Leicester City For Sale (Ongoing Thread)

[Headcase]

14 hours ago, Wymsey said:

What would've changed if Vichai and Susan Whelan were still around?

Well i can tell you is...100% rud-skin would not be about. 

Edited 21 August by Headcase

[Finnegan]

11 minutes ago, FoxinNotts said:

I just don't see it

RB already have Leeds 

They can't change a name (in this country), and they'll be limited as to what could be re-named in this country.

Why would they want two clubs in one country?

 

I'd bet a fairly decent amount of money the Red Bull rumours are nonsense tbh. 

 

They'd have to sell their stake in a Premier League club to buy us, if they wanted to fully buy an English football club instead of investing a minority stake they'd have done that instead of investing in Leeds. It's not like they're short of money. They actively chose to invest instead because they knew English football fans would be extremely resistant to the full take overs they've done elsewhere. 

 

I just don't think I buy the idea that Leicester is such a good opportunity for them they'll do a U turn on that, sell up their interest in Leeds and decide to turn us in to RB Leicester. 

 

Now if you told me they wanted to just buy Seagrave off us and turn it in to some sort of national or global academy in keeping with their youth development attitude globally? Bit of a stretch but I could probably believe it. 

 

Probably think the whole thing is someone's imagination / wish though. 

 

[ourla]

Red Bull took on Newcastle Falcons rugby team.

 

They are more of a diamond in the rough, big project thing than we are.

 

Not saying the rumours are true but I think we are in the ballpark of what they like to take on.

[john ridley]

Well the bloke on Bentleys roof seems pretty sure they'll  be there at the weekend. IF  their  not  i assume  he'll  just drift away with all the other WUMs.But if their  there  Computer fox might trump the back of the head shot .

[hackneyfox]

24 minutes ago, Lineker's Left Foot said:

Oh ok then Sweetheart 

 

[FoxinNotts]

9 minutes ago, ourla said:

Red Bull took on Newcastle Falcons rugby team.

 

They are more of a diamond in the rough, big project thing than we are.

 

Not saying the rumours are true but I think we are in the ballpark of what they like to take on.

But they could re name them Newcastle Red Bulls.

 

Don't forget, Red Bull is a PR agency, not an energy drink! - They literally make their money from Branding. That is their business model.

[LCFCJohn]

28 minutes ago, Headcase said:

Well i can tell you is...100% rud-skin would not be about. 

I mean I don’t think you can.

 

Rudkin was still Vichai’s guy, he put him in that position. It’s not like it was something Aiyawatt did when he took over.

 

There’s not actual evidence Vichai would have binned him, particularly not 100% confidence that you have. We can suspect that he wouldn’t have let things go as far as they have but that’s about it.

[hackneyfox]

15 minutes ago, john ridley said:

Well the bloke on Bentleys roof seems pretty sure they'll  be there at the weekend. IF  their  not  i assume  he'll  just drift away with all the other WUMs.But if their  there  Computer fox might trump the back of the head shot .

He was claiming that Klopp is involved but he's now the German manager.

[john ridley]

Just now, hackneyfox said:

He was claiming that Klopp is involved but he's now the German manager.

Yeah I know, he's  gonna fall on his sword  tomorrow 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[fleshdaddy]

Regardless what you think of Red Bull, you can't argue that in terms of sporting projects, they get the infrastructure and things behind the scenes right, at least more often than not. 

As I say, regardless of what you think of them, everything they do is geared towards success and they focus massively on infrastructure, which is probably what we're crying out for at the moment, in terms of competent people being in the right roles and empowered, and really changing the culture as a whole - probably everything we've been lacking for a few years now.

Edited 21 August by fleshdaddy
Clarity

[Finnegan]

55 minutes ago, ourla said:

Red Bull took on Newcastle Falcons rugby team.

 

They are more of a diamond in the rough, big project thing than we are.

 

Not saying the rumours are true but I think we are in the ballpark of what they like to take on.

 

Newcastle is a large metropolitan area with surprisingly little other sporting competition. 

 

They're an established top flight rugby club in England in a sport that requires drastically less investment to bridge the gap from top to bottom than football. 

 

Red Bull have started in the lower leagues with football several times, our being League One isn't the problem. But we have a lower ceiling than they'd like, mountains of debt, baggage and complications and as I said before, English football is hugely resistant to the kind of brand change they rely on. 

 

They've already got in Leeds probably about their best case situation in England. 

 

[Lineker's Left Foot]

10 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

Newcastle is a large metropolitan area with surprisingly little other sporting competition. 

 

They're an established top flight rugby club in England in a sport that requires drastically less investment to bridge the gap from top to bottom than football. 

 

Red Bull have started in the lower leagues with football several times, our being League One isn't the problem. But we have a lower ceiling than they'd like, mountains of debt, baggage and complications and as I said before, English football is hugely resistant to the kind of brand change they rely on. 

 

They've already got in Leeds probably about their best case situation in England. 

 

I personally think, along with the Leuven fan, that Todd Boehly is the most likely.

[coolhandfox]

1 hour ago, FoxinNotts said:

But they could re name them Newcastle Red Bulls.

 

Don't forget, Red Bull is a PR agency, not an energy drink! - They literally make their money from Branding. That is their business model.

Internet hyperbole, they sell over 12bn cans a year, they just outsources all the production to companies like Rauch, which mean they don't have to pay out for any costly factory infrastructure.

 

They just pay someone else to do the work, which keeps the cost of production low. 

 

95% of their income is from beverage sales 12bn per annum , less then 5% come from sports and media rights and content. 

 

Because they spend no capital on infrastructure they can spend 30% of their income on in marketing, sports etc.  

