Accounts 22/23

[moseeds]

Clearly a board level decision was made to 'go big or go home' and it all seemed plausible. What the board wasn't able to do was recognise when they were throwing good money after bad. Agents were sweet-talking Whelan, Congerton and Rudkin into hyper-inflated salaries and fees. Top should have recognised what was happening but I imagine inexperience and trust got the better of him. He's learned his lesson the hard way. We'll splurge on lawyers but it's inevitable we are docked points somewhere. We deserve it too. I don't think any fan thought players like Smithies, Daka and Vestergaard were on the kinds of salaries they're on. Which is also why nobody will buy them.

 

(Side note: the latest reveals are going to have a massive morale-deflating effect on KDH and other academy products who seem to be as good as the players brought in on 5x the salary.)

 

The club needs a reset. King Power should stay they're good owners overall and cannot be accused of lacking ambition. Top's on a learning curve. He needs to grow up quickly though by making some heads roll - to show he is in charge and won't accept such poor performance. If he can't do that then no lessons have been learned and we could quickly see the club falling into a Sunderland-like abyss.

[worth_the_wait]

5 hours ago, Hitesh said:

The without player trading one is most striking of the all. 

Yep.  A loss of £152 million, the worst in the league.   Good job we made a profit on player sales of £51 million.     Kept our loss down to only £90 million.  Lucky us!   

[Bluetintedspecs]

6 minutes ago, worth_the_wait said:

Yep.  A loss of £152 million, the worst in the league.   Good job we made a profit on player sales of £51 million.     Kept our loss down to only £90 million.  Lucky us!   

Keep the faith or.......

[FoxFossil]

Vichai did have a dream to build a footfall team. Top and KP just view LCFC as part of a consumer brand. Those  crap adverts all about 'Shopping with my sis' on Fox hub really give the game away.

We are not fans just consumers now. Sky and PL part of this theft of our game. Another Tory privatisation success.

[SemperEadem]

2 minutes ago, FoxFossil said:

Vichai did have a dream to build a footfall team. Top and KP just view LCFC as part of a consumer brand. Those  crap adverts all about 'Shopping with my sis' on Fox hub really give the game away.

We are not fans just consumers now. Sky and PL part of this theft of our game. Another Tory privatisation success.

All of this was the same when Vichai was here. This romanticising of him is miles off. We were just as much part of a consumer brand then and arguable a toy and status symbol as we might feel we are today.

[Parker Pen]

14 hours ago, worth_the_wait said:

Premier League clubs' £1bn of losses in 11 charts

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68713522

 

Some interesting charts here.

It’s all about Money Laundering on a global scale. Hidden behind it all are some of the world’s biggest criminals or corrupt government officials. Football players and agents are the new untapped oilfields.

Look at how Barcelona were bankrupted by Messi and his dad /agent.

 

It says it all when PSG have a club shop in Oxford Street London, that hotbed of Parisian support selling Mbappe shirts at £80 a pop, ffs!

 

 

[Dan LCFC]

On 04/04/2024 at 12:35, 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 

That would require them realising they've done wrong so good luck with that.

[Ric Flair]

16 hours ago, Strokes said:

Yes but commercial revenue growth is unobtainable without continued success on the pitch. Chicken and egg.

It’s no longer a proper competition. The Premier League is 3 mini leagues in reality. If PSR is the solution for the non big 6 clubs, I’m not sure I understand what the problem was.

PSR is sky sports wet dream come true. All clubs and fans with any ambition beyond mediocrity should oppose this imo.

I'm not so sure PSR has caused this, the exponential popularity of the Premier League and there sheer wealth has caused this.

 

Every PL side has benefitted from that in recent years vs the rest of Europe hence why muck like Bournemouth can sign players ahead of the likes of AC Milan, Marseille etc. 

 

The gulf between the big 6 and the rest is commercial revenue. Spurs didn't increase theirs massively because of PSR to the detriment to the rest of the league, they have had a specific plan that at times has frustrated their fanbase but it's enabled them to stay relatively close to the rest. 

 

I suppose the only club right now that is truly hamstrung by PSR vs the big 6 is Newcastle. If it was unlimited spending they would make an absolute mockery of the rest, including Man City and I'm not so sure that would be a wholesome experience for the rest of us.

 

PSR in its current guise is flawed and it needs changing but I don't see what can occur that really levels the playing field.

[WigstonWanderer]

5 hours ago, cityfanlee23 said:

Sounds feasible my only concern would be that there would need to be some sort of rule of a legal contract on that gift, since some owners would give the money as a “gift” then just asset strip the clubs to get their money back if they lost interest. 
 

I’m sure with a bit of thought it’s possible to set up a set of rules and parameters that acknowledge that the top 6 derive more revenue, but allow other clubs to stand a chance of competing.

