Leicester have borrowed from MacQuarie again secured on future TV and KDH money

[Clever Fox]

8 hours ago, bigpapagoldy said:

What’s the maximum the KP could be expanded too ? 

Based on the current plans from 32000 seated Stadium to somewhere around 42000 seater.

 

If they are are allowed some standing area as many are calling for then that number could be increased further.

[MPH]

14 hours ago, Clever Fox said:

Based on the current plans from 32000 seated Stadium to somewhere around 42000 seater.

 

If they are are allowed some standing area as many are calling for then that number could be increased further.

 

im a bit worried that by the time they bring back a standing area, all those that used to love standing  ( me included) will be too old to enjoy it!

[Paninistickers]

14 hours ago, Clever Fox said:

Based on the current plans from 32000 seated Stadium to somewhere around 42000 seater.

 

If they are are allowed some standing area as many are calling for then that number could be increased further.

Hell will freeze over before Whelan sanctions young lads standing 

[sylofox]

4 hours ago, Paninistickers said:

Hell will freeze over before Whelan sanctions young lads standing 

Seems the whole club thinks standing will make it like the 80's all over again.

[tylesta]

20 hours ago, Clever Fox said:

Based on the current plans from 32000 seated Stadium to somewhere around 42000 seater.

 

If they are are allowed some standing area as many are calling for then that number could be increased further.

Safe standing won't make any diffrence

[Paninistickers]

Legit question.

 

Based on the fact we have already received the money for the two parachute payments - and inturn those payments go to Macquarie instead - where do we actually get the working capital from to pay even a vastly reduced wage bill and the running costs of Seagrave? 

 

Last time it was done via Madders, Barnes, Castagne raising 80m

 

But, we might only pull in 25m-35m this time in a fire sale..

 

What will they do?

[Foxes_Trust]

6 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

Legit question.

 

Based on the fact we have already received the money for the two parachute payments - and inturn those payments go to Macquarie instead - where do we actually get the working capital from to pay even a vastly reduced wage bill and the running costs of Seagrave? 

 

Last time it was done via Madders, Barnes, Castagne raising 80m

 

But, we might only pull in 25m-35m this time in a fire sale..

 

What will they do?

You don’t get a parachute payment if you get promoted, so we only will have received one for the 23/24 season

[StanSP]

11 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

Legit question.

 

Based on the fact we have already received the money for the two parachute payments - and inturn those payments go to Macquarie instead - where do we actually get the working capital from to pay even a vastly reduced wage bill and the running costs of Seagrave? 

 

Last time it was done via Madders, Barnes, Castagne raising 80m

 

But, we might only pull in 25m-35m this time in a fire sale..

 

What will they do?

Get the youth in. Rely on them building their profile, go through a big rebuild of playing squad and culture at the club, and reinvest through the sale of the pure profit of the youth players. 

[Bilo]

1 minute ago, StanSP said:

Get the youth in. Rely on them building their profile, go through a big rebuild of playing squad and culture at the club, and reinvest through the sale of the pure profit of the youth players. 

It's how Seagrave could finally end up working for us. There are some solid prospects who could play for us for a couple of years, replace some of the big names on huge wages, get a vaguely coherent playing style again and then either get us back up or sold on for pure profit.

[Paninistickers]

3 minutes ago, Foxes_Trust said:

You don’t get a parachute payment if you get promoted, so we only will have received one for the 23/24 season

Happy to be wrong here, but I think we have taken out loans against the two parachute payments we are guaranteed for this season in the PL..

 

So 25/26 we have cashed in with Macquarie and 26/27 (which if we are still in championship would have been 50% of the normal money) ....I'm pretty sure both have been already paid up by Macquarie 

[Paninistickers]

5 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Get the youth in. Rely on them building their profile, go through a big rebuild of playing squad and culture at the club, and reinvest through the sale of the pure profit of the youth players. 

Yeah but I mean, how will we actually pay the annual running costs of, say, 50m quid if we haven't got any income aside from transfers (which may fall way short of 50m) 

Edited 5 April by Paninistickers

[Blue-fox]

4 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

Yeah but I mean, how will we actually pay the annual running costs of, say, 50m quid if we haven't got any income aside from transfers (which may fall way short of 50m) 

They’ll probably take another loan based on the next parachute payments. 

[Paninistickers]

1 minute ago, Blue-fox said:

They’ll probably take another loan based on the next parachute payments. 

But that's kinda my point. We've already taken them. There are no more guaranteed parachutes after 26/27. And we've already spent that this season..

 

So the question is - and always has been from me and some others on here - what money, actual real money, will they have to run the club if the transfer income doesn't cover our running costs? 

[coolhandfox]

24 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

Legit question.

 

Based on the fact we have already received the money for the two parachute payments - and inturn those payments go to Macquarie instead - where do we actually get the working capital from to pay even a vastly reduced wage bill and the running costs of Seagrave? 

 

Last time it was done via Madders, Barnes, Castagne raising 80m

 

But, we might only pull in 25m-35m this time in a fire sale..

 

What will they do?

You just what the finance is secure on, you just refinance and play the loan of with another loan 

[Blue-fox]

1 minute ago, Paninistickers said:

But that's kinda my point. We've already taken them. There are no more guaranteed parachutes after 26/27. And we've already spent that this season..

