Fire sale due to King Power finances

[SafewayFox]

Will our wish of draining the swamp finally happen with us historically putting OTT prices on our “squad fillers” hopefully having to change due to our need to “trade players”.

 

Seeing the back of Coady, Wout and other high earners, to make us more attractive to potential buyers surely has to be an option to Top and co.

Edited 24 June 2025 by SafewayFox

[Finnegan]

I think you're overlooking how amortisation of player fees work. 

 

We haven't "historically put OTT prices" on our "squad fillers."

 

We just overpaid for players that didn't end up working out and we need to make back the full amount of their remaining amortisation in the year we sell them, otherwise we take a loss for PSR, which we can't afford because our wage bill has been drastically too high compared to our revenue. 

 

This is the first summer that guys like Daka and Soumaré will have a small enough remaining book value that we can sell them for realistic prices without suffering significant losses in the seasons books. 

 

Rudkin is due a lot of criticism but one thing that people give him a silly amount of criticism for is "being bad at selling players." It's not that we're bad at selling, it's that we're bad at buying. We give players too high wages and spend too much on initial fees which makes it impossible to get rid of them.

 

But to answer the base question, are Leicester players going to be sold to fund King Power's problems? No. 

 

Any money we make from player sales will go towards covering the club's losses, else Top's problems will get even worse. If he's going to make any cash off Leicester, it's by selling the club and he'll need it to be in the strongest position possible to do that. 

 

[filbertway]

13 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

I think you're overlooking how amortisation of player fees work. 

 

We haven't "historically put OTT prices" on our "squad fillers."

 

We just overpaid for players that didn't end up working out and we need to make back the full amount of their remaining amortisation in the year we sell them, otherwise we take a loss for PSR, which we can't afford because our wage bill has been drastically too high compared to our revenue. 

 

This is the first summer that guys like Daka and Soumaré will have a small enough remaining book value that we can sell them for realistic prices without suffering significant losses in the seasons books. 

 

Rudkin is due a lot of criticism but one thing that people give him a silly amount of criticism for is "being bad at selling players." It's not that we're bad at selling, it's that we're bad at buying. We give players too high wages and spend too much on initial fees which makes it impossible to get rid of them.

 

But to answer the base question, are Leicester players going to be sold to fund King Power's problems? No. 

 

Any money we make from player sales will go towards covering the club's losses, else Top's problems will get even worse. If he's going to make any cash off Leicester, it's by selling the club and he'll need it to be in the strongest position possible to do that. 

 

 

The forced amortisation really does punish mistakes. I don't really have any sympathy for our board because the rules are the same for everyone. 

 

[Stadt]

34 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

I think you're overlooking how amortisation of player fees work. 

 

We haven't "historically put OTT prices" on our "squad fillers."

 

We just overpaid for players that didn't end up working out and we need to make back the full amount of their remaining amortisation in the year we sell them, otherwise we take a loss for PSR, which we can't afford because our wage bill has been drastically too high compared to our revenue. 

 

This is the first summer that guys like Daka and Soumaré will have a small enough remaining book value that we can sell them for realistic prices without suffering significant losses in the seasons books. 

 

Rudkin is due a lot of criticism but one thing that people give him a silly amount of criticism for is "being bad at selling players." It's not that we're bad at selling, it's that we're bad at buying. We give players too high wages and spend too much on initial fees which makes it impossible to get rid of them.

 

But to answer the base question, are Leicester players going to be sold to fund King Power's problems? No. 

 

Any money we make from player sales will go towards covering the club's losses, else Top's problems will get even worse. If he's going to make any cash off Leicester, it's by selling the club and he'll need it to be in the strongest position possible to do that. 

 

We are bad at selling though. Other clubs do manage to shift unwanted players, not always but more frequently than we do.

 

Off the top of my head we've turned down seemingly adequate bids for Praet, Soumare, Iversen, McAteer etc because they didn't match our lofty valuations. Some of those prior to he current PSR regs too.

 

We also don't hawk players out to the right sort of markets either, we've sold 1 player to Saudi (Musa about 8 years ago), none to MLS, very few to Turkey for any money and we didn't;t do any PSR swap deals despite having one forced on us.

