Leicester City For Sale (Ongoing Thread)

[Golden Fox]

If you look at the values of US sports franchises and Premier League clubs, they have gone up and up and up.

 

The Padres and then the Angles have just broken MLB records, The Lakers are being sold for a big profit after 1 year, and the recent partial sales of both Liverpool and Man Utd to people who won't even have a majority share have all gone for multiples of purchase price.

 

That is the backdrop: not the annual losses, and the potential prize of buying us now and selling after a couple of promotions could be hundreds of millions.

[cruzFOX]

Guess you could call it a sellers market?

demand is high! Just hope Top & Rudkin don’t cock this up too like everything else. 
Good buyers are out there just gotta market the proposition well within the right networks.
so many celebs are wanting to get a slice of the action based on word of mouth and PR.

[Pliskin]

14 minutes ago, Golden Fox said:

If you look at the values of US sports franchises and Premier League clubs, they have gone up and up and up.

 

The Padres and then the Angles have just broken MLB records, The Lakers are being sold for a big profit after 1 year, and the recent partial sales of both Liverpool and Man Utd to people who won't even have a majority share have all gone for multiples of purchase price.

 

That is the backdrop: not the annual losses, and the potential prize of buying us now and selling after a couple of promotions could be hundreds of millions.

US sports owners know how to make money, because they franchise. Brits hate it, sponsors everywhere, commercial breaks etc. etc…. But they make money….. success is few and far between, for example I follow the Seahawks in the NFL, we won the superbowl last season, but may not win it again for 15 years or more, but we will still make money in that time….

 

The right US business owner will look to expand the club and extend it to an American audience, all the stuff the brits hate makes money in the US I’d be all up for a US owner, even if it means we end up dipping our toes into a cross over between us and a US sporting franchise….. whatever it takes for this club to be financially sound for the future. 

[Langston]

45 minutes ago, Pliskin said:

US sports owners know how to make money, because they franchise. Brits hate it, sponsors everywhere, commercial breaks etc. etc…. But they make money….. success is few and far between, for example I follow the Seahawks in the NFL, we won the superbowl last season, but may not win it again for 15 years or more, but we will still make money in that time….

 

The right US business owner will look to expand the club and extend it to an American audience, all the stuff the brits hate makes money in the US I’d be all up for a US owner, even if it means we end up dipping our toes into a cross over between us and a US sporting franchise….. whatever it takes for this club to be financially sound for the future. 

 

American football comparison is not quite right when the salary cap plays such a massive part in the profitability of the clubs to the point it'd be more difficult to make a loss. European football (soccer) is a completely different kettle of fish..

[1972 Fox]

5 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

Let's hope if that's the case there is no mutually agreed stipulation that someone like Rudkin stays on to oversee their skin in the game. Absolutely terrifying prospect.

Rudkin is only still in position because of Top. The day Top/KP leave, Rudkin is gone too.

 

It's farcical that everyone apart from Top can see through him. He wouldn't be in his current position at any other professional club.

[slymunn]

8 minutes ago, Langston said:

 

American football comparison is not quite right when the salary cap plays such a massive part in the profitability of the clubs to the point it'd be more difficult to make a loss. European football (soccer) is a completely different kettle of fish..

In the Super league (Rugby league) last financial year only one team posted a profit and they have salary caps.

[when_you're_smiling]

1 hour ago, Golden Fox said:

If you look at the values of US sports franchises and Premier League clubs, they have gone up and up and up.

 

The Padres and then the Angles have just broken MLB records, The Lakers are being sold for a big profit after 1 year, and the recent partial sales of both Liverpool and Man Utd to people who won't even have a majority share have all gone for multiples of purchase price.

 

That is the backdrop: not the annual losses, and the potential prize of buying us now and selling after a couple of promotions could be hundreds of millions.

 

1 hour ago, Pliskin said:

US sports owners know how to make money, because they franchise. Brits hate it, sponsors everywhere, commercial breaks etc. etc…. But they make money….. success is few and far between, for example I follow the Seahawks in the NFL, we won the superbowl last season, but may not win it again for 15 years or more, but we will still make money in that time….

