2023/24 Financials (The Club made a pre-tax loss of £19.4M for the 12-months to 30 June 2024)

[KFS]

Do we reckon the EFL are going to try it on again?

[87fox]

7 minutes ago, moore_94 said:

It was mentioned that due to a technicality (again) we may still get the full £105m losses for that period

 

We are fine for the period ending 23/24 anyway

 

Borson suggesting our ongoing arbitration relates to TWO seasons of PSR disputes 

[K789]

Just now, KFS said:

Do we reckon the EFL are going to try it on again?

On what grounds.  Looks fine 

[Mickyblueeyes]

As a Club, we still have work to do to return to the consistent heights of the last 15 years and the ability to successfully adapt to different challenges is a strength we will rely on as we build for future seasons

 

The CEO (who doesn’t get involved in football) is classing the last 3 years as a strength ? A show of adaptability ? Are you ****ing kidding me ? Is this asswipe drunk ? 
 

@Foxes_Trust is this the passion that makes you all hot and bothered as a board ? 

[moore_94]

2 minutes ago, 87fox said:

 

Borson suggesting our ongoing arbitration relates to TWO seasons of PSR disputes 

I don’t think he really knows what is going on other than his fag packet maths when it comes to us

[filbertway]

Se we spent £125m in the Championship season. 

 

Imagine if we hadn't gone up!

[AjcW]

17 minutes ago, 87fox said:

That's not a commercial dispute though is it. Commercial clearly indicates sponsorship, FBS break clause of 2.7m (around 10% of full package) sounds about right.

[Happy Fox]

Until King Power depart we will continue to see the same failings off the pitch as well as on the pitch.

[justfoxes]

53 minutes ago, Mike Oxlong said:

And a sneak preview at the introduction to next years’ release 

 

Leicester City Football Club today publishes its annual accounts for the period ending 30 June 2025.

 

After one consecutive season of Premier League football, our only year back in the top flight for the next decade had a marked catastrophic impact on future revenues. An absolute shit show regarding contracts, player and manager recruitment and a lack of leadership, transparency and accountability from those responsible for the running and direction of Leicester City has led to the club not having a pot to piss in for the foreseeable future. This total balls up has enabled the club to achieve an immediate return to the Championship where we hope and pray that it will be able to remain without experiencing a further relegation. 

 

 

To get back to how we were run a few years back we need a complete overhaul of the City Board get rid of Rudkin and Top needs to stand up and be counted, he can’t leave all the financial and playing squad decisions with Rudkin the man has shown he’s totally incompetent and incapable of running a football club on a day to day basis !!

[AjcW]

My biggest question, as it was when we took out this loan, is why did we do this and where has that money been spent?

 

"The Company has also entered into short term discounting facilities with Macquarie bank to bring forward the proceeds from the sale of one player and Premier League revenue distributions."

 

Taken out just before the January window, but not spent, theory is we would be liable to PSR if we had spent it, but if that's the case why haven't we immediately paid it back?

 

I really hope it's being saved for the summer, but at the time I couldn't help shake the feeling it was the start of asset stripping.

[MattFox]

1 hour ago, 87fox said:

From the actual accounts document:
 

What does this relate to??

Is this the JD sports legal issue thing ?

[The Year Of The Fox]

2 minutes ago, AjcW said:

My biggest question, as it was when we took out this loan, is why did we do this and where has that money been spent?

 

"The Company has also entered into short term discounting facilities with Macquarie bank to bring forward the proceeds from the sale of one player and Premier League revenue distributions."

 

Taken out just before the January window, but not spent, theory is we would be liable to PSR if we had spent it, but if that's the case why haven't we immediately paid it back?

 

I really hope it's being saved for the summer, but at the time I couldn't help shake the feeling it was the start of asset stripping.

I think KP are robbing Peter to pay Paul, given how the overall organisation appears to be in trouble (as per those Thailand reports last month) 

[Soar Fox]

6 minutes ago, AjcW said:

My biggest question, as it was when we took out this loan, is why did we do this and where has that money been spent?

 

"The Company has also entered into short term discounting facilities with Macquarie bank to bring forward the proceeds from the sale of one player and Premier League revenue distributions."

 

Taken out just before the January window, but not spent, theory is we would be liable to PSR if we had spent it, but if that's the case why haven't we immediately paid it back?

 

I really hope it's being saved for the summer, but at the time I couldn't help shake the feeling it was the start of asset stripping.

Probably gone to their businesses in Thailand.

[Tommy G]

Just now, Soar Fox said:

Probably gone to their businesses in Thailand.

Presume this is tongue in cheek, be interested to hear the mechanics of taking the proceeds from a commercial lender and ''sent it to Thailand'' 

 

Maybe PWC and HMRC have missed it.

[CosbehFox]

17 minutes ago, AjcW said:

My biggest question, as it was when we took out this loan, is why did we do this and where has that money been spent?