 

Good DoFs/Shrewd clubs realise when players aren't going to work out and flog them for a reasonable price quickly or get creative with loan-to-buys. We are hemmed in by his stupid initial mistakes but he doesn't pull enough of the levers avail be to him. He's a stone age director.

[The whole world smiles]

31 minutes ago, filbertway said:

 

The forced amortisation really does punish mistakes. I don't really have any sympathy for our board because the rules are the same for everyone. 

 

Not to stick up for them but we been hit particularly hard because we had a top 6 squad and top 6 wage bill that became a team in the championship within 1/2 season which has completely strangled the club.

[filbertway]

21 minutes ago, The whole world smiles said:

Not to stick up for them but we been hit particularly hard because we had a top 6 squad and top 6 wage bill that became a team in the championship within 1/2 season which has completely strangled the club.

We did indeed, allowing Rodgers to tank the club probably wasn't their wisest move.

 

[pmcla26]

4 hours ago, Stadt said:

We are bad at selling though. Other clubs do manage to shift unwanted players, not always but more frequently than we do.

 

Off the top of my head we've turned down seemingly adequate bids for Praet, Soumare, Iversen, McAteer etc because they didn't match our lofty valuations. Some of those prior to he current PSR regs too.

 

We also don't hawk players out to the right sort of markets either, we've sold 1 player to Saudi (Musa about 8 years ago), none to MLS, very few to Turkey for any money and we didn't;t do any PSR swap deals despite having one forced on us.

 

Good DoFs/Shrewd clubs realise when players aren't going to work out and flog them for a reasonable price quickly or get creative with loan-to-buys. We are hemmed in by his stupid initial mistakes but he doesn't pull enough of the levers avail be to him. He's a stone age director.

You probably don't notice how many clubs have players in their squad that the fans think aren't good enough or should be moved on. 

 

I'm sure most people outside of LCFC don't think Soumare, Faes, Daka, Coady, Vestergaard etc. aren't rated by a large group of our fans because they haven't been moved on in years. 

[SafewayFox]

5 hours ago, Finnegan said:

I think you're overlooking how amortisation of player fees work. 

 

We haven't "historically put OTT prices" on our "squad fillers."

 

We just overpaid for players that didn't end up working out and we need to make back the full amount of their remaining amortisation in the year we sell them, otherwise we take a loss for PSR, which we can't afford because our wage bill has been drastically too high compared to our revenue. 

 

This is the first summer that guys like Daka and Soumaré will have a small enough remaining book value that we can sell them for realistic prices without suffering significant losses in the seasons books. 

 

Rudkin is due a lot of criticism but one thing that people give him a silly amount of criticism for is "being bad at selling players." It's not that we're bad at selling, it's that we're bad at buying. We give players too high wages and spend too much on initial fees which makes it impossible to get rid of them.

 

But to answer the base question, are Leicester players going to be sold to fund King Power's problems? No. 

 

Any money we make from player sales will go towards covering the club's losses, else Top's problems will get even worse. If he's going to make any cash off Leicester, it's by selling the club and he'll need it to be in the strongest position possible to do that. 

 

I normally agree with most things that you post but couldn’t disagree any harder.

 

Take Iversen as an example, we turned down an offer for him to just let him wind down his contract and play zero minutes for us after that offer, that’s bad business.

 

How many players have we moved on that aren’t the obvious?

 

I also should have phrased it better but with players two years on from an amortisation basis, them moving on should be easier.

 

Coady going to Rangers hopefully is the first of many players to move for a nominal fee but enough to not take a financial hit.

[Stadt]

31 minutes ago, pmcla26 said:

You probably don't notice how many clubs have players in their squad that the fans think aren't good enough or should be moved on. 

 

I'm sure most people outside of LCFC don't think Soumare, Faes, Daka, Coady, Vestergaard etc. aren't rated by a large group of our fans because they haven't been moved on in years. 

I looked at a few transfers from various pl clubs and Everton have shifted Godfrey to Atalanta for £12m.

 

Southampton received £10m+ for Alvarez, Mara, Salisu etc (some starters maybe I don’t know?).

 

Wolves and Villa consistently pick up £5m ish for the likes of Sanson/Podence whereas we have two sorts of departure - big money player we don’t want to lose á la Maddison, Barnes, KDH, or they leave on free.

 

We almost never get anything for players we don’t want, Rudkin is spectacularly bad at it. The £200m+ worth of players that have left on frees is testament to it.

