Chelmofox Posted 7 January Posted 7 January (edited) 21 minutes ago, Bob Weasel Fox said: 0.25 million did you say . . . . Careful Rudders, any one would think you cant negotiate. Edited 7 January by Chelmofox 1
Chrysalis Posted 12 January Posted 12 January (edited) Rudkin wont sell, he will be too obsessed with the book value being met yet again. Edited 12 January by Chrysalis
Jon the Hat Posted 13 January Posted 13 January 5 hours ago, Chrysalis said: Rudkin wont sell, he will be too obsessed with the book value being met yet again. He has to be obsessed with the book value being met. 4
moore_94 Posted 13 January Posted 13 January (edited) Monaco interest has cooled - L’Equipe reporter Edited 13 January by moore_94
StanSP Posted 13 January Posted 13 January It was either Faes or Soumare. No other football club is as dumb as us to have them both in your team at the same time. 2
ajthefox Posted 13 January Posted 13 January On 07/01/2026 at 16:46, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said: Posted this in the match thread, I was shocked and happy for a second, then I realised it was just 💩 reporting Someone confused Cannon and Soumare?!
ian__marshall Posted 13 January Posted 13 January Just now, ajthefox said: Someone confused Cannon and Soumare?! No, they also have a player called Soumare. No doubt his far superior twin. 2
AKCJ Posted 13 January Posted 13 January Jelly and ice cream when this div goes. Plays like he's wearing jeans. 1 2
jim5000 Posted 13 January Posted 13 January On 02/12/2025 at 10:36, Sol thewall Bamba said: He's been here 4 seasons (not counting his loan) and we've been relegated in 2 of them and at our lowest eb in 18 years in another. "There's a player in there" though apparently. And he was bought with the express intent of pushing us into the top 4 of the Premier League
Popular Post Chrysalis Posted 13 January Popular Post Posted 13 January (edited) 20 hours ago, Jon the Hat said: He has to be obsessed with the book value being met. No he doesnt, there is this misconception that you must meet book value otherwise there is no gain on PSR, I have had to explain a few times why this is not the case. Its called cutting your losses. Lets say you have 2 years left on a 5 year contract, 40 million amortised over 5 years plus 4 million a year salary. With two years left you have 24 million liability on the books. You sell the player for a million, and no longer have to pay salary, this 24 million liability is now reduced to a 15 million liability, a 9 million gain from the previous position. Clubs routinely do these type of transactions to clear out dead wood, but LCFC are stubborn hence the difficulties we have. Turning down multiple offers for Iversen as an example, to only let him go for nothing and pay an extra couple of years wages. In the world of football you win some and you lose some, KPFC are struggling to understand you cant be assured of selling for what you paid. Its not like the normal business world. Edited 13 January by Chrysalis 9
Molson Canadian Posted 13 January Posted 13 January Meanwhile Boubakary Soumare was rejected by the same club Boubakary Soumare was supposed to be on his way to Côte d'Azur (the French Riviera) as well. Lucky guys! Although, it appears the Frenchman won't be in the Casino de Monte-Carlo spending that unbelievable £80,000-per-week he took home on Filbert Way just yet: 🚨 AS Monaco's interest in #Leicester City midfielder Boubakary Soumaré has cooled and they are now looking at other options. [@ftresarrieu]#lcfc #transfers https://t.co/NqY5dUiMhp pic.twitter.com/XnTQYzOO6u — LCFC Daily News (@cuzcuzverde) January 13, 2026 1
Sly Posted 13 January Author Posted 13 January To think we turned down a £20m bid from Monaco’s few seasons ago for him. Hindsight now but we thought it was crazy at the time.