 

Guess what massive brand awareness means they sell more drinks. 

Edited 21 August by coolhandfox

[FoxinNotts]

3 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

Internet hyperbole, they sell over 12bn cans a year, they just outsources all the production to companies like Rauch, which mean they don't have to pay out for any costly factory infrastructure.

 

They just pay someone else to do the work, which keeps the cost of production low. 

 

95% of their income is from beverage sales 12bn per annum , less then 5% come from sports and media rights and content. 

 

Because they spend no capital on infrastructure they can spend 30% of their income on in marketing, sports etc.  

 

Guess what massive brand awareness means they sell more drinks. 

All true. Should have said *started out as a marketing company that then purchased a drinks firm and rebranded them as 'Red Bull' which became their biggest selling product

[CarolinaFox]

Red Bull is an interesting idea...a multi-club organization would see the whole package (men's team, women's team, OH Leuven and Seagrave) as strengthening their overall ecosystem. Seagrave is one of the best training facilities in Europe, it could become a hub for Red Bull's academy system in England. Red Bull also don't have (to my knowledge) a footprint in Belgian football. If they only own about 10% or less of Leeds United it shouldn't be an issue. And as for the name, I don't see them diluting the Leicester City brand. I'd be open to it, but curious to know what everyone else thinks. 

[Lineker's Left Foot]

1 minute ago, CarolinaFox said:

Red Bull is an interesting idea...a multi-club organization would see the whole package (men's team, women's team, OH Leuven and Seagrave) as strengthening their overall ecosystem. Seagrave is one of the best training facilities in Europe, it could become a hub for Red Bull's academy system in England. Red Bull also don't have (to my knowledge) a footprint in Belgian football. If they only own about 10% or less of Leeds United it shouldn't be an issue. And as for the name, I don't see them diluting the Leicester City brand. I'd be open to it, but curious to know what everyone else thinks. 

Yeah would take it.  Leicester City is my team, but if we changed our name I would support them without a problem, as the club is still the main one which represents my city.

[Golden Fox]

Frankly, I think we are taking too narrow a view on here:

 

What we do know is that we are up for sale and have engaged Citigroup. 

Despite our current position in League One, we are a global name, have a good modern stadium, world class training facilities and a multi-club model.

We might not be that fashionable a city, but are just 100 miles out of London, which may as well be a suburb to those with provate jets/helicopters.

 

What we suspect is that Top would like £140m, but he might need to accept closer to £100m if KP has basically said they want to draw a line under losses and want out.

 

This would make us an incredible opportunity for someone to buy low and increase their value very quickly, and Citigroup will have plenty of contacts and be spreading the message about us in the right places.

 

So I'd image there is likely a lot of interest, but that it will be an iterative process. People will show interest, have a look, maybe visit the training ground, attend a match, discuss with other investors, all before we get to the stage of actual.

 

I think it is entirely possible we've had Middle Eastern visitors to Seagrave, the Red Bull are going to the match on Saturday, even that Boehly has been talking to Citgroup about where the land lies. I'd actually be surprised if we weren't getting a lot of people kick the tyres. The 49ers are becoming more entrenched in running Leeds, so If Red Bull saw us as a better option, I'm sure they could shift their 10% quickly. I'm sure the chap who pulled out of Derby will have been running the numbers. I'd also think it could easily take a couple of months before we actually get to hear of serious bids being made.

 

This will be the normal process for a corporate sale such as this - I just don't think it will be as black and white as discussion its Red Bull or Boehly or whoever and that they will imminently be putting an offer in and buying us or just ruling it out completely. Its fun to speculate as to who might be looking at us, but thats all we can do at this point, and claiming to know whether someone is or isn't buying us based on claiming to know the motivations of these potential buyers is just a stretch at this point.

[RoboFox]

More likely to be bought by Panda Pops than Red Bull.
 

People’s heads are on mars.

[coolhandfox]

1 hour ago, FoxinNotts said:

All true. Should have said *started out as a marketing company that then purchased a drinks firm and rebranded them as 'Red Bull' which became their biggest selling product

Chaleo Yoovidhya created the drink Krating Daeng which translates to red gaur (a large wild bovine) = Red Bull, he met Dietrich Mateschitza who was marketing director for Blendax who came up with the idea of selling it in the west.

 

They formed Red Bull together and own 49% each, it never started out as a marketing company.

[HankMarvin]

20 minutes ago, RoboFox said:

More likely to be bought by Panda Pops than Red Bull.
 

People’s heads are on mars.

You riding to the shops

[Jimmy]

Red Bull can't buy us due to their stake in Leeds

[CarolinaFox]

1 hour ago, Jimmy said:

Red Bull can't buy us due to their stake in Leeds

I wondered the same thing. I think it might depend on the type of ownership stake they have in Leeds. There are rumors its less than 10%, and if its a non-controlling minority stake that might make a difference. But I think yes, long term it would present problems. 

[Lambert09]

4 hours ago, hackneyfox said:

He was claiming that Klopp is involved but he's now the German manager.

He was always a German manager 

[lcfc_forever]

7 minutes ago, CarolinaFox said:

I wondered the same thing. I think it might depend on the type of ownership stake they have in Leeds. There are rumors its less than 10%, and if its a non-controlling minority stake that might make a difference. But I think yes, long term it would present problems. 

Not rumours, been reported as below 10% as they have to publish more transparency if they have a higher shareholding. 
https://www.cityam.com/red-bull-diluted-energy-drink-giant-reduces-stake-in-leeds-united/

[JimJams]

I'd be buzzing if we got taken over by Red Bull. Imagine the possibilities of being able to steal a march on getting players like Patson Daka from the network.

 

Salivating.