeister]

It was only a few weeks ago that I found out we have a hugely disproportionate number of forensic accountants on FT.

[Foxy-Lady]

1 hour ago, Babylon said:

It's all very well them saying they were budgeting for x, y, z finish / position. It's not guaranteed, did nobody run a "what if" scenario. That's a flabbergasting loss considering it includes those sales. 

Sadly, what we're now looking at IS the "what if scenario" that doesn't seem to have been considered.

 

Standard business practice to have Risk contingency plans and start implementing them ahead of time as and when the risk becomes apparent/real ....but not sure if the clowns who run our club have the experience of doing that? 

[Babylon]

Just now, Foxy-Lady said:

Sadly, what we're now looking at IS the "what if scenario" that doesn't seem to have been considered.

 

Standard business practice to have Risk contingency plans and start implementing them ahead of time as and when the risk becomes apparent/real ....but not sure if the clowns who run our club have the experience of doing that? 

I'm flabbergasted we spent what we did in the summer knowing how much we'd lost. Especially on players that add almost zero in terms of potential value like Coady. I know getting promoted was critical, but we just look like we've gambled again. 

[cityfanlee23]

24 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

I can't see us sacking Maresca if we go up, so unless he decides to quit I think he'll be in charge next season, playing the same style of football. In which case I really hope our scouting department has been putting in the hard yards because we're going to need some inspired player recruitment to stand any chance of staying up.

Yeah I guess it’s contract dependent really, if we fail to go up can we afford to sack him? 
 

I don’t trust him to be able to make his philosophy work with even worse players, because I 100% don’t trust our scouting department to be able to find the 7-8 gems he will need. 
I sincerely hope he goes if we fail to get promoted. If we play the same way we did against Norwich though I’m still semi confident we can do it 

[CosbehFox]

32 minutes ago, cityfanlee23 said:

Looks like we are going to need to find a new Pearson esque manager who can come in and build the foundations again on a shoestring and get a team who will run through brick walls for eachother. 
 

This is such a mess, promotion this season is the most important goal of our clubs recent history. 
Go up this season, cut the cloth and accept a hard relegation battle next season, probably resulting in relegation but on a much sounder financial footing. If we go up and Ipswich bottle it, I’d 100% take McKenna and allow him to get relegated and rebuild. 

We are looking for a golden dart in that case sadly. Pearson was as much about infrastructure as it was on the field. With Seagrave, it’s not just the case of a few tweaks.
 

It needs fresh blood in the form of three or four personnel hires. Experienced operators. It’s like having the best car on the grid but inexperienced drivers. Even without the last few months, you’d say it’s gone stale. Enzo or any manager needs honest support - what the parameters he’s playing with, and he build a squad/backroom appropriately. We’ve spent too long thinking who we are and forgot who we were 

Edited 3 April by CosbehFox

[Collymore]

There's only one man I know who can get us out of this mess on a small budget who has total control of spending. 

 

[David Lowe]

17 hours ago, davieG said:

 

Leicester City: Championship club report £89.7m in losses after Premier League charge
By Andrew Aloia & Nick Mashiter
BBC Sport
Last updated on15 minutes ago15 minutes ago.
From the sectionLeicester
Breaking news
Leiceter City have reported £89.7m loss for 2022-23 season
Leicester City have reported a loss of £89.7m for the 2022-23 season - taking total losses for their last three Premier League campaigns to over £215m.

The Foxes were charged last month for allegedly breaching profit and sustainability rules (PSR) relating to the figures they have now released.

Top-flight rules permit clubs to lose £105m over a rolling three-year period.

It comes despite the Foxes, who were relegated at the end of last season, making a £74.8m profit in player sales.

 

The Championship club's chief executive Susan Whelan said: "After a sustained period of growth and success for the club during the last decade, the 2022-23 season was a significant setback, the consequences of which will be felt for some time.

"We must now focus on rebuilding and seeking to return to and re-establishing ourselves in the Premier League.

"Having achieved finishing positions in the Premier League of fifth, fifth and eighth in the three preceding seasons, our targets and associated budgets for 2022-23 were entirely reasonable.

"However, for a club such as ours, whose sustained sporting achievements have justified the levels of investment required to compete with the most established clubs and pursue our ambition, a season of such significant under-performance on the pitch presents financial challenges, particularly from the perspective of the game's current Profitability and Sustainability rules."