coolhandfox Posted 13 January Posted 13 January 21 minutes ago, Sly said: To think we turned down a £20m bid from Monaco’s few seasons ago for him. Hindsight now but we thought it was crazy at the time. Not a chance they bid 20m. 2
Jon the Hat Posted 14 January Posted 14 January 4 hours ago, Chrysalis said: No he doesnt, there is this misconception that you must meet book value otherwise there is no gain on PSR, I have had to explain a few times why this is not the case. Its called cutting your losses. Lets say you have 2 years left on a 5 year contract, 40 million amortised over 5 years plus 4 million a year salary. With two years left you have 24 million liability on the books. You sell the player for a million, and no longer have to pay salary, this 24 million liability is now reduced to a 15 million liability, a 9 million gain from the previous position. Clubs routinely do these type of transactions to clear out dead wood, but LCFC are stubborn hence the difficulties we have. Turning down multiple offers for Iversen as an example, to only let him go for nothing and pay an extra couple of years wages. In the world of football you win some and you lose some, KPFC are struggling to understand you cant be assured of selling for what you paid. Its not like the normal business world. You are right except your example ignores the PSR period. Some of your wages are saved in the final year, while you crystalise the remaining amortisation in this year. So in your example, while the total PSR cost is reduced by 9M, it increased by 3M in this year and reduces by 12M in the next year. Which is fine if you can afford the 3M loss this year. If you can't, you are still better off keeping the player until their final year. So in effect to get net zero in PSR terms you would need to sell for 4M not 1M. It is the antithesis of good business. 1
Vowels Posted 14 January Posted 14 January 6 hours ago, Jon the Hat said: You are right except your example ignores the PSR period. Some of your wages are saved in the final year, while you crystalise the remaining amortisation in this year. So in your example, while the total PSR cost is reduced by 9M, it increased by 3M in this year and reduces by 12M in the next year. Which is fine if you can afford the 3M loss this year. If you can't, you are still better off keeping the player until their final year. So in effect to get net zero in PSR terms you would need to sell for 4M not 1M. It is the antithesis of good business. Yes; and this is one of the huge flaws with it; if the goal is to have sustainably run football clubs. We want responsible and prudent, business savvy owners; but PSR actively encourages poor business decisions from a business performance perspective.
5waller5 Posted 14 January Posted 14 January 1 hour ago, Vowels said: Yes; and this is one of the huge flaws with it; if the goal is to have sustainably run football clubs. We want responsible and prudent, business savvy owners; but PSR actively encourages poor business decisions from a business performance perspective. I agree, it reminds me of the rules around council spending, resulting in a mad dash to spend every penny of the budget in March (notice the pothole repair mayhem in that month) instead of better planned longer term work like resurfacing a road. We seem to run the club in the same way; in a constant state of pothole repair, never improving just falling further behind maintaining the crumbling mess 1
South Shire Fox Posted 14 January Posted 14 January (edited) 12 hours ago, Sly said: To think we turned down a £20m bid from Monaco’s few seasons ago for him. Hindsight now but we thought it was crazy at the time. It was 15 million euros (£12 ish million) . And thats if it was actually true Edited 14 January by South Shire Fox 1
Chrysalis Posted 14 January Posted 14 January 11 hours ago, Jon the Hat said: You are right except your example ignores the PSR period. Some of your wages are saved in the final year, while you crystalise the remaining amortisation in this year. So in your example, while the total PSR cost is reduced by 9M, it increased by 3M in this year and reduces by 12M in the next year. Which is fine if you can afford the 3M loss this year. If you can't, you are still better off keeping the player until their final year. So in effect to get net zero in PSR terms you would need to sell for 4M not 1M. It is the antithesis of good business. This is why its stupid to push right to the limit of PSR, sensible clubs have head room. 2
Metal Lover Posted 14 January Posted 14 January 3 hours ago, Clarkey123 said: Midfield akinbiyi Not that good.Ade at least had energy.
damolcfc Posted 16 January Posted 16 January On 14/01/2026 at 16:49, Metal Lover said: Not that good.Ade at least had energy. Adama Traora had muscle and pace too 🤪 He was the wolves version of Ade 😉 1
Clever Fox Posted 18 January Posted 18 January I assume he's not being used for fear he'd pick up an injury. Just get it done so as we can sign someone to replace him.
coolhandfox Posted 18 January Posted 18 January 37 minutes ago, Clever Fox said: I assume he's not being used for fear he'd pick up an injury. Just get it done so as we can sign someone to replace him. Came on yesterday......
Chelmofox Posted 18 January Posted 18 January 1 hour ago, coolhandfox said: Came on yesterday...... For 2 mins 14 seconds. Improved his stats mind you....
Recommended Posts