Trust in our owners

[Trav Le Bleu]

I think the owners have handled the situation very well. They knew they were damned if they did, damned if they didn't. People would have said that a denial would have been proof of guilt. Silence was the way to go, though who's to say that they hadn't reassured Pearson that none of it was true, hence his "minor irritation" comment. Pearson isn't the kinbd of man to get drawn on something like this either. It's only been with Redknapp's statement denying contact with City (and indeed anyone) that they have spoken out. I sense there was some timing in this, as it would not appear convincing if one party had said something, but the other nothing.

The owners have invested in the club, including the training facilities and been a lot less trigger happy than Mandaric ever was, so for now I'm content.

[blueharmie]

I like them. Do I trust them ? Hell no and neither does np.

[Kitchandro]

Okay. I undersatnd what you're saying. I'm genuinely not looking to pick a fight here - indeed, I often find myself nodding in agreement with your posts - but NP wasn't doing well (according to many on here) after the Wolves defeat or the Burton debacle. I re-read some of the posts on those threads yesterday to see if I'd imagined it and there was some pretty vindictive stuff being directed his way. The jury was no longer out for many at that time. Anyway, yesterday's beer now. Let's raise the roof tomorrow and roar to the top of the pile !!

[Mack]

Whilst I admire blind faith I'm not the type in the face of facts.

There's the facts that show we are hugely in debt to them and are paying back that debt at 8% interest.

All the cloak and dagger managerial stuff aside the finances to concern me.

As does the lack of free fun fairs all season!

[Thracian]

The long-awaited and carefully thought-out statement is welcome but it really doesn't answer any of my questions and doesn't convince me one bit.

They talk about the media comments being "unwarranted and inaccurate" but don't go close to denying that something happened.

The impression I get is that their feelings changed with the dramatic improvement in results.

Quite understandably they soon realised how unpopular any change of management would be and served this stattement up as a damage limitation exercise.

And I'm glad. It seems to reflect genuine appreciation of what's happened recently and the owner's hope that they and the manager can once again work and support one another in taking the club forard. It might not amount to an apology but it probably amounts to a public admittance that they made a mistake.

But let no-one pretend that statement in any way denies that something went on that shouldn't have done.

If that had been the case and the intention, there would have been no ambiguity whatsoever.

As I said in another thread I hope both parties are genuinely big enough to forgive and forget properly and that, in future they both learn from this and work together honourably for the good of the club and each other.

[yorkie1999]

What's Ultra said now, he really needs to pull up his trousers and stop showing his skiddy pants and get a proper job and life!!

Race has nothing to do with trust, infact history will probably paint the west as probably a least trusting race of people!!

Yeah right, like you'd trust your Japanese neighbour to look after your koi carp, or a german shower attendant

[Thracian]

They can't prove they haven't but it is a bit difficult to prove it didn't happen isn't it? It's not something you can prove didn't happen. All they can do is say it didn't happen, and Redknapp completely denied it.

"Given the recent unwarranted and inaccurate speculation in relation to our manager, we wish to set the record straight in the most unequivocal manner.

"Nigel has and continues to retain our total support in helping us to deliver our stated long-term aim of achieving footballing success."

This statement here is them saying nothing has happened...

It may give that impression but it actually says nothing of the sort.

"Unwarranted," could mean all sorts of things and certainly that the owners wished there'd been no speculation about what did or didn't happen which would be entirely accurate and understandable from their point of view.

"Inaccurate" could also mean various things but is not in any way a flat denial that anything happened. Just that whatever was written as speculation was not accurate in what could have been countless ways.

"Has and continues to retain our support ," refers to the present and arguably the future tense. "Always had, has and will continue to have...." would have been convincing.

I'm not nit-picking to be provocative or to continue having a go at the owners.

As already stated I welcome their statement and hope it serves the intended purpose of allowing the whole affair to be forgiven and forgotten.

Let's be quite clear. Overall I think our owners have tried to be good for our club and there seems some hope now that we are finally on the right path...both on and off the field.

I even believe the lessons learned from this affair might be beneficial in the long run.

[tedrub]

Trust the owners - why? All we have to do is support our team - we don't have to trust the owners.

If you don't like it get a few million quid together and buy the club - then sit back and watch everyone question every decision you make.

If I was them reading this thread I would call in the £60m loan and tell you all to do one.

Have some respect for the time, money and effort they have put in. And don't give me that "just an opinion" bollx -

Out team - their club - and I can't think of any other owners I would rather have.

Suggestions?