 

The right US business owner will look to expand the club and extend it to an American audience, all the stuff the brits hate makes money in the US I’d be all up for a US owner, even if it means we end up dipping our toes into a cross over between us and a US sporting franchise….. whatever it takes for this club to be financially sound for the future. 

 

17 minutes ago, Langston said:

 

American football comparison is not quite right when the salary cap plays such a massive part in the profitability of the clubs to the point it'd be more difficult to make a loss. European football (soccer) is a completely different kettle of fish..

When you compare it to US franchises you need to factor in they are always guaranteed a seat at the top table due to no relegation. Plenty more guaranteed income, exposure, etc and much less risk

[Jimmy]

9 minutes ago, slymunn said:

In the Super league (Rugby league) last financial year only one team posted a profit and they have salary caps.

in Rugby Union they have a salary cap and no one comes close to breaking even in England

Edited 8 September by Jimmy

[Langston]

7 minutes ago, slymunn said:

In the Super league (Rugby league) last financial year only one team posted a profit and they have salary caps.

 

But rugby league doesn't have the commercial revenue streams the NFL does????

[slymunn]

1 minute ago, Langston said:

 

But rugby league doesn't have the commercial revenue streams the NFL does????

No, but also a much smaller salary cap to go with it.

 

You kind of said a salary cap means you wouldn't lose money, so just pointing out it doesnt always work like that.

[Langston]

1 minute ago, slymunn said:

No, but also a much smaller salary cap to go with it.

 

You kind of said a salary cap means you wouldn't lose money, so just pointing out it doesnt always work like that.

 

I said the salary cap in the NFL, I wasn't talking about rugby..

Edited 8 September by Langston

[Phild]

23 hours ago, Pliskin said:

 

 

Edited 8 September by Phild

[Tommy G]

3 hours ago, Chelmofox said:

I've been involved in 3 acquisitions that have all been earn out structures.

 

In each the existing leadership had to stay as the targets of the earnout were based on their performance. For LCFC, thats a hideous prospect. 

Yes but there is often a distinct difference where the management teams aren’t also the major shareholder unlike LCFC where Top is. They will all go, in terms of the earn out it will be a £xx payout if promoted to the championship and £xx if promoted to the PL, which the new owners won’t care as the amounts payable will be structured in a way that they won’t be that material compared with the riches of going up two divisions.

[Paninistickers]

9 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Yes but there is often a distinct difference where the management teams aren’t also the major shareholder unlike LCFC where Top is. They will all go, in terms of the earn out it will be a £xx payout if promoted to the championship and £xx if promoted to the PL, which the new owners won’t care as the amounts payable will be structured in a way that they won’t be that material compared with the riches of going up two divisions.

Management teams are usually obligated to stay in place when the buyer is buying into a healthy, growing business.

 

In this case, the buyer is acquiring a distressed business. It's inconceivable that Rudkin and Kevin Davies remain in situ 

 

 

[CL Fox]

14 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Yes but there is often a distinct difference where the management teams aren’t also the major shareholder unlike LCFC where Top is. They will all go, in terms of the earn out it will be a £xx payout if promoted to the championship and £xx if promoted to the PL, which the new owners won’t care as the amounts payable will be structured in a way that they won’t be that material compared with the riches of going up two divisions.

Wouldn't be so sure they'll all clear out, one guy is desperate to stay on and has a major say in who the new owners are.....👀

[Tommy G]

2 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

Management teams are usually obligated to stay in place when the buyer is buying into a healthy, growing business.

 

In this case, the buyer is acquiring a distressed business. It's inconceivable that Rudkin and Kevin Davies remain in situ 

 

 

Management teams are often incentivised very heavily to stay and make a success you mean 😎

 

I agree with you - they will be toast 

[Chelmofox]

29 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Yes but there is often a distinct difference where the management teams aren’t also the major shareholder unlike LCFC where Top is. They will all go, in terms of the earn out it will be a £xx payout if promoted to the championship and £xx if promoted to the PL, which the new owners won’t care as the amounts payable will be structured in a way that they won’t be that material compared with the riches of going up two divisions.