 

So the question is - and always has been from me and some others on here - what money, actual real money, will they have to run the club if the transfer income doesn't cover our running costs? 

Oh I thought that we would get more as we have just been re-relegated. Will have to come from player sales I presume. 

[Paninistickers]

2 minutes ago, Blue-fox said:

Oh I thought that we would get more as we have just been re-relegated. Will have to come from player sales I presume. 

But what if it don't? 

 

2 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

You just what the finance is secure on, you just refinance and play the loan of with another loan 

That seems the only possible way I think. So we are in a position where the club is overtrading,.right? 

[Blue-fox]

Just now, Paninistickers said:

But what if it don't? 

 

That seems the only possible way I think. So we are in a position where the club is overtrading,.right? 

There will be enough pulled in in transfers if we had to do a fire sale of any asset. If you said 5 million for the following (on average):

faes

ndidi

soumare

VK

hermanson

winks

ayew 

Daka

BEK

Justin

Skipp

 

Obviously some are more marketable and more profit than the others, but these are the ones I would think we could shift if needed. 

[st albans fox]

41 minutes ago, Foxes_Trust said:

You don’t get a parachute payment if you get promoted, so we only will have received one for the 23/24 season

Assume he’s referring to next season in the championship - will be way lower than last seasons amount 

[Paninistickers]

2 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Assume he’s referring to next season in the championship - will be way lower than last seasons amount 

Yep, we would get 90m this August 2025 as we line up against, say, Brum. But we won't, as we've already had it. Just from Macquarie instead of PL..

 

Then, unless we got promoted at first attempt, we'd get around 45m in August '26 as we line up v Blackburn...but we won't again as we've already had it from Macquarie to pay for he season we are enjoying now. Macquarie gets that 45m. Not us..

 

Which means, unless we can sell 135m worth of players,.ticket sales and commercial revenue in the next 18 months, we are fcked. However, as @coolhandfox says, we will almost certainly have to take a loan out - of which there is no guarantee we can pay back. 

 

 

 

 

[st albans fox]

5 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

Yep, we would get 90m this August 2025 as we line up against, say, Brum. But we won't, as we've already had it. Just from Macquarie instead of PL..

 

Then, unless we got promoted at first attempt, we'd get around 45m in August '26 as we line up v Blackburn...but we won't again as we've already had it from Macquarie to pay for he season we are enjoying now. Macquarie gets that 45m. Not us..

 

Which means, unless we can sell 135m worth of players,.ticket sales and commercial revenue in the next 18 months, we are fcked. However, as @coolhandfox says, we will almost certainly have to take a loan out - of which there is no guarantee we can pay back. 

 

 

 

 

Do we know how much of the Macquarie loans we actually drew down. I know they were secured against the parachute payments but unless we took all the monies then we may still have some of the next PP to use.

[Paninistickers]

6 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Do we know how much of the Macquarie loans we actually drew down. I know they were secured against the parachute payments but unless we took all the monies then we may still have some of the next PP to use.

Well, why would Macquarie seek a guarantee for all of the money unless they needed it?

 

But even allowing for you being correct, we've DEFINITELY taken the 90m parachute money of the first year,. otherwise why seek a guarantee on the year 2 parachute?

 

And the desperate need for transfer cash (going back as far as Mahrez) indicates what a precarious cashflow tightrope KP walk. We can't ever wait for the instalments of Mahrez, Maguire, Madders, Barnes, KDH...KP always need the money,.like, yesterday. The need for actual hard cash appears unquenchable. Which is more than a little worrying.

 

I don't think KP does well in cold hard cash. Assets,.loans, bonds refinance, crypto, shares - maybe. Cash....hmmmmm

Edited 5 April by Paninistickers

[coolhandfox]

4 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Do we know how much of the Macquarie loans we actually drew down. I know they were secured against the parachute payments but unless we took all the monies then we may still have some of the next PP to use.

Which is a good point, as it a facility that we pull down if needed.

 

@Paninistickers I dont think its a big issue, its just a mechanism to aid cash flow.

[coolhandfox]

1 minute ago, Paninistickers said:

Well, why would Macquarie seek a guarantee for all of the money unless they needed it?

 

But even allowing for you being correct, we've DEFINITELY taken the 90m parachute money of the first year,. otherwise why seek a guarantee on the year 2 parachute?

 

And the desperate need for transfer cash (going back as far as Mahrez) indicates what a precarious cashflow tightrope KP walk. We can't ever wait for the instalments of Mahrez, Maguire, Madders, Barnes, KDH...KP always need the money,.like, yesterday. The need for actual hard cash appears unquenchable. 

Because its like a pre-approved loan, so the club has access to money with having a process to go through.

 

It's a bit like an overdraft facility.

 

 

[Paninistickers]

2 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

Which is a good point, as it a facility that we pull down if needed.

 

@Paninistickers I dont think its a big issue, its just a mechanism to aid cash flow.

I hope you're right..

 

But you have to admit the fact we permanently need transfer cash straight up rather than wait for instalments is a big red flag 

[sharpylcfc]

If we've borrowed against future TV money which I assume is Premier League how does that impact us financially going down?