[marty78]

They may as well have said nothing since plenty still refuse to believe them, same with Redknapp, no-one believes him either. Instead people are much more willing to believe random forum posters who 'can't say any more than that' and perhaps even sparked this story in the media for all I know. Certainly the papers that ran the story haven't offered any real evidence nor any specific details and neither has any 'IDK' on here. Saying 'I know for a fact' or 'a reliable source said' isn't evidence in my World and with both accused parties denying any wrong doing the argument now seems a little lopsided in my eyes. All seems rather peculiar to me but each to the their own.

Anyway, roll on Saturday so we can talk about football for a change and hopefully put this shit behind us.

[dmayne7]

I trust them simply because they have invested an awful lot into the club infrastructure and made several other long term investments. Granted they have been quiet recently but they are still more forthcoming than most chairman and not in an egotistical manner

[yorkie1999]

At the end of the day they have bought leicester to both our benefits which can only be sound business. We are seeing investment in both the ground and the players and staff which can only be good for us, they are raising the king power profile which can only be of benefit to their other business interests. If we get to the premiership we'll all be happy bunnies, especially this year because of the massive sky payments that kick in at the end of this season.

[terry2simmo]

Please close this hypothetical nonsense thread and move on.

[MooseBreath]

I didn't make it up you said they where justified in looking for new manager because of the results thus implying that this is normal business practice therefore the conclusion I came to from your views was that we can expect them to be looking for a new manager when ever we have a few bad results.

Where the hell did this xenophobe come in are you accessory in disguise where you have to throw it in when you're struggling to make your point.

We had a few poor results, yet we didn't sack the manager so the whole idea about a few poor results causing us to sack the manager is clearly wrong. Even more so if we continue with some good form. You'd be much less inclined to think about sacking the manager in the face of a few poor results if you're still doing ok in the league. I don't expect this kind of frenzy of gossip every time we have a fee bad games, but I think you're being a bit naive if you think the owners aren't constantly surveying available managers, planning for different scenarios, just like Pearson and scouting team will still be out there looking at and speaking to wingers - there's no need for knocky to be offended, it's just good practice to know what's going on who is available

[davieG]

We had a few poor results, yet we didn't sack the manager so the whole idea about a few poor results causing us to sack the manager is clearly wrong. Even more so if we continue with some good form. You'd be much less inclined to think about sacking the manager in the face of a few poor results if you're still doing ok in the league. I don't expect this kind of frenzy of gossip every time we have a fee bad games, but I think you're being a bit naive if you think the owners aren't constantly surveying available managers, planning for different scenarios, just like Pearson and scouting team will still be out there looking at and speaking to wingers - there's no need for knocky to be offended, it's just good practice to know what's going on who is available

I don't believe I said sacking the manager I said looking for one, I still stand by the view that it's crazy, disruptive, distrustful to be 'looking' for a new manager if we get a few bad results where as you think that is sound business practice.

If they're in such a nervous state to be continually looking out for available managers then I've even less reason to respect them, because I see them having no trust in the manager they've appointed or trusting them because I do not want to see a constant changeover of managers. Looking for players when you have to maintain a squad of 20+ plus players that could be injured, retire or adapt to a new set of tactics is an entirely different scenario.

Anyway I've spent enough time debating this and frankly i'm bored even if you're not so that's me finished on this subject.

[cc_star]

We're extremely lucky to have the owners we do, they have invested heavily in the squad, training ground and stadium. Can't understand why anyone would have any animosity towards them.

You and the people who +1'd your post, have a remarkable lack of knowledge of how 'investing' in a UK football club works.

If the performance curve is upward it most likely will never matter

but if, even for a season, the curve isn't upward, we could be a mess, and a mess that would make our previous administration look a cakewalk in comparison.

[Deucalion]

You and the people who +1'd your post, have a remarkable lack of knowledge of how 'investing' in a UK football club works.

If the performance curve is upward it most likely will never matter

but if, even for a season, the curve isn't upward, we could be a mess, and a mess that would make our previous administration look a cakewalk in comparison.

If they walk away, how are they going to get a return on their investment? The amount paid to Mandaric was something like £45 million. They overpaid for the club in the first place. They have invested money into the playing side and into the infrastructure but unless we are in the Premier League they will get nothing like this if they sold the club.

That leaves them with the option of declaring the club bankrupt if they want out. Their recent move to make the club part of King Power Investments does not make this easier.

The only way the owners can make any money from Leicester City is by establishing the club in the Premier League. Then, they can either run the club as an established Premier League club or they can sell it, probably at a profit.

There is no reason to suspect they will chose anything but the former option. Their stated reason for buying the club in the first place was as a marketing tool for King Power in Europe. It would be a strange thing to do to get rid of the marketing tool once it was in a position to actually get noticed.