If the amounts are immaterial i dont see Top signing anything and would just negotiate a lower cash deal. An earn out would have to take it from an initial low payment towards the sort of valuation Top is hoping for. In that situation, the buyer is incentivised to not succeed short term so they can avoid overpaying for their asset.

 

I dont know of any earnout structure where those party to it just leave the business. Doesnt really make sense. But football is a strange game.  

Edited 8 September by Chelmofox

[Tommy G]

10 minutes ago, Chelmofox said:

If the amounts are immaterial i dont see Top signing anything and would just negotiate a lower cash deal. An earn out would have to take it from an initial low payment towards the sort of valuation Top is hoping for. In that situation, the buyer is incentivised to not succeed short term so they can avoid overpaying for their asset.

 

I dont know of any earnout structure where those party to it just leave the business. Doesnt really make sense. But football is a strange game.  

Immaterial meaning in terms of comparing it going up to the PL (worth £150m these days?) 

 

He might not have a choice to dictate the earn out structure in any case as I doubt there will be a tonne of interest, so it might be take that or nothing. 

[Pliskin]

Chat GPT suggests 

 

 

1. Turki Alalshikh

2. Alwaleed bin Talal……..

[Miquel The Work Geordie]

14 minutes ago, Pliskin said:

Chat GPT suggests 

 

 

1. Turki Alalshikh

2. Alwaleed bin Talal……..

 

Roll neck wearer - deviant CONFIRMED

 

Get him in

[Pliskin]

Just now, Miquel The Work Geordie said:

 

Roll neck wearer - deviant CONFIRMED

 

Get him in

Looks like a Bond villain breeding genetically enhanced horses! 

[Miquel The Work Geordie]

Just now, Pliskin said:

Looks like a Bond villain breeding genetically enhanced horses! 

 

Proper Dalton era Bond

[urban.spaceman]

Just now, Miquel The Work Geordie said:

 

Roll neck wearer - deviant CONFIRMED

 

Get him in

Pedro Pascal to play him in the inevitable movie. 

[Pliskin]

20 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

Pedro Pascal to play him in the inevitable movie. 

Genius. 

[Golden Fox]

2 hours ago, when_you're_smiling said:

 

 

When you compare it to US franchises you need to factor in they are always guaranteed a seat at the top table due to no relegation. Plenty more guaranteed income, exposure, etc and much less risk

Agreed - and when you get down to more detail, most leagues have salary caps (and floors) linked to league revenue, which means you can't near to the revenue to salary ratios in English football, and on top of that, these leagues get revenue sharing which means you get income and make money even if you are poor relations. (And that's without threatening to leave and having the perk of getting taxpayers to build a new stadium for you...)

 

The outlier is actualy MLB, as there is no salary cap - which should be holding back franchise values (although we will likely see a lockout coming up as that battle escalates), which is why I mentioned the Angels sale (as this has reached record MLB values at arguably the worst time to sell as the Cap may well be on its way) and shows owners don't care about the day to day operational running. It is supply and demand and there is a limited supply, and that is driving up prices, and driving people to look at alternatives.

 

And this is why I linked our situation to US values, as so many of the recent investors in British football are American, and they are looking at these trends in values and alternatives to US teams, and this is causiring the knock-on effect for the increase in value of English Premier League teams that I mentioned (whatever common sense might say about risks and losses).

 

Yes there are massive risks for investors with relegation, but the flip side is potential massive upside with promotion and if an investor looking for a club currenly underperforming that will regress to the mean in the long term that is available for a knock down price (classic buy low, sell high scenario), they will certainly be expressing an interest in us with Citi Bank, which I why I think there will be a lot more interest than the general feel of people on here.