 

"The Company has also entered into short term discounting facilities with Macquarie bank to bring forward the proceeds from the sale of one player and Premier League revenue distributions."

 

Taken out just before the January window, but not spent, theory is we would be liable to PSR if we had spent it, but if that's the case why haven't we immediately paid it back?

 

I really hope it's being saved for the summer, but at the time I couldn't help shake the feeling it was the start of asset stripping.

Strikes me as effectively being used to pay for day to day costs of the club or paying owning transfer fees. One of the rumours was that the summer's spending was done on the provision Cannon was to be sold before 1st September, may be they thought they'd sell another too. 

 

To give any idea, our net current liabilities are £127m - that's some serious bills that need paying. 

 

 

Edited 2 April by CosbehFox

[AjcW]

Also we must be one of the only clubs in history to hire more administrative staff upon relegation  

 

Administration staff

24 - 424

23- 408  

 

[MonarchFox]

18 minutes ago, AjcW said:

My biggest question, as it was when we took out this loan, is why did we do this and where has that money been spent?

 

"The Company has also entered into short term discounting facilities with Macquarie bank to bring forward the proceeds from the sale of one player and Premier League revenue distributions."

 

Taken out just before the January window, but not spent, theory is we would be liable to PSR if we had spent it, but if that's the case why haven't we immediately paid it back?

 

I really hope it's being saved for the summer, but at the time I couldn't help shake the feeling it was the start of asset stripping.

The loan is taken against the sale of a player to get cash in the bank ASAP.

 

For instance Dewsbury Hall sold for £30m.  This could be structured as £5m down and £5m per year for next 5 years.  We take a loan for the £25m and the lender can see we have that income guaranteed.  Supposedly puts us in a better trading position 

[AjcW]

*removed after poster clarifications  

Edited 2 April by AjcW

[CosbehFox]

6 minutes ago, AjcW said:

Also we must be one of the only clubs in history to hire more administrative staff upon relegation  

 

Administration staff

24 - 424

23- 408  

 

Not necessarily clear though - how that translates to working hours. Could be more staff because reduction in hours elsewhere. 

Edited 2 April by CosbehFox

[TheGoldenGod]

Asking Stefan Borson is the equivalent of asking me....he's not got a digeridoo.

Bit like when Kieran McGuire went on The Overlap and did a big "one club is definitely going to breach" insinuating us and we got around it. 

[Tommy G]

13 minutes ago, AjcW said:

9 directors currently share £2.38m

 

An average of £264k per director. 

 

Susan is on £251k so if you take that out the agenda, there's an average of £266k per year across 8 directors.

 

The people running the show currently ladies and gents......  

Where have you got that from? If you are looking at note 5 on the accounts that refers to the pay of statutory directors and highest paid director, not directors by title. 

 

Where is the £2.38m and the 9 directors?

 

Got to be careful how people interpret these accounts. I'm anti KP and the current BofD but £250K a year is probably below market rate these type of roles.

Edited 2 April by Tommy G

[ClaphamFox]

24 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

Strikes me as effectively being used to pay for day to day costs of the club or paying owning transfer fees. One of the rumours was that the summer's spending was done on the provision Cannon was to be sold before 1st September, may be they thought they'd sell another too. 

 

To give any idea, our net current liabilities are £127m - that's some serious bills that need paying. 

 

 

That was the figure at 30 June last year. Since then KP have converted a huge chunk of debt to equity, which would have wiped most of that off.

[Out Foxed]

4 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Where have you got that from? If you are looking at note 5 on the accounts that refers to the pay of statutory directors and highest paid director, not directors by title. 

 

Where is the £2.38m and the 9 directors?

 

Got to be careful how people interpret these accounts. I'm anti KP and the current BofD but £250K a year is probably below market rate these type of roles.

i was going to say. whelan should be on way more than 250k (not cos she's good but just due to her position)

[AjcW]

4 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Where have you got that from? If you are looking at note 5 on the accounts that refers to the pay of statutory directors and highest paid director, not directors by title. 

 

Where is the £2.38m and the 9 directors?

 

Got to be careful how people interpret these accounts. I'm anti KP and the current BofD but £250K a year is probably below market rate these type of roles.

Fair enough, i'm pretty sure i've read it correctly.

 

It states clearly the highest paid director (which will naturally be the CEO) is on £250k, like you say it's probably the going rate, I just wanted to highlight to people who might not have known, how much the people who have got us in to this mess earn.

 

We have 9 directors listed on our "senior management" so that's where I got that from.

 

The 2.38m is directly from note 5 isn't it? 

[moore_94]

7 minutes ago, Out Foxed said:

i was going to say. whelan should be on way more than 250k (not cos she's good but just due to her position)

I don’t think she is on much more than that

 

But remember she also works for King Power so likely gets a bigger wedge that way