I think we should have a little faith in the owners, as if and when their plans are realised, we and they both stand to benefit.

[MooseBreath]

I don't believe I said sacking the manager I said looking for one, I still stand by the view that it's crazy, disruptive, distrustful to be 'looking' for a new manager if we get a few bad results where as you think that is sound business practice.

If they're in such a nervous state to be continually looking out for available managers then I've even less reason to respect them, because I see them having no trust in the manager they've appointed or trusting them because I do not want to see a constant changeover of managers. Looking for players when you have to maintain a squad of 20+ plus players that could be injured, retire or adapt to a new set of tactics is an entirely different scenario.

Anyway I've spent enough time debating this and frankly i'm bored even if you're not so that's me finished on this subject.

Fait enough, was gonna say it looks like we're going to have to agree to disagree. I'll keep viewing looking at other managers as a sensible background activity in a professional relationship and you can keep viewing it as something akin to cheating on your partner and worrying about breaking poor Pearson's little heart

[Steve Agnew]

Anyone who doesn't love the owners is a racist. No other argument is valid, they're foreign so even if you have genuine concerns about the way they run the football club, any opposition makes you a racist. Regardless of the fact that no one has mentioned anything to do with their ethnicity. Nope, all posters who love the owners have the moral high ground and all who are unsure about their intentions with regards to the club can have no reason for doing so other than being knuckle dragging racists.

Apparently.

PC gone mad!

[marty78]

PC gone mad!

My PC went mad once and thought it was a toaster.

[cc_star]

If they walk away, how are they going to get a return on their investment? The amount paid to Mandaric was something like £45 million. They overpaid for the club in the first place. They have invested money into the playing side and into the infrastructure but unless we are in the Premier League they will get nothing like this if they sold the club.

That leaves them with the option of declaring the club bankrupt if they want out. Their recent move to make the club part of King Power Investments does not make this easier.

The only way the owners can make any money from Leicester City is by establishing the club in the Premier League. Then, they can either run the club as an established Premier League club or they can sell it, probably at a profit.

There is no reason to suspect they will chose anything but the former option. Their stated reason for buying the club in the first place was as a marketing tool for King Power in Europe. It would be a strange thing to do to get rid of the marketing tool once it was in a position to actually get noticed.

I think we should have a little faith in the owners, as if and when their plans are realised, we and they both stand to benefit.

Oh I don't think they'll pull out, sending us into bankruptcy and them end up simply accepting 10p in the £ from administrators

My point was their investment isn't generous, it's not a gift, all they've done is secure themselves future earnings from the club's tickets, sales & tv revenue for the next gawd knows how many years.

People were already on about Forest, Blackburn & others signing loads of players in the summer whilst we bought in some ManU rejects & foreign guy & a dude from a non-league club.

In-short people were concerned we weren't spending whilst others were & that we'd be left behind, now imagine we don't go up for a few more years, we're hardly going to make big dents in the loan payments back to the Thai's so that debt will still be hanging around... in fact the reality is it will get worse because more money will be added to it through more managers coming in & signing yet more players.

So whilst other teams fresh on the new owner ladder or those relegated with parachute payments will be free to spend, we'd simply be servicing a debt to our generous owners for their 'investment' until the payments got so big it would be tough to not have a fire sale & hope for the best.

Yes, I trust them to want that money back & as business to want profit on that money (as well as King Power exposure) but I'm uneasy with the word 'investment' when it's basically just a 'gamble' with the future of the club

[Kitchandro]

Fait enough, was gonna say it looks like we're going to have to agree to disagree. I'll keep viewing looking at other managers as a sensible background activity in a professional relationship and you can keep viewing it as something akin to cheating on your partner and worrying about breaking poor Pearson's little heart

Come off it, you can't seriously think what they may have done was professional.

It wouldn't have looked so professional if Nigel had found out it was true and then turned around and said 'you can stick it up your arse, I quit'. And make no mistake, if they did speak to Redknapp they were taking that risk.

There's nothing professional about what they did at all, quite the opposite. Professional would have been doing nothing and waiting a few more games to see how things panned out. That's called keeping your nerve. That's what the best businessmen do.

[Daggers]

They really have less of a clue about football than Cooling has about life.

[Deucalion]

Oh I don't think they'll pull out, sending us into bankruptcy and them end up simply accepting 10p in the £ from administrators

My point was their investment isn't generous, it's not a gift, all they've done is secure themselves future earnings from the club's tickets, sales & tv revenue for the next gawd knows how many years.

People were already on about Forest, Blackburn & others signing loads of players in the summer whilst we bought in some ManU rejects & foreign guy & a dude from a non-league club.

In-short people were concerned we weren't spending whilst others were & that we'd be left behind, now imagine we don't go up for a few more years, we're hardly going to make big dents in the loan payments back to the Thai's so that debt will still be hanging around... in fact the reality is it will get worse because more money will be added to it through more managers coming in & signing yet more players.

So whilst other teams fresh on the new owner ladder or those relegated with parachute payments will be free to spend, we'd simply be servicing a debt to our generous owners for their 'investment' until the payments got so big it would be tough to not have a fire sale & hope for the best.

Yes, I trust them to want that money back & as business to want profit on that money (as well as King Power exposure) but I'm uneasy with the word 'investment' when it's basically just a 'gamble' with the future of the club

Surely everyone is concerned about mounting debt. I certainly am.

But...given a choice between the mediocrity and lack of ambition of the past and owners prepared to gamble a little, I personally want the latter. Running a tight ship previously in the Premier League still resulted in administration when we were relegated. A little more ambition with signings and managerial appointments following O'Neill's departure might have resulted in a longer stay in the Premier League and no administration. We will never know.

While the owners have purchased the club to pursue their own business interests, I actually believe they have been generous. They have laid on entertainment, fairs, half-time entertainment and many other little gestures. They didn't have to do any of this and before anyone gets too cynical about it, compare it with anything you have received for free from previous owners?

It is easy to criticise the owners but when you stand them up against previous owners and boards, I believe they are better in almost every regard.

[Kitchandro]

Surely everyone is concerned about mounting debt. I certainly am.

But...given a choice between the mediocrity and lack of ambition of the past and owners prepared to gamble a little, I personally want the latter. Running a tight ship previously in the Premier League still resulted in administration when we were relegated. A little more ambition with signings and managerial appointments following O'Neill's departure might have resulted in a longer stay in the Premier League and no administration. We will never know.

While the owners have purchased the club to pursue their own business interests, I actually believe they have been generous. They have laid on entertainment, fairs, half-time entertainment and many other little gestures. They didn't have to do any of this and before anyone gets too cynical about it, compare it with anything you have received for free from previous owners?

It is easy to criticise the owners but when you stand them up against previous owners and boards, I believe they are better in almost every regard.

Even Mandy didn't charge what these guys are charging. They've certainly not been generous in that sense. And your average football fan isn't bothered about fairs, face-paints, kick boxing, etc. And I think most would take promotion and decent ticket prices over a one-off friendly against Real Madrid too - as good an occasion as that was.

Like I said, they've done some good things, but with the things that really matter they haven't been so impressive.

[Deucalion]

Even Mandy didn't charge what these guys are charging. They've certainly not been generous in that sense. And your average football fan isn't bothered about fairs, face-paints, kick boxing, etc. And I think most would take promotion and decent ticket prices over a one-off friendly against Real Madrid too - as good an occasion as that was.

Like I said, they've done some good things, but with the things that really matter they haven't been so impressive.

Football is far too expensive but I don't think the Raksriaksorns are responsible for that. The FA are responsible as prices have rocketed since the advent of the Premier League. The Mercury usually runs a price comparison at some point during the season and Leicester usually is pretty reasonably priced...comparatively.

One of the most impressive chairmen in the past has to be Martin George. He was a total tight-assed and once commented that; 'it wasn't his responsibility to spend his family's fortune on Leicester City.' This sticks in my mind as 'spending the family fortune' is exactly what he was expecting most fans on far more modest means to be doing. But to the point, he had an eye for a manager and he selected Brian Little to turn LCFC around and eventually get us promoted. This took us 3 years.

The Raksriaksorns may yet get us into the Premier League in 3 years. They will have done so by spending far more than George did, but football has changed greatly in the 21 years since Brian Little was appointed. Promotion on a shoestring may still happen but it is far more difficult due to parachute payments and the amount of foreign owners attracted to the Championship due to the possibility of the Premier League moneypot.

Their biggest mistake so far was letting Pearson go in the first place. The stewardships of Sousa and Sven have resulted in two lost years of progress. They have learnt enough to put right their initial error though, although to be fair, it looks more like Mandaric's error than theirs.

I haven't given up on them impressing me in a football sense. I am pretty impressed at the moment to be honest. With the amount of disappointments in the last decade it is difficult to keep faith in the club. Faith seems harder to come by than easy cynicism. But it is faith which will best support the team on matchday.

So, to resurrect a slogan from past, more difficult times...

Keep the Faith !!