Leicester at risk of another Premier League PSR charge over latest accounts

[Wymsey]

14 minutes ago, Bert said:

No one fully knows what’s going on. Indications from “experts” are it seems to be we are in breach. Most people on here trying to find ways to convince themselves and everyone else we’ve not breached. Will know for sure by Tuesday. 

Would John Percy know anything regarding this?

[Babylon]

1 hour ago, Ric Flair said:

Swiss Ramble is the best of the best but I do wonder if the training ground sponsorship has been picked up by all these financial experts trying to project potential figures.

We haven't even released our 23/24 accounts, have we, so where exactly does the information come from?

[Wymsey]

Just now, Babylon said:

We haven't even released our 23/24 accounts, have we, so where exactly does the information come from?

Leaked?

A mole at the club?

[HankMarvin]

1 minute ago, Babylon said:

We haven't even released our 23/24 accounts, have we, so where exactly does the information come from?

Dynamic forecast, based on information that is publicly available 

[egg_fried_rice]

5 minutes ago, HankMarvin said:

“Having extended their accounting period to 13 months - filing on 30 June 2023 - to bring Leicester's accounting in line with the rest of the business, the Foxes were not a Premier League member, having handed in their shares after relegation, and therefore could not be bound by the top flight's rules”

The loophole can’t go both ways though can it, on one hand they have said last season they were not a pl member at that time. How can they then claim the £22n reduction doesn’t apply to them the 35m PSR limit is for the top flight teams per season?

What ever the outcome, it’s as shady as **** for a second season. 
Why not just clear the decks and spend less. Ward, Iversen etc 

cannon and coady totally not needed 

 

11 minutes ago, 87fox said:

Swiss Ramble and Stefan Borson have had an interesting back-and-forth about the T / T-1 / T-2 issue on X. I think this is what it's going to boil down to. Ie, we are £12m over on the PL's intent of the rules, but we are £10m under on the way the rules are actually written.

 

Is it the same clause that De Marco picked apart previously?

 

[Babylon]

2 minutes ago, HankMarvin said:

Dynamic forecast, based on information that is publicly available 

But most of the information isn't publicly available and won't be until we publish our accounts. 

Edited 8 January by Babylon

[les-tah]

2 minutes ago, Babylon said:

But most of the information isn't publicly available and won't be until we publish our accounts. 

If its only public info and only £12 million over im sure we can sweep that 12 million somewhere else before its released

[HankMarvin]

7 minutes ago, Babylon said:

But most of the information isn't publicly available and won't be until we publish our accounts. 

 edited below by accident 

Edited 8 January by HankMarvin

[HankMarvin]

He does state estimate on the top.

 

“To answer this question perfectly, we would need access to the accounts for the most recent 2023/24 season, so all figures would be available for the 3-year monitoring period used for the PSR calculation, but unfortunately very few of these have been published to date.

Therefore, we will have to prepare a forecast for 2023/24 for most Premier League clubs, but we should be able to make a reasonable estimate, as key drivers like on-pitch performance, player sales and purchases are already known.”

[Babylon]

Just now, les-tah said:

If its only public info and only £12 million over im sure we can sweep that 12 million somewhere else before its released

He's using data from previous years to estimate a year that's nothing like the previous years due to relegation. There are way too many variables that can change, from wage reductions, to sponsorship etc. If they had a mole feeding them information, I think all these people would be a bit more bullish about it... as it is, it's all "estimates", "could", "maybe", "potentially" etc etc. 

[Bert]

12 minutes ago, Wymsey said:

Would John Percy know anything regarding this?

Not really. Everything that’s being mooted about now is all guesstimating. Until the accounts become public most of the stuff coming out will be the same. 

[Babylon]

Just now, HankMarvin said:

He does state estimate on the top.

 

“To answer this question perfectly, we would need access to the accounts for the most recent 2023/24 season, so all figures would be available for the 3-year monitoring period used for the PSR calculation, but unfortunately very few of these have been published to date.

Therefore, we will have to prepare a forecast for 2023/24 for most Premier League clubs, but we should be able to make a reasonable estimate, as key drivers like on-pitch performance, player sales and purchases are already known.”

But we got relegated, which means a huge chunk of the data is basically null and void. Wages (by far our biggest issue), costs, sponsorships etc he can't possibly know. If he's estimated a 25% drop in wages and our actual drop is 35%, the numbers change drastically, as one example. 

[SouthStandUpperTier]

4 minutes ago, Babylon said:

But most of the information isn't publicly available and won't be until we publish our accounts. 

But we have already had to submit our 23/24 accounts to the PL, along with Everton, Forest and Chelsea I believe. So I guess some figures could be being leaked out to journos with good contacts.

[Dahnsouff]

12 minutes ago, HankMarvin said:

Dynamic forecast, based on information that is publicly available 

Twitter then. 

