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

[Paninistickers]

Just now, sharpylcfc said:

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

That's my point. Potentially there is none. 

 

Others seem more relaxed though

[CosbehFox]

Just now, Paninistickers said:

That's my point. Potentially there is none. 

 

Others seem more relaxed though

Money comes direct for King Power 

[HankMarvin]

This is when the owner comes in in a year or two and converts debt to equity 

[Paninistickers]

Just now, CosbehFox said:

Money comes direct for King Power 

But there are rules against that. That's why the supposed debt to equity thing happened..

 

It wasn't the 'oh benevolent forever in our hearts his worshipfulness' KP they'd have us believe. They had to do it.

[coolhandfox]

4 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

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 

It's pretty common practice in football, lots of clubs do it.

[CosbehFox]

3 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

But there are rules against that. That's why the supposed debt to equity thing happened..

 

It wasn't the 'oh benevolent forever in our hearts his worshipfulness' KP they'd have us believe. They had to do it.

Different set of rules in the EFL for starters.
 

But the answer is simply the club sell something to make up the difference. That’s why the banks are happy to give it out even though the club on paper was never going to stay out. There’s plenty of assets to get the cash back. 

Edited 5 April 2025 by CosbehFox

[CosbehFox]

3 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

It's pretty common practice in football, lots of clubs do it.

Particularly in the transfwr window era. Your big incoming revenue is focused on two parts of the season. 
 

It’s a tactic very common with big financial funds building property 

Edited 5 April 2025 by CosbehFox

[Ric Flair]

From an accounting perspective this doesn't make that much difference. It's a cash flow thing, which is an issue and we've got massively out of kilter with it for a good 3-4 years. 

[Guest Bilo]

15 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

From an accounting perspective this doesn't make that much difference. It's a cash flow thing, which is an issue and we've got massively out of kilter with it for a good 3-4 years. 

You'd expect that we start to reassess our spending in light of it. Start thinking about players with potential future resale value, there were at least signs of that with BEK and Okoli, and playing some of the young players. It's no coincidence that comfortably our worst season in over a decade has correlated with our most egregious underuse of academy products.

[Nick]

14 hours ago, Bilo said:

You'd expect that we start to reassess our spending in light of it. Start thinking about players with potential future resale value, there were at least signs of that with BEK and Okoli, and playing some of the young players. It's no coincidence that comfortably our worst season in over a decade has correlated with our most egregious underuse of academy products.

The thing that concerns me the most from the position we are in today is that we will sell our best assets with the most promise and future resale value and be left with old dead wood on high wages. I really need to see a proper plan in place rather than a yearly panick-stricken scattergun return fire approach to transfers.