 

The question is whether that would be accepted by those top clubs. If they throw their weight around I’ve no doubt the football authorities would quickly cave. I’m sure they are much more content with the current cartel.

Edited 5 April by WigstonWanderer

[Strokes]

3 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

I'm not so sure PSR has caused this, the exponential popularity of the Premier League and there sheer wealth has caused this.

 

Every PL side has benefitted from that in recent years vs the rest of Europe hence why muck like Bournemouth can sign players ahead of the likes of AC Milan, Marseille etc. 

 

The gulf between the big 6 and the rest is commercial revenue. Spurs didn't increase theirs massively because of PSR to the detriment to the rest of the league, they have had a specific plan that at times has frustrated their fanbase but it's enabled them to stay relatively close to the rest. 

 

I suppose the only club right now that is truly hamstrung by PSR vs the big 6 is Newcastle. If it was unlimited spending they would make an absolute mockery of the rest, including Man City and I'm not so sure that would be a wholesome experience for the rest of us.

 

PSR in its current guise is flawed and it needs changing but I don't see what can occur that really levels the playing field.

I wasn’t saying PSR caused it, but it certainly maintains it.

Other than that I don’t disagree with anything you’re saying.

We have to find a solution that levels it out on the grass because if money wins the game and money isn’t even. Then it barely meets the definition of competition.

What is the point if we are all just here to make up the numbers?

[smudgerfox]

On 03/04/2024 at 15:57, egg_fried_rice said:

Got my years mixed up!

 

Just checked wiki for a more accurate answer - says bonus knockout round prize money for Conference League is:

Knockout round play-offs: €300,000

Round of 16: €600,000
Quarter-final: €1,000,000
Semi-final: €2,000,000

Plus

Europa League qualification: €3,630,000

2 group stage wins: 2 x €630,000

2 group stage draws: 2 x €210,000

 

I make that €9,210,000, so about £8m. Add that to the ~£30m for prem prize money and that's the decrease in revenue about covered.

I think theres tv money from Europe as well as competition money 

[moore_94]

https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/leicester-city-handed-15m-ffp-9236048

 

The 2022/23 accounts say that “The Group and Company also entered into a sponsorship agreement with King Power Duty Free in relation to the stadium naming rights for the 2024.25 season.” Interestingly, it then adds: “and the Seagrave training ground naming rights for the 2023/24, 2023/35 and 2025/26 seasons. £15,000,000 was invoiced in the period with nothing outstanding at the 30 June 2023 (2022: £nil)."

 

The sponsorship agreement for the King Power Stadium only runs for the 2024/25 season. So, in theory, the club could potentially search for a new sponsor for the stadium which could potentially bring a more lucrative deal for the season after next.

[moore_94]

If anyone fancies a laugh it says this in the latest accounts:

 

"The Board of Directors of Leicester City Football Club believe that they acted, both individually and as a group, in a way they consider would be most likely to promote the success of the Company for the benefit of its members as a whole in the decisions taken during the 13 month period ended 30 june 2023."

 

I also find this rather hilarious:

 

"The executive management team of the club meets on average twice a month either in person or via teleconference."

 

No wonder it seems like they haven't got a clue what is going on

Edited 19 April by moore_94

[CosbehFox]

1 hour ago, moore_94 said:

https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/leicester-city-handed-15m-ffp-9236048

 

The 2022/23 accounts say that “The Group and Company also entered into a sponsorship agreement with King Power Duty Free in relation to the stadium naming rights for the 2024.25 season.” Interestingly, it then adds: “and the Seagrave training ground naming rights for the 2023/24, 2023/35 and 2025/26 seasons. £15,000,000 was invoiced in the period with nothing outstanding at the 30 June 2023 (2022: £nil)."

 

The sponsorship agreement for the King Power Stadium only runs for the 2024/25 season. So, in theory, the club could potentially search for a new sponsor for the stadium which could potentially bring a more lucrative deal for the season after next.

Further highlights how shocking the accounts were without such help as this 

[Aus Fox]

2 hours ago, moore_94 said:

If anyone fancies a laugh it says this in the latest accounts:

 

"The Board of Directors of Leicester City Football Club believe that they acted, both individually and as a group, in a way they consider would be most likely to promote the success of the Company for the benefit of its members as a whole in the decisions taken during the 13 month period ended 30 june 2023."

 

I also find this rather hilarious:

 

"The executive management team of the club meets on average twice a month either in person or via teleconference."

 

No wonder it seems like they haven't got a clue what is going on

Twice a month! Twice a ****ing month and by teleconference. You’re a multimillion pound business. 
FFS, twice a month whilst your losing over a million quid a day. This is beyond poor management.

End of review - management at an executive level of the club is nonexistent