Accounts 22/23

[Chelmofox]

16 minutes ago, Collymore said:

It's transfers like Harry Souttar that makes my blood boil. Bought recently for absolutely no reason. He's sat there doing nothing just depreciating. He should have been released on a free in January just like Soumare, Praet and Ward to get off the wage bill. 

 

Daka and Kelechi should have been fire sales sold off cheaply. Instead we will keep all of these for the remainder of their contracts costing us millions and then they'll leave for nothing anyway. 

 

It's like logic goes out of the window with us at management level. I would expect a three year old to be able to run us better than we are. The more I think about it, the more it seems like utter recklessness on a massive scale. 

 

Heads need to roll.

We should release Souttar on a free? On of the PSR/FFP issues is how the P/L of transfer deals are handled. If you dump Souttar for free the whole amortised lump of his fee will show as a loss. Its better to keep, try and loan or work out a role for him. Like Vestegaard, you don't always know how things will pan out.

 

Players not quite working out happens at every club. But you would hope we would be able to deal with it better than we have done. 

[Mike Oxlong]

It would be nice to have a statement from the club explaining from its perspective what went wrong and why, what lessons have been learnt and what it will do differently in the future 

 

I’m not too sure why I should invest my time and money in the club in the next 12 months if those running it avoid providing explanations and demonstrating accountability 

 

[Collymore]

2 minutes ago, Chelmofox said:

We should release Souttar on a free? On of the PSR/FFP issues is how the P/L of transfer deals are handled. If you dump Souttar for free the whole amortised lump of his fee will show as a loss. Its better to keep, try and loan or work out a role for him. Like Vestegaard, you don't always know how things will pan out.

 

Players not quite working out happens at every club. But you would hope we would be able to deal with it better than we have done. 

It's not as if any of what we have done has helped with PSR anyway. In real terms rather than PSR calculations Souttar is likely to cost us £30 odd million with absolutely no return on the field. If we had got rid of him in January we would be saving his contract payments .

 

IMO opinion, someone needs to grab the bull by the horns and admit we've messed up, get rid of the dead wood so we can start again. If that happens to show up negatively on some PSR calculation so be it, things can't get any worse than they are. 

[st albans fox]

2 minutes ago, Collymore said:

No I mean get another club to take over the contract (no one would probably be stupid enough to pay him £50k a week) but wave off the transfer fee. If he isn't backup in the Championship do we seriously think he'll ever play IF we're to get promoted. 

 

I think we need to take some drastic measures to repair. £15m contract £17m fee - a £30m investment that if we go from other patterns is will end up costing us £30m! 

 

We need to learn to cut our losses rather than experiening the full cost each time. 

The problem is that with psr, getting rid of the player means taking the full fee hit left on amortisation (in his case approx 11m) in this financial year.  You can lose his 2.5m wages if you give him away but psr forces you to act in a way that isn’t necessarily best for the club.  So your choice is to keep him and lose 3m amortisation plus 2.5m wages this year or lose 11m.  If we go up then I predict he will be loaned out to the championship next season which will cost us around 25k/week in wage subsidy and we may be able to get 750k loan fee.  Hopefully he has a good season and we can sell him summer 2025 for £6m

[Chelmofox]

2 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

The problem is that with psr, getting rid of the player means taking the full fee hit left on amortisation (in his case approx 11m) in this financial year.  You can lose his 2.5m wages if you give him away but psr forces you to act in a way that isn’t necessarily best for the club.  So your choice is to keep him and lose 3m amortisation plus 2.5m wages this year or lose 11m.  If we go up then I predict he will be loaned out to the championship next season which will cost us around 25k/week in wage subsidy and we may be able to get 750k loan fee.  Hopefully he has a good season and we can sell him summer 2025 for £6m

@Collymore - what this bloke says. Much better explaining this stuff than me!

[Collymore]

1 minute ago, st albans fox said:

The problem is that with psr, getting rid of the player means taking the full fee hit left on amortisation (in his case approx 11m) in this financial year.  You can lose his 2.5m wages if you give him away but psr forces you to act in a way that isn’t necessarily best for the club.  So your choice is to keep him and lose 3m amortisation plus 2.5m wages this year or lose 11m.  If we go up then I predict he will be loaned out to the championship next season which will cost us around 25k/week in wage subsidy and we may be able to get 750k loan fee.  Hopefully he has a good season and we can sell him summer 2025 for £6m

You have a better understanding of it than me. I'd be charging in to the KP and releasing them all on a free.

 

Top wouldn't have a clue or care what I'm doing anyway...

[st albans fox]

Just now, Collymore said:

You have a better understanding of it than me. I'd be charging in to the KP and releasing them all on a free.

