Guest MattP Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 Is it really that helpful to have discussions on Radio Leicester by people who are not qualified accountants? Seems like bad journalism to me. You don't to be a great accountant to realise breaking the record for losses in a Championship season isn't a fantastic thing to happen.
Guest MattP Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 Why are they charging interest? Because they are here to make money.
davieG Posted 4 March 2013 Author Posted 4 March 2013 Why are they charging interest? They've always claimed to have a