Macquarie Loan for Parachute Payments Rolled Over

[foxfanazer]

52 minutes ago, Officer Doofy said:

Do Macquarie currently own any football clubs? 

Not yet

[Tommy G]

4 hours ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

The worst thing is all the aggregator accounts posting it as if it's "breaking news". This stuff was reported at the time and no one wanted to know as it was bad news and they'd rather just bury their heads in the sand. 

 

When we get put into administration I think there will be a huge proportion of people that will genuinely be shocked and wonder how it's happened because they just aren't bothered enough to look into what's going on.

We are where we are though 

[Fox92]

On 22/04/2026 at 07:03, FoxesTez said:

Keiran Maguire has confirmed that we will receive £2m cash in broadcast revenue next season. Parachute payments all going towards servicing debt as we knew. 
 

It’s bleak. 

Not sure if mentioned but it was covered in an article yesterday:

Leicester 'face £70m black hole' after disastrous spending gamble - BBC Sport

 

[AjcW]

3 minutes ago, Fox92 said:

Not sure if mentioned but it was covered in an article yesterday:

Leicester 'face £70m black hole' after disastrous spending gamble - BBC Sport

 

I've called this out a few times in this thread about how we've cashed in massive amounts, but was shot down on a couple of occasions, and told we probably haven't cashed in "all" of the TV money. For example we might have only taken an advance of £8m on £45m. 

 

But Keiran paints a different picture and he's a football finance expert, so not really sure anymore!

[FoxTrott]

41 minutes ago, AjcW said:

I've called this out a few times in this thread about how we've cashed in massive amounts, but was shot down on a couple of occasions, and told we probably haven't cashed in "all" of the TV money. For example we might have only taken an advance of £8m on £45m. 

 

But Keiran paints a different picture and he's a football finance expert, so not really sure anymore!

He does paint a different picture, but also important to note that he benefits from doom mongering as this is what gets clicks and that's what companies pay for. So, I do agree, it seems we're in a particularly perilous situation, but the truth will come to light very shortly I'm sure. 

Edited 24 April by FoxTrott

[Gamble92]

1 minute ago, FoxTrott said:

He does paint a different picture, but also important to note that he benefits from doom mongering as this is what gets clicks and that's what companies pay for. So, I do agree, it seems we're in a particularly perilous situation, but the truth will come to light very shortly I'm sure. 

It would help if the club could come out with a bit of clarification. Just a quick "your club isn't going bust" would be a nice consolation for getting to play Mansfield and Bromley and not knowing. 

[Officer Doofy]

Just now, Gamble92 said:

It would help if the club could come out with a bit of clarification. Just a quick "your club isn't going bust" would be a nice consolation for getting to play Mansfield and Bromley and not knowing. 

I would take that as a very bad sign if they released that statement 

[CosbehFox]

3 minutes ago, FoxTrott said:

He does paint a different picture, but also important to note that he benefits from doom mongering as this is what gets clicks and that's what companies pay for. So, I do agree, it seems we're in a particularly perilous situation, but the truth will come to light very shortly I'm sure. 

On the point about the parachute payments, there is no need to exaggerate. It’s there on companies house for everyone to see 

[st albans fox]

1 hour ago, CosbehFox said:

On the point about the parachute payments, there is no need to exaggerate. It’s there on companies house for everyone to see 

The charge is there but we don’t know how much of that is owed to the bank.  
 

for example, a business may borrow a million quid and secure it against its stock.  The stock might be worth £3m.  That doesn’t mean the business has borrowed 3m. Just that this is the security for the 1m loan. 

 

Edited 24 April by st albans fox

[Gamble92]

2 hours ago, Officer Doofy said:

I would take that as a very bad sign if they released that statement 

That's true. Like a vote of confidence in Macquarie 

[Terraloon]

39 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

The charge is there but we don’t know how much of that is owed to the bank.  
 

for example, a business may borrow a million quid and secure it against its stock.  The stock might be worth £3m.  That doesn’t mean the business has borrowed 3m. Just that this is the security for the 1m loan. 

 

When the latest accounts were published there was comment, as required, about transactions with that Aussie bank.

 

Look at the wording of the £50m loan. That suggests to me that in effect every £ of it had been drawn down and with the repayments due way into the future surely suggests it has to include some if not all of the 26/27 parachute payments 

 

 

[st albans fox]

14 minutes ago, Terraloon said:

When the latest accounts were published there was comment, as required, about transactions with that Aussie bank.

 

Look at the wording of the £50m loan. That suggests to me that in effect every £ of it had been drawn down and with the repayments due way into the future surely suggests it has to include some if not all of the 26/27 parachute payments 

 

 

Doesn’t look great based on those charges …….

 

firesale upcoming with nothing to burn ! 

[CosbehFox]

https://x.com/XtraLeicester/status/2047690937996911043/video/1?s=46
 

A very bleak video that 

[when_you're_smiling]

3 hours ago, FoxTrott said:

He does paint a different picture, but also important to note that he benefits from doom mongering as this is what gets clicks and that's what companies pay for. So, I do agree, it seems we're in a particularly perilous situation, but the truth will come to light very shortly I'm sure. 

To be fair to him, in every article I’ve seen with him, he implies the real danger is if there’s no promotion next season, and that we should be alright for this season.

 

For example the BBC website article states: 

"Birmingham lost £34m last season, and the owners were able to ride it out and they got promoted.

"But if you ended up down there for a longer period, then the effects could be more stark."

 

That bit does kind of get hidden by the headline writers though.

 

And yes, nobody will be more pessimistic about the prospect about not going up next season than us lot, with good reason.

[Chrysalis]

1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

Doesn’t look great based on those charges …….