[HankMarvin]

1 minute ago, Babylon said:

But we got relegated, which means a huge chunk of the data is basically null and void. Wages (by far our biggest issue), costs, sponsorships etc he can't possibly know. If he's estimated a 25% drop in wages and our actual drop is 35%, the numbers change drastically, as one example. 

I don’t know, one way to check would be to see is if he predicted clubs that have previously breached etc and if he had predicted clubs that would and didn’t.

personally, I will take it for what it is a estimate but probably one of the most educated guesses out there.

[StonyFox]

The fact we don't seem to be close to bringing any players in yet makes me think it's close, and the club aren't 100% sure on whether we have breached or not.

 

Chelsea have sold hotels and their womens team to themselves, the latter for £150m apparently! Our women's team isn't worth that much, but surely we could have sold it for £10-15m to cover the estimated £12m breach. 

[Pliskin]

30 minutes ago, HankMarvin said:

Dynamic forecast, based on information that is publicly available 

But what’s public ally available isn’t a true reflection of the accounts. 

[Pliskin]

33 minutes ago, Wymsey said:

Leaked?

A mole at the club?

No chance this happens. Only a very small group of people would be privy to our accounts in full, and it would suicidal for someone to reveal such sensitive data for a cheat pay off. It would become obvious very quickly who would have done it.

[Ric Flair]

8 minutes ago, StonyFox said:

The fact we don't seem to be close to bringing any players in yet makes me think it's close, and the club aren't 100% sure on whether we have breached or not.

 

Chelsea have sold hotels and their womens team to themselves, the latter for £150m apparently! Our women's team isn't worth that much, but surely we could have sold it for £10-15m to cover the estimated £12m breach. 

We were an EFL club during 2023/24 and their rules don't allow for stunts like that. Been interesting to see if we do this during 2024/25.

[HankMarvin]

9 minutes ago, Pliskin said:

But what’s public ally available isn’t a true reflection of the accounts. 

Who knows, it seems a bit odd that that a few days before the accounts are published he predicts 20 clubs chances of breaching PSR. Lots of chances to get stuff wrong.

Edited 8 January by HankMarvin

[TheRobbosuite]

Last year the rumours around Everton & Notts started in December of a breach by the same journalists. We know how that ended.

[HarryDee8]

6 hours ago, CrazyKopCorner said:

If the owners had to sign legally binding guarantors and are continually assessed for their financial ability to meet their obligations I really don't see what the problem is 

Yep I agree with this. If the owners put the money upfront, and it's all vetted and ok. Then there should be no limited to how much you can spend on players. 

 

These financial regulations rules need looking at, protect the club from going bust that's fine, but there should not be a cap on spending

[Angus Scott]

18 hours ago, jayfox26 said:

Just don't accept this at all. Nobody is or ever has suggested we are as big or can compete financially with the "cartel 6", but that doesn't mean we couldn't have remained an established premier league club. Finishing top 6 every season would be unrealistic but after the league win and then the later success with the fa Cup and community shield, plus the top half finishes, we should have built on this to ensure we remained an established premier league club. Finishing in the top 10 every season should have been our aim. That may not have been possible every season but the fact is, only 3-4 years ago, we were miles ahead of the likes of Brentford, Brighton, Fulham, Bournemouth etc in every single aspect, and now we are miles behind these clubs and also the likes of Forest, not to mention the obvious of Newcastle and Villa, but I accept that these clubs are bigger than us and have more financial muscle than we do. Even with the "big 6" plus Villa, Newcastle and West Ham (bigger clubs, more money) that would have still put us within the top 10 clubs in the country had the club been run properly. We should never have allowed all these other clubs to catch us up, never mind over take us and leave us miles behind.  Ultimately, all the good work that was put in whilst Vichai was here has been undone because people at the club took their eye off the ball and allowed the club to spiral into trouble both on and off the pitch with poor leadership and poor decision making. 

Agree entirely. I never expected us to compete for the Champions League every season but with the squad we had built that should have been the foundation for us to be an established Premier League club for years to come. Our route into Europe would probably have come from trying to win one of the 2 cup competitions.

What has happened to us in such a short space of time is criminal

[coolhandfox]

As good as Swiss Ramble is, it's still only an estimate, a best guess using past accounts and snips of information.

[SouthStandUpperTier]

1 minute ago, HarryDee8 said:

Yep I agree with this. If the owners put the money upfront, and it's all vetted and ok. Then there should be no limited to how much you can spend on players. 

 

These financial regulations rules need looking at, protect the club from going bust that's fine, but there should not be a cap on spending

Maybe a luxury tax is the way to go - like in the MLB and NBA. Spend what you want, but you are taxed above a certain threshold and the tax is then divvied out equally amongst the other clubs.