Nick Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 Beckham wanted by Leicester: http://msn.foxsports.com/foxsoccer/england/story/paper-chase-july-31-beckham-leicester-ac-milan-fabregas-kaka-chelsea-07311?
Woollett's Wellies Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 Now the Daily Wail has got it. However, some interesting quotes in this... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2020730/David-Beckham-Leicester-Sven-Goran-Eriksson.html
Jimmy Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 they're just reporting the star story its nothing new and adds no credence to the story
stourbridgefox Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 Long time reader but very rare poster. Vishai Raksriaksorn's personal wealth is a 'measily' £180 million or so, which won't go very far if he continues to spend on the club in the manner he has started. But... I believe the King Power business empire is worth £4 billion. I have read that it is worth £4 billion before but I can't find any sources on this today. If you consider King Power own a huge hotel and many retail outlets in Bangkok and Thailand then it is probably reasonable that the company is worth this much. Originally the plan was to finance LCFC through Asia Football Investments along with other investors, which included Milan Mandaric and an Indonesian oil and coal tycoon. However Mandaric left to buy Shef Weds and I remember it being reported that the Raksriaksorn's had purchased the 20% share owned by the Indonesian businessman to take their ownership of Asia Football Investments to 100%. The reason Top stated for this was so the Raksriaksorn's had 'total control'. Another change since the owners took over seems to be a move from the club being owned by Asia Football Investments at arms length from King Power to LCFC becoming almost a division of King Power. Evidence for this is the appointment of Susan Weelan as CEO of LCFC from her previous role as CEO of King Power. Buying the stadium rights is also a significant move as they are turning down a potentially lucrative revenue stream to further strengthen the association between King Power and LCFC and also possibly to get around the new Football League rules about financing players with debt. This is similar to Man City where instead of the owners providing loans to clubs, which are then of course owed by the club to the owners if they leave, they have instead bought the naming rights to the stadium so any investment can be accounted as revenue rather than debt. I am not claiming to have any inside knowledge or even specialist knowledge here, I have just followed the stories regarding our ownership in the media very closely. All the above is based on my memory of media stories and I am not spending my Sunday searching for sources, so let's just hope my memory serves me well! So, if all the above is correct... we can in fact afford David Beckham for six weeks just for publicity purposes!
Jimmy Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 we'd make the money back in shirt sales in Asian where he is huge anyway, not to mention here
Nick Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 Long time reader but very rare poster. Vishai Raksriaksorn's personal wealth is a 'measily' £180 million or so, which won't go very far if he continues to spend on the club in the manner he has started. But... I believe the King Power business empire is worth £4 billion. I have read that it is worth £4 billion before but I can't find any sources on this today. If you consider King Power own a huge hotel and many retail outlets in Bangkok and Thailand then it is probably reasonable that the company is worth this much. Originally the plan was to finance LCFC through Asia Football Investments along with other investors, which included Milan Mandaric and an Indonesian oil and coal tycoon. However Mandaric left to buy Shef Weds and I remember it being reported that the Raksriaksorn's had purchased the 20% share owned by the Indonesian businessman to take their ownership of Asia Football Investments to 100%. The reason Top stated for this was so the Raksriaksorn's had 'total control'. Another change since the owners took over seems to be a move from the club being owned by Asia Football Investments at arms length from King Power to LCFC becoming almost a division of King Power. Evidence for this is the appointment of Susan Weelan as CEO of LCFC from her previous role as CEO of King Power. Buying the stadium rights is also a significant move as they are turning down a potentially lucrative revenue stream to further strengthen the association between King Power and LCFC and also possibly to get around the new Football League rules about financing players with debt. This is similar to Man City where instead of the owners providing loans to clubs, which are then of course owed by the club to the owners if they leave, they have instead bought the naming rights to the stadium so any investment can be accounted as revenue rather than debt. I am not claiming to have any inside knowledge or even specialist knowledge here, I have just followed the stories regarding our ownership in the media very closely. All the above is based on my memory of media stories and I am not spending my Sunday searching for sources, so let's just hope my memory serves me well! So, if all the above is correct... we can in fact afford David Beckham for six weeks just for publicity purposes! Welcome Mr. Stourbridge Fox - good first post.