[iancognito]

Lets be honest, never mind a fire sale, you could put Daka and Soumare in the end of season concourse sale and not shift them.

 

It's not just the book values on these guys, it's the wages. Look at the likes of Ward, Vestergaard, Praet, Choudhary and others in the past few years. Even when clubs come in for them they can't agree terms. I remember we agreed to sell Iversen at one point and someone like Wednesday or Derby "expressed genuine shock" at the player's demands.

[wardyfox86]

39 minutes ago, SafewayFox said:

I normally agree with most things that you post but couldn’t disagree any harder.

 

Take Iversen as an example, we turned down an offer for him to just let him wind down his contract and play zero minutes for us after that offer, that’s bad business.

 

How many players have we moved on that aren’t the obvious?

 

I also should have phrased it better but with players two years on from an amortisation basis, them moving on should be easier.

 

Coady going to Rangers hopefully is the first of many players to move for a nominal fee but enough to not take a financial hit.

The last few players i can think of that fetched a fee, that were thought of as not to standard are Musa, Iborra and Lawrence. I remember thinking we actually got decent money for those 3.

 

So yes, I think your point is valid and probably proves that we overpay (fees and wages) for squad players who then can't move sideways or down the football pyramid when they're deemed surplus.

[SafewayFox]

50 minutes ago, iancognito said:

Lets be honest, never mind a fire sale, you could put Daka and Soumare in the end of season concourse sale and not shift them.

 

It's not just the book values on these guys, it's the wages. Look at the likes of Ward, Vestergaard, Praet, Choudhary and others in the past few years. Even when clubs come in for them they can't agree terms. I remember we agreed to sell Iversen at one point and someone like Wednesday or Derby "expressed genuine shock" at the player's demands.

Wasn’t there an offer on the table from Palace though?
 

Coady is on a very large wedge and we’re hopefully shifting him on.

 

With their relegation clauses, a more shrewd DoF would definitely be better at moving players on.

 

 

[Pita]

With the transfer window open can’t see any club rushing for our players 

[Claudio Fannieri]

8 hours ago, Pita said:

With the transfer window open can’t see any club rushing for our players 

Aside from Coady, I don’t think we will see any or much movement in the remainder of this month unless it’s Mads or BEK for PSR purposes, from 1st July and the new financial year will be when the new reduced book values of players kick in, so that will be when it’s more likely to see Soumare, Daka, Faes, VK, Winks etc move on, no club will play a premium to buy them in June instead of July. 

[Lambert09]

Genuinely wonder what happens if we can’t  sell anyone for reasonable fees? If our big assets don’t gain enough interest what do we do? 
 

I wonder how much we need to bring in? Maybe we will look into to January and hope someone’s performed well enough to gain interest 

[Sol thewall Bamba]

2 minutes ago, Lambert09 said:

Genuinely wonder what happens if we can’t  sell anyone for reasonable fees? If our big assets don’t gain enough interest what do we do? 
 

I wonder how much we need to bring in? Maybe we will look into to January and hope someone’s performed well enough to gain interest 

Depends on the relegation clauses and the finances of the year that has dropped off. I can see the squad being very similar to what it was last season because we won't sell too many players (our players are on huge wages and we over-inflate the figures we want for fringe players that the wider footballing world don't feel are very good), and that will lead to us not having much money to spend. 

 

TBH I'd kind of hoping that is the case, the more money Rudkin has to play with the worse for the club long term imo. 

 

Hopefully Rohl can get in the door soon and start to leverage the loan/small fee market. 

[st albans fox]

2 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

Depends on the relegation clauses and the finances of the year that has dropped off. I can see the squad being very similar to what it was last season because we won't sell too many players (our players are on huge wages and we over-inflate the figures we want for fringe players that the wider footballing world don't feel are very good), and that will lead to us not having much money to spend. 

 

TBH I'd kind of hoping that is the case, the more money Rudkin has to play with the worse for the club long term imo. 

 

Hopefully Rohl can get in the door soon and start to leverage the loan/small fee market. 

For players who have relegation wage clauses then I assume wages become less of an issue. For those on 80k that will now drop to 50k, finding a club willing to pay 40k in Europe may be more achievable.  That would mean we only have to cover 500k on a consequential fee reduction. Whilst that’s still a tricky job, it’s miles easier than last summer where the buying club would be looking to take 4m off the price to cover the difference over the two years left on the contracts. ( bouba and daka). 