 

Top wouldn't have a clue or care what I'm doing anyway...

Some would argue that top is doing that already with rudders at the wheel !

[Spudulike]

9 minutes ago, filbo rob said:

For what it's worth, my view is that Top has abdicated his responsibilities and governance and let Rudkin run the club. He's responsible for the football side of things but obviously is involved with contracts and wages and recruitment etc., Whelan for the business side. As we can see, everything for the past 2 or 3 years, maybe more,  has been a financial disaster. Someone has to take responsibilty for this mess and these two persons should be out of a job, now!

The club gambled chasing top 4 and euro success. It failed but no one can accuse it of 'what if' or 'if only'. The ambition proved to be a bridge too far. 

 

The gamble could've struck gold, wouldn't be the first time that King Power have pulled it off. They have ambition above the likes of Palace or Wolves or Bournemouth. 

 

Responsibility lies at the door of a previous manager and his recruitment team to a large extent. 

[RizLCFC]

Does anyone know how much promotion to the PL would help our finances? Some actual figures would be good. Obviously it adds to the pot, but would it significantly change our transfer capabilities or will we still be scrounging around for bargains/frees.

 

Apologies if this has been mentioned already.

[Clever Fox]

51 minutes ago, RizLCFC said:

Does anyone know how much promotion to the PL would help our finances? Some actual figures would be good. Obviously it adds to the pot, but would it significantly change our transfer capabilities or will we still be scrounging around for bargains/frees.

 

Apologies if this has been mentioned already.

They say promotion will mean an increase in revenue of at least £135million over the next three seasons for the triumphant club.

That could rise to £265m over a five-year period if the club avoids relegation in their first season in the Premier League.

https://talksport.com/football/1108001/championship-play-off-final-worth-money-premier-league/#:~:text=They say promotion will mean,season in the Premier League.

[CosbehFox]

3 hours ago, Mike Oxlong said:

It would be nice to have a statement from the club explaining from its perspective what went wrong and why, what lessons have been learnt and what it will do differently in the future 

 

I’m not too sure why I should invest my time and money in the club in the next 12 months if those running it avoid providing explanations and demonstrating accountability 

 

You won't because simply the top rank of King Power, hierarchy of the board and possibly even deeper to suggest the Royal family of Thailand are all about maintaining reputation and keeping themselves. To admit error is to admit defeat. 

 

When they got panned for the sacking of Ranieri by media, general public and at events they attended, they absolutely hated it. Every managerial sacking has always had in their minds - how does this look to everyone else? 

 

If they weren't embarrassed by relegating one of the strongest ever squads from the PL - are they going to be further embarrassed by this? I don't know but it's pretty maddening from a fans perspective that they can't probably engage. 

[CosbehFox]

Just remember Wolves chased after the European places at the same time as us but they still had the back-up plan of player trading and not being so bloody stupid when it came to building a squad. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, CosbehFox said:

Just remember Wolves chased after the European places at the same time as us but they still had the back-up plan of player trading and not being so bloody stupid when it came to building a squad. 

And also when finances dictated they couldn't strengthen and their manager kept crying about the squad, they replaced him rather than letting the situation fester and only taking action when it was far too late

[LFox99]

1 hour ago, CosbehFox said:

Just remember Wolves chased after the European places at the same time as us but they still had the back-up plan of player trading and not being so bloody stupid when it came to building a squad. 

They're also regularly having to bend over for Mendes and his politics. Sure, they might get a gem of a player here and there but whenever those turn out good, they have to accept a shitty fee a year later and smile while doing so. 

Edited 4 April by LFox99

[HankMarvin]

4 hours ago, Clever Fox said:

They say promotion will mean an increase in revenue of at least £135million over the next three seasons for the triumphant club.

That could rise to £265m over a five-year period if the club avoids relegation in their first season in the Premier League.

https://talksport.com/football/1108001/championship-play-off-final-worth-money-premier-league/#:~:text=They say promotion will mean,season in the Premier League.

Isn’t that fee relative to if the club are already on parachute payments or a club that is coming up from championship money 

Edited 4 April by HankMarvin

[SilverFox]

5 hours ago, Mike Oxlong said:

It would be nice to have a statement from the club explaining from its perspective what went wrong and why, what lessons have been learnt and what it will do differently in the future 

 

I’m not too sure why I should invest my time and money in the club in the next 12 months if those running it avoid providing explanations and demonstrating accountability 

 

They are going to try to defend it (as indefensible as it may be) in legal proceedings to either delay or mitigate.  A statement to the effect of ‘we have messed up’ will not remotely assist them.  At this moment in time (until a sanction has been settled upon) they have to play their cards close to their chest. 