21st Century Fox Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 Some really bad journalism and poor research, the Raksriaksorn's aren't billionaires for a start.
cc_star Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 we'd make the money back in shirt sales in Asian where he is huge anyway, not to mention here *sigh* If I might mention a 'player's image rights' which often dwarf his wage packet... again
SouthLondonFox Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 *sigh* If I might mention a 'player's image rights' which often dwarf his wage packet... again Ha! I have no idea how many sales we would sell on the back (ahem) of Beckham. Irrespective of the population of Thailand and, more widely, SE Asia - from my experience of visiting the region most years (I have family in Malaysia), we would never get remotely close to the popularity of the usual European suspects. And most shirts you see people wearing, and it's not that many, are knock-off. But shirts sales are not the reason we are interested in Beckham...if indeed we are.
Spudulike Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 Some really bad journalism and poor research, the Raksriaksorn's aren't billionaires for a start. Who said they were billionaires ?? The quote was "I believe the King Power business empire is worth £4 billion". So......who now ownes LCFC, Asia Football Investments or King Power
tomtom Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 Some really bad journalism and poor research, the Raksriaksorn's aren't billionaires for a start. Try reading what he wrote again
MGLCFC Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 What ever they are worth they are at least investing in all areas of the club, unlike some owners. I'd rather have a situation where we are excited about the forthcoming season because of the investment in theclub than one where we know it will be just another average season. Whether this financial backing will continue remains to be seen, but if they want to be big globally, I'm sure it will.
haraven Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 Long time reader but very rare poster. Vishai Raksriaksorn's personal wealth is a 'measily' £180 million or so, which won't go very far if he continues to spend on the club in the manner he has started. But... I believe the King Power business empire is worth £4 billion. I have read that it is worth £4 billion before but I can't find any sources on this today. If you consider King Power own a huge hotel and many retail outlets in Bangkok and Thailand then it is probably reasonable that the company is worth this much. Originally the plan was to finance LCFC through Asia Football Investments along with other investors, which included Milan Mandaric and an Indonesian oil and coal tycoon. However Mandaric left to buy Shef Weds and I remember it being reported that the Raksriaksorn's had purchased the 20% share owned by the Indonesian businessman to take their ownership of Asia Football Investments to 100%. The reason Top stated for this was so the Raksriaksorn's had 'total control'. Another change since the owners took over seems to be a move from the club being owned by Asia Football Investments at arms length from King Power to LCFC becoming almost a division of King Power. Evidence for this is the appointment of Susan Weelan as CEO of LCFC from her previous role as CEO of King Power. Buying the stadium rights is also a significant move as they are turning down a potentially lucrative revenue stream to further strengthen the association between King Power and LCFC and also possibly to get around the new Football League rules about financing players with debt. This is similar to Man City where instead of the owners providing loans to clubs, which are then of course owed by the club to the owners if they leave, they have instead bought the naming rights to the stadium so any investment can be accounted as revenue rather than debt. I am not claiming to have any inside knowledge or even specialist knowledge here, I have just followed the stories regarding our ownership in the media very closely. All the above is based on my memory of media stories and I am not spending my Sunday searching for sources, so let's just hope my memory serves me well! So, if all the above is correct... we can in fact afford David Beckham for six weeks just for publicity purposes! Makes sense to me.
Onions Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 Few simple questions: Why on earth would Beckham join us? How can we afford him/work out a deal if Spurs couldn't just 6 months ago. How much ages are we talking for a player? Would suit both parties the story claims...... how would it? It's not going to happen, poor and lazy journalism desperate for a story..... I mean FFS bring back the NOTW, they can at least tell us whats going on, even if it is illegal
artursteppe Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 *sigh* If I might mention a 'player's image rights' which often dwarf his wage packet... again Please explain what you mean. What good are Beckham's image rights without a vehicle to capitalise on those image rights. He can only make money through being involved with a joint marketing organisation. His 'partners' in that joint operation would also make money, or no 'partner' would get involved, meaning Beckham wouldn't make any money either. Is it that difficult to understand? If we were his 'partners' we would make money by having his name on the back of Leicester City shirts, and he would make money ( through his image rights ) by having Leicester City shirts with his name on them. Simples. VERY BIG SIGH!