 

firesale upcoming with nothing to burn ! 

The recent Keiran tweet suggests its been cashed out, so the question for me at this point is how much of that cash is left in LCFC bank account.

[Pliskin]

1 minute ago, Chrysalis said:

The recent Keiran tweet suggests its been cashed out, so the question for me at this point is how much of that cash is left in LCFC bank account.

It all comes down to Top. 
 

This season is very much all or bust, but Top is the only person who can sort it. 
 

He could probably sort most of the problems out by injecting money into the club, but, it would need to be considerable. 
 

The financial rules in league one are there to be exploited if you’re rich enough and clever enough. 
 

 

But the two main points are:

 

1.Can Top afford to inject the necessary money into the club.

2. Is he willing to inject the necessary money into the club. 
 

 

There’s no way we can do it on self generated revenue, we will end up digging further into a financial hole. 
 

Top has to inject money into the club, to stabilise it, even if he wants to sell it…. But judging by the childlike look on his eyes the other night, I doubt he’s got it in him.

[Cropwellfox]

At least he’s written (or had it written for him) that it’s on him. Based on the culture of saving face and social standing that’s going to hurt him - and maybe trigger a response from within the family silver 

[StanSP]

18 minutes ago, Chrysalis said:

The recent Keiran tweet suggests its been cashed out, so the question for me at this point is how much of that cash is left in LCFC bank account.

Very little. 

 

I thought it was well known there's a problem with cash flow at the club. 

[1972 Fox]

19 hours ago, FoxTrott said:

it seems we're in a particularly perilous situation, but the truth will come to light very shortly I'm sure. 

Quick and truthful communications are very unlikely IMO.

 

Edited 25 April by 1972 Fox

[st albans fox]

15 hours ago, Pliskin said:

It all comes down to Top. 
 

This season is very much all or bust, but Top is the only person who can sort it. 
 

He could probably sort most of the problems out by injecting money into the club, but, it would need to be considerable. 
 

The financial rules in league one are there to be exploited if you’re rich enough and clever enough. 
 

 

But the two main points are:

 

1.Can Top afford to inject the necessary money into the club.

2. Is he willing to inject the necessary money into the club. 
 

 

There’s no way we can do it on self generated revenue, we will end up digging further into a financial hole. 
 

Top has to inject money into the club, to stabilise it, even if he wants to sell it…. But judging by the childlike look on his eyes the other night, I doubt he’s got it in him.

to clarify 

who owns us ?

king power or the family? 
I was under the impression that it’s still king power 

afaik, king power is no longer ‘controlled’ by the family with decisions made by an appointed financial person.  They wouldn’t just chuck £100m into Lcfc to prop us up.  Of course there is an argument that investment into the club would be protecting the value of king powers shareholding. But I think we may have dropped too far now to justify that. 

 

if it’s a combination of KP and the family, then why would the family pump funds in if KP are also beneficiaries of that. Unless KP allowed for the families shareholding to increase as a consequence. 
 

 

 

[Mickyblueeyes]

7 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

to clarify 

who owns us ?

king power or the family? 
I was under the impression that it’s still king power 

afaik, king power is no longer ‘controlled’ by the family with decisions made by an appointed financial person.  They wouldn’t just chuck £100m into Lcfc to prop us up.  Of course there is an argument that investment into the club would be protecting the value of king powers shareholding. But I think we may have dropped too far now to justify that. 

 

if it’s a combination of KP and the family, then why would the family pump funds in if KP are also beneficiaries of that. Unless KP allowed for the families shareholding to increase as a consequence. 
 

 

 

The ultimate beneficial individual owners of Leicester City Football Club are as follows:

 

• Aiyawatt Srivaddhanaprabha 58.1%
• Voramas Srivaddhanaprabha 9.3%
• Apichet Srivaddhanaprabha 9.3%
• Aroonroong Srivaddhanaprabha 9.3%
• Aimon Srivaddhanaprabha 14%

[st albans fox]

Just now, Mickyblueeyes said:

The ultimate beneficial individual owners of Leicester City Football Club are as follows:

 

• Aiyawatt Srivaddhanaprabha 58.1%
• Voramas Srivaddhanaprabha 9.3%
• Apichet Srivaddhanaprabha 9.3%
• Aroonroong Srivaddhanaprabha 9.3%
• Aimon Srivaddhanaprabha 14%

Thanks for that 

so basically no KP involvement 
 

all depends on how much of their wealth they want to risk to drive a higher value further down the line.   there won’t be any more coming their way from KP. 
 

 

[Muzzy_no7]

17 hours ago, CosbehFox said:

https://x.com/XtraLeicester/status/2047690937996911043/video/1?s=46
 

A very bleak video that 

This alone should be enough for any of our normal fans to want Bottom, Spudders and KP out and yet they blindly just follow them. 

[Mickyblueeyes]

15 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Thanks for that 

so basically no KP involvement 
 

all depends on how much of their wealth they want to risk to drive a higher value further down the line.   there won’t be any more coming their way from KP. 
 

 

His siblings think he (Top) is an idiot. The mother doesn’t have much of an opinion of him too. The only idiots who think he walks on water are the sad, demented losers in this fanbase.

[Foxin_Mad]

They are going to have to put money in if they want any hope of getting any back. The problem is you could do it sustainably if you have the correct people in place. The rules in this division mean that in the first year the large wages signed before last year on a 3 year or more deal don’t count on scmp. Turnover, we can spend 60% of on playing budget and an owner can invest and spend 60% of an investment on playing budget. Unlimited amounts can be spent on infrastructure which I assume is the train ground etc. With the right people running it and a good manager, starting literally next week or early June at the latest it’s doable but it requires people with a brain cell and self awareness at the top.