[Clever Fox]

2 minutes ago, HankMarvin said:

Isn’t that fee relative to if the club are already on parachute payments or a club that is coming up from championship money 

I'm not sure to be honest. I assume the 135 mil is the Championship prize money plus at least 1 years revenue from the Premier league.

Obviously that changes depending on if you go up as Champions or runner up positions. And how high you finish in the Premeriership.

 

Then if you stay up for 5 years it can add up to 265mil over 5 years.

[CosbehFox]

38 minutes ago, LFox99 said:

They're also regularly having to bend over for Mendes and his politics. Sure, they might get a gem of a player here and there but whenever those turn out good, they have to accept a shitty fee a year later and smile while doing so. 

And where are the respective clubs now?
 

They’ve cut off Mendes.

 

They did a piece of work in the summer flogging a player off way over his true value to Saudi Arabia. Rudkin et al didn’t have the vision to do such a thing 

[Ric Flair]

11 hours ago, Babylon said:

I don't think anyone wants a wild west siutation, just for them to be allowed to spend if they want, but with it underwritten by them, and ring fenced. 

 

Like most billionaires, the money is tied up in assets, there are few that are cash rich unless they've basically sold a large chunk of their shareholding. Loans are used by billionaires and mega rich companiues all the time. Apple have cash in hand of $70b, but still have borrowed $100b+. It's just an easy way to finance things, over time. Suggesting there is something untoward there isn't fair IMO. 

 

We are already blown out of the water, it's not going to suddenly become vastly different if owners need to use their own money rather than loans, becuase there is little apetite by rich peope to waste their money. Ours have pumped in more personally than most others have.

I know but there's been arguments in Everton's case that high interest has caused them to breach and with us the hike in interest on the loans we have with the Aussie bank will have further impacted on our losses and PSR.

 

Our argument is PSR prevents us trying to be ambitious which maybe valid but I'd counter there's things we are opting not to do that would lessen our loss and they're choosing not to. If PSR is removed and owners can pump in their own money, it's not much different to fronting the loans themselves and not charging any interest or even better, injecting the money directly with no repayment due.

[Ric Flair]

9 hours ago, Strokes said:

By calling out PSR for what it is, does not mean we are calling for zero rules regarding finances.

Asking for a fair and level playing field that doesn’t stifle forward thinking nor favour the status quo is not unreasonable.

I’m not defending our owners by any means but PSR stinks to high heaven.

There isn't a level playing field, the big 6 earn hundreds of millions in commercial revenue over and above the rest of us. The level playing field is limits on what clubs can spend that on or its pooled and shared around alarm NFL (that would be outrageous).

[Strokes]

3 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

There isn't a level playing field, the big 6 earn hundreds of millions in commercial revenue over and above the rest of us. The level playing field is limits on what clubs can spend that on or its pooled and shared around alarm NFL (that would be outrageous).

How can non big 6 clubs build up revenue to ever compete under PSR?

If PSR came in 10-15 years earlier, Man City and Chelsea would be also rans permanently.

Removing external investment, is removing competition. Watching the trophies bounce between the big 6 is like watching a lava lamp.

 

I’d rather clubs go to wall trying to achieve success than be in suspended animation like Palace or Fulham etc.

[CheeseHead]

4 minutes ago, Strokes said:

 

Removing external investment, is removing competition. Watching the trophies bounce between the big 6 is like watching a lava lamp.

 

You're surely not including Spurs in this are you!?

[Ric Flair]

6 minutes ago, Strokes said:

How can non big 6 clubs build up revenue to ever compete under PSR?

If PSR came in 10-15 years earlier, Man City and Chelsea would be also rans permanently.

Removing external investment, is removing competition. Watching the trophies bounce between the big 6 is like watching a lava lamp.

 

I’d rather clubs go to wall trying to achieve success than be in suspended animation like Palace or Fulham etc.

Commercial revenue is their only way, or getting access to Champions League repeatedly. 

 

I'm not against unlimited owner investment but it would not benefit most clubs and probably not us. It will further inflate transfer fees and wages too.

 

Anyway, this all seems pretty futile as UEFA don't seem to be changing their rules so any club qualifying for Europe will eventually have to comply with spending only 70% of their revenue.

[Ric Flair]

3 minutes ago, CheeseHead said:

You're surely not including Spurs in this are you!?

He means us. One of only 6 clubs that win multiple major honours.

[CheeseHead]

8 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

He means us. One of only 6 clubs that win multiple major honours.

Ha, true of course, but he is including Spurs. And I shouldn't call him Shirley.