stourbridgefox Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 The last media source, ie, the Leicester Mercury, reported that Asia Football Investments was 100% owned by King Power. I've just learned something new. I always assumed King Power was owned 100% by the Raksriaksorn family but it turns out it is a public limited company (or whatever this is called in Thailand). The following article has some information on King Power. http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/King-Power-sets-sights-on-new-Bangkok-airport-69023.html It claims domestic turnover for King Power is 9 billion Baht per year, which in pounds is...£185 million a year. This is based on this exchange rate 1 THB = 0.0205 GBP 1 GBP = 48.7805 THB. My dodgy maths has arrived at the figure of £185 million and I would appreciate someone checking it. It would be interesting to know how much of this is profit. As a conservative estimate, let's say 20% is. This means profit is £35 million a year. This then has to be shared out amongst shareholders. To be fair...it doesn't seem to leave much to run a football club on does it? eeek.
MPH Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 That article says we have Billionaire owners! Since when! did they say billionaire of what currency? ( 1 million pounds is about 500 million bhat)
MPH Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 Here's an idea... maybe they understated their wealth when buying us just so to keep the price down... just to TRY and save us money in the transfer market ( allthough they messed up with that when announcing we have whatever we need to assemble the squad..)
DANGEROUS TIGER Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 Despite all the differences of opinion, the fact remains, that as mere supporters we only know a limited amount, about our owners. They are highly successful businessmen, that we do know. How there business is run from within, how much money they have, and which individuals have a share in it, other than the obvious, then we know nothing. How they think, what their objectives are, how they invest money, and what will happen at our club next, we clearly have no idea. Beckham? Who really KNOWS?
escos Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 Just to answer an earlier post, the reason a deal couldnt be worked out with Beckham and Spurs was an insurance issue with the MLS.
dannythefox Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 We dont want beckham we would be stupid to pay the money!
escos Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 It's amazing really how people think David Beckham would be a waste of money and yet see no problem with spending £8m on a player who has had one good season or £5.5m on a striker with a dodgy knee!! Any club that signs Beckham is signing a license to print money!!
The Doctor Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 Please explain what you mean. What good are Beckham's image rights without a vehicle to capitalise on those image rights. He can only make money through being involved with a joint marketing organisation. His 'partners' in that joint operation would also make money, or no 'partner' would get involved, meaning Beckham wouldn't make any money either. Is it that difficult to understand? If we were his 'partners' we would make money by having his name on the back of Leicester City shirts, and he would make money ( through his image rights ) by having Leicester City shirts with his name on them. Simples. VERY BIG SIGH! you seem to be misunderstanding. Players like Beckham have huge marketability and so generally have lower basic wages than you'd expect of a player of that size. They make it up with image rights, taking a huge cut of the money their club makes from using their image & name on posters, shirts etc. Supposing he were to get 50% of all money made through exploitation of his image (which would probably be a low end estimate) then half of the profits from shirt sales would go to him meaning we'd have to sell thousands more shirts than any other player to make any Beckham deal commercial sense.
renards Posted 31 July 2011 Posted 31 July 2011 That article refers to them being in a good position to win the contract at the new BK airport, I think it has no been open for 4 years The last media source, ie, the Leicester Mercury, reported that Asia Football Investments was 100% owned by King Power. I've just learned something new. I always assumed King Power was owned 100% by the Raksriaksorn family but it turns out it is a public limited company (or whatever this is called in Thailand). The following article has some information on King Power. http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/King-Power-sets-sights-on-new-Bangkok-airport-69023.html It claims domestic turnover for King Power is 9 billion Baht per year, which in pounds is...£185 million a year. This is based on this exchange rate 1 THB = 0.0205 GBP 1 GBP = 48.7805 THB. My dodgy maths has arrived at the figure of £185 million and I would appreciate someone checking it. It would be interesting to know how much of this is profit. As a conservative estimate, let's say 20% is. This means profit is £35 million a year. This then has to be shared out amongst shareholders. To be fair...it doesn't seem to leave much to run a football club on does it? eeek.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.