Latent or Spent?

[stourbridgefox]

We are going through another difficult patch as City fans and it maybe seems worse due to the fever pitch of expectation built up over the summer. There is a question I would like to put 'out there' though, and the question is this.

Is the investment made since the Thai owners took over spent, or is it latent?

In other words, are we like Ipswich? Has foreign investment been squandered by poor choices made by managers, leaving the club no better off than before the investment?

Or, are we more like QPR? Is it a case of foreign investment taking a while to have an effect on performances, leaving the club seemingly little better off than before the investment but actually in a good position to have a great season in the near future with promotion at the end of it?

While the investment in the infrastructure of the club will benefit the club for a long time to come (assuming overheads are not too high), it's the investment in playing staff which is really make or break. Let's look at this

Sousa Period

Spent: Moreno, Vitor.

Latent: Abe, Mousa.

Sven First Season.

.

Spent: Naughton, Yakubu, Mee, PVA, Kamara,

Latent: Sol Bamba, Vassel,

Sven Second Season.

Spent: Paintsil, SSL, Ball, Johnson, Fernandez.

Latent: Schmeichel, Peltier, Konchesky, Mills, Beckford, Danns, Nugent.

So to sum up. Even though we had half a season of attractive football in Sven's first season, there is not much latency in any investment made. I would guestimate £2-3 million in loan fees returned 10th place. Sven's two permanent signings that season (which I can remember) were Sol Bamba and Darius Vassell. Vassell may still have a minor part to play on the pitch but is unlikely to return much in resale value.

Sven's first season is saved by the purchase of Sol Bamba. His resale value is likely to offset the wasted loan fees and he still has a huge contribution to make on the pitch.

Sven has wasted a lot of investment in the second season. There are loan players who have made as much contribution as they are likely to make and can only be considered as wasted investment. It may be harsh to consider SSL waste as he may have a part to play on the pitch and would be likely to recoup his transfer fee.

There is hope however. Many of Sven's signings currently in the first team squad do still have a part to play, do still have the potential to improve and still could command a decent transfer fee.

In purely financial terms, I am guestimating £7 million in loan and transfer fees cannot be recouped. This has to be offset with my estimation of £15 million worth of playing talent still at the club which was purchased by Sven.

In conclusion, the financial damage to the Raksriaksorns is not as great as I would expect it to be. Money has definitely been wasted but some astute purchases such as Sol Bamba and Kasper Schmeichel have offset this, along with players still with value and still doing a decent job. Therefore, I believe the QPR example is the one LCFC is most likely to emulate in following seasons.

Fingers crossed!!

[Captain...]

You are missing a lot of spent money in Sven's season, Cunningham, Davies, Kirkland, Bednar, Bruma, Ricardo, Uchechi, Kamara

And a couple more Sousa signings, Waghorn and Lamey.

You are also not considering the money we got for selling the likes of Hobbs, Fryatt and Morrison.

Either way I don't think it is our finances we need to be concerned about it is what is happening on the pitche that counts.

[stourbridgefox]

You are right that I've missed a few players.

The purpose isn't to count up what has been spend versus what could be recouped though, it is to try to get an idea of whether our previous investment is total loss or whether there is still something to come from it.

I think it looks like there is more to come.

[Nickfosse]

No evidence, just a hunch. I think the owners have put it all on black and it has come up red.

I think they decided when they appointed Sven to give him virtually every penny he asked for in the hope/expectation that we would get promoted and they could tout Leicester as the Thai team in the PL and make money eventually from big eastern markets.

I think they will give Pearson a spin, but I expect the announcement sometime this summer that "Leicester no longer intends to break the bank to make any further signings."

As I say, just my reading of it all

[stourbridgefox]

I suspect that might be the case too but it might not be a bad thing.

The only problem being we must have a big post-Sven hangover in regards to wages. The question on my mind was...does Nigel have to rebuild the whole squad from scratch or is there some value left over.

I think there is value in the current squad (in an on the pitch sense) which needs a few clever, but not necessarily expensive, additions.

Even though Nigel is working with some difficulties, such as wages expected by potential signings and squad disharmony due to inequalities, I think he might be the man to pull it off.

Although for me, his task this season is to avoid relegation!

[davieG]

It's inevitable these days when clubs need to have large squads that reflecting on the 'unused' buys will seem like we wasted money but every club will have players in their squads that rarely play and the more successful they are the less likely they are to be needed.

Even those loan players in Sven's first season enabled us to climb from relegation candidates to play off ones this would have produced and increase income so cannot be seen as a waste or not recouped.

So to suggest that money spent on maintaining a squad size seems to be off the mark.