[Lambert09]

9 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

Depends on the relegation clauses and the finances of the year that has dropped off. I can see the squad being very similar to what it was last season because we won't sell too many players (our players are on huge wages and we over-inflate the figures we want for fringe players that the wider footballing world don't feel are very good), and that will lead to us not having much money to spend. 

 

TBH I'd kind of hoping that is the case, the more money Rudkin has to play with the worse for the club long term imo. 

 

Hopefully Rohl can get in the door soon and start to leverage the loan/small fee market. 

Hope you’re right. My gut tells me if the right moves don’t come we will lose Nelson and possibly players like alves for small fees. basically anyone advantageous from a psr perspective. 
 

id like the new manager to have some say in who we keep and move on. which hopefully might explain why nobody had jumped out the door already.  We saw what Enzo did for players like vesty so who knows, maybe they can make a player out of someone unexpected. 
 

Theres a few that personality wise just need to be shown the door though, whether its a financially helpful move or not. Madness that we are still scraping away at Brendan rot 

[Chrysalis]

On 24/06/2025 at 13:27, Finnegan said:

I think you're overlooking how amortisation of player fees work. 

 

We haven't "historically put OTT prices" on our "squad fillers."

 

We just overpaid for players that didn't end up working out and we need to make back the full amount of their remaining amortisation in the year we sell them, otherwise we take a loss for PSR, which we can't afford because our wage bill has been drastically too high compared to our revenue. 

 

This is the first summer that guys like Daka and Soumaré will have a small enough remaining book value that we can sell them for realistic prices without suffering significant losses in the seasons books. 

 

Rudkin is due a lot of criticism but one thing that people give him a silly amount of criticism for is "being bad at selling players." It's not that we're bad at selling, it's that we're bad at buying. We give players too high wages and spend too much on initial fees which makes it impossible to get rid of them.

 

But to answer the base question, are Leicester players going to be sold to fund King Power's problems? No. 

 

Any money we make from player sales will go towards covering the club's losses, else Top's problems will get even worse. If he's going to make any cash off Leicester, it's by selling the club and he'll need it to be in the strongest position possible to do that. 

 

Not quite right.

 

Simple example.

Player is 10 million amortised over 5 years.

End of year 3, bid comes in for 2 million.

If dont sell, is 4 million losses on the book spread over the remaining 2 years.

If sell is 2 million losses left on the book.  In other words its still a 2 million gain.

In laymans terms, dont get obsessed with book value, selling a player is still better than not selling for finances, especially when wages are considered as well.

Its a big reason we in the mess we in, we seem to have an obsession of meeting our valuation for players to sell them.

Edited 11 July 2025 by Chrysalis

[DezFox]

Can we change the name of this thread to “Fire sale due to performance, attitude and stagnation” 

[norwichfox]

Not long left to get it all sorted:

 

https://flo.uri.sh/visualisation/23712757/embed?auto=1

Edited 15 July 2025 by norwichfox

[FoxesWalk]

Rudkin couldn’t sell a steak in a famine 

[sylofox]

Fire sale 😆 🤣 😂 😹 😆 🤣 😂 

 

I guess Rudkins gone to fetch the ⛽️ petrol and matches.

[smudgerfox]

Worth saying that our position partly reflects the utter financial domination of the EPL over the European leagues. When we cant shift a player to Sevilla because they cant afford his salary something is very wrong. The bottom has dropped out of the mid table transfer market in Spain, France and Italy. Ten years ago we'd have been trading regularly with those kind of clubs..

[LFEFox23]

Realistically there's only a couple of players a think we could demand double figures for ....

 

Bilai - Between £25-30m

Mads - Between £10-15m

Ndidi - Between £7-9m

VK - Between £7-9m

Okoli - Between £7-9m

Soumare - Between £5-7m

Mavididi - Between £5-7m

McAteer - Between £5-7m

Daka - Between £5-7m

Winks - Between £3-5m

Faes - Between £2-4m

Justin - Between £1-2m

Ayew - Under £1m

Vestergaard - Under £1m

Coady - Under £1m

BDCR - Under £1m