The Foxes raised about £70m by selling French centre-back Wesley Fofana to Chelsea in August 2022 and England midfielder James Maddison completed a £40m move to Tottenham last summer.

But those figures were offset by the sacking of Brendan Rodgers and his coaching staff in April 2023, and a lower-than budgeted league position.

Rodgers voiced his frustration at the Foxes' inability to spend in the 2022 summer transfer window. At the start of the season he predicted Leicester would struggle and needed to target 40 points to survive - they finished 18th and were relegated with 34 points.

Turnover decreased to £177.3m - down from £214.6m the previous year - but chairman Aiyawatt Srivaddhanaprabha cleared the club's outstanding £194m debt to parent company King Power International last February.

The Foxes owed the amount in loans to KPI, which is owned by the Srivaddhanaprabha family, but a debt-to-equity transfer was completed.

"The long-term and ongoing financial security and commitment provided by Khun Aiyawatt, the Srivaddhanaprabha family and King Power International, enables the club to rebuild with certainty and confidence," added Whelan.

 

The release of Leicester's accounts comes 12 days after they were charged by the Premier League for alleged PSR breaches and for failing to submit audited finances.

Leicester will have "add backs", which includes spending on its women's team and the academy, which will bring their losses down in the Premier League's calculations, while they are reporting for 13 months rather than 12.

This was a long-term club decision to bring Leicester's accounting in line with the rest of the business.

The £215.3m loss over three years includes a £33.1m pre-tax loss from the 2020-21 season, in which they lifted the FA Cup, and the club-record loss of £92.5m a year later.

If found guilty of breaking spending rules, which allows clubs to average losses of £35m per season in the Premier League, Leicester could face a points deduction.

As the case, including any appeals, is likely to run beyond the end of this season, it means any sanctions, if applicable, will be enforced next season.

Premier League sides Everton and Nottingham Forest have already been punished with points deductions this season for breaking rules.

Leicester are also the subject of a separate financial probe by the English Football League (EFL), who then followed up the Premier League charge by imposing a registration embargo on the East Midlands club.

The Foxes reacted

Whelan admitting that they budgeted to keep finishing in the top half - but there have never been any clubs of our size who have consistently finished in the top half.

[filbertway]

14 minutes ago, JimmyC74 said:

Fair point. What I was getting at was they have generated large incoming fees for Potter, Cucarella, Caicedo and McCallister and the prospects of continuing this are remote.

 

Where they are head and shoulders above us in scouting and recruitment (esp. South America) young talent at affordable fees. It is reminiscent of us buying Kante and Mahrez and what we need to get back to.

These are their signings this summer...this doesn't strike me as a team that are abandoning their principles. 

 

De Zerbi has been in the media a few times talking about frustration in the market. Brighton have their way of working - if the coach doesn't like it then he will be free to leave I imagine. This is how to do it. What you don't do is abandon your principles, letting a jumped up little egomaniac keep giving pay rises to the squad so they like him and start signing "project" players on massive money. 

 

[Pliskin]

35 minutes ago, cityfanlee23 said:

Looks like we are going to need to find a new Pearson esque manager who can come in and build the foundations again on a shoestring and get a team who will run through brick walls for eachother. 
 

This is such a mess, promotion this season is the most important goal of our clubs recent history. 
Go up this season, cut the cloth and accept a hard relegation battle next season, probably resulting in relegation but on a much sounder financial footing. If we go up and Ipswich bottle it, I’d 100% take McKenna and allow him to get relegated and rebuild. 

I wouldn’t say relegation is certain, the bottom cluster of clubs are so poor, we may have to sell the likes of KDH, possibly Winks too and Mads for decent money, and wisely reinvest it. We’ve still got a good chance of surviving, if we do it properly, and don’t take any silly risks. 

[JimmyC74]

1 minute ago, filbertway said:

These are their signings this summer...this doesn't strike me as a team that are abandoning their principles. 

 

De Zerbi has been in the media a few times talking about frustration in the market. Brighton have their way of working - if the coach doesn't like it then he will be free to leave I imagine. This is how to do it. What you don't do is abandon your principles, letting a jumped up little egomaniac keep giving pay rises to the squad so they like him and start signing "project" players on massive money. 

 

I agree that we placed too much faith in BR and Congerton and forgot what made us successful. 

[Muzzy_no7]

Has anyone got a breakdown of our results adjusted for FFP from say 17-23? 

[filbertway]

2 minutes ago, Pliskin said:

I wouldn’t say relegation is certain, the bottom cluster of clubs are so poor, we may have to sell the likes of KDH, possibly Winks too and Mads for decent money, and wisely reinvest it. We’ve still got a good chance of surviving, if we do it properly, and don’t take any silly risks. 

 

I've highlighted the flaw in your plan 

[Foxy-Lady]

6 minutes ago, Babylon said:

I'm flabbergasted we spent what we did in the summer knowing how much we'd lost. Especially on players that add almost zero in terms of potential value like Coady. I know getting promoted was critical, but we just look like we've gambled again. 

To gamble and lose the first time could be considered unlucky.......to gamble AGAIN on the back of such a disastrous "loss" should be considered as either incompetent or worse still, negligent dependent on how generous you want to be!

 

either way, repetitive "gambling" is largely based on luck and/or favourable winds.....and you would NOT expect competent and experienced senior executives to run a business that way.

[Chelmofox]

8 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

who on earth thought it made sense to give them 80k/week ?  Surely you max at 50k and if they turn out to be mustard then you can give them a new deal 18 months later 

I've discussed this yesterday, but it's the root of the problems and where others might get caught out too.

 

We are chasing CL spots, just miss out, and want to either get back there or become mainstays of the Europa cup.  We simply can't entice the elite players in - those players negotiate to be in the top 6.

 

But, Tops vision has the best Coach in the land (who we a lucky to have) and the best training facilities in the land. So the answer is simple, you entice in tomorrow's PL talent, who has had a level of success elsewhere, and you let Rodgers + Seagrave fast track them to superstardom.  To help that fast tracking, you pay them now as if they are established stars and amortise their fees over 5 year contacts. No need to deal with any of that negotiating nonsense in 2 years, as by then Man City will be buying them for 100 million anyway.

 

Flaws were:

• Rodgers wasn't as good as Top (and Rodgers) thought he was. 
• A great training facility can't magically turn average players into superstars.
• Paying them as if they've already succeeded gives very little incentive to develop and push on. Once Soumare had his teeth done, what more was there left for him in life?

The training ground is a massive white elephant. I have visions of Top and Rukin going around dumbstruck as to why Praet hasn't turned into Messi yet.

 

[Collymore]

2 minutes ago, Foxy-Lady said:

Especially on players that add almost zero in terms of potential value like Coady.

...but then to not even play him! 

[KFS]

The Coady signing is looking more and more bizarre as the season goes on. Enzo said recently he basically doesn’t play because he’s slow. Who sanctioned his signing for that fee and wages? The bloke basically spends more time doing media and at Wolves games than he does playing for us. So many examples of these across the board

[Chelmofox]

3 minutes ago, KFS said:

The Coady signing is looking more and more bizarre as the season goes on. Enzo said recently he basically doesn’t play because he’s slow. Who sanctioned his signing for that fee and wages? The bloke basically spends more time doing media and at Wolves games than he does playing for us. So many examples of these across the board

I just dont think anyone expected Vestergaard to be as good as he was. Which is odd, as our club singed him!

[Ashley]

30 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Our wage approach is astonishing 

take Bouba and patson 

 

they would likely have been earning. 20k/week in France and Austria 

 

who on earth thought it made sense to give them 80k/week ?  Surely you max at 50k and if they turn out to be mustard then you can give them a new deal 18 months later 

 

vestergaard at 80k is more understandable given his experience and that he was likely already on 50k at soton. Even then surely he would have signed at 65k.  
 

bertrand at 80k/week is often pointed at for being nuts.  But he was a free and considered himself worth a £3m s/o few. So over two years that 3m is 30k/week.  We’ve effectively bought him for 3m on a two year deal and paid him 50k/week.  We have no idea if there was an option for us to extend his two year deal to three at 50k if he’d worked out. 

 

Our general transfer policy was ridiculous. When players are half way through their contracts you

a) offer them a new deal on a reasonable increase if they have excelled

b)  you sell them and cut your losses if necessary 

you don’t have a policy which doesn’t match the commercial size of the club when there is a psr structure in place that prevents you from spending much more than you can earn.   We won’t know if there was resistance in place from some board members and they were over ruled or out voted. To assume that all of them were fully on board (pardon the pun) isn’t something we can second guess. 

 

 

 

Daka was on €7k - £79k at Leicester 

Soumare €16k - £83k at Leicester

 

You're telling me that wouldn't have accepted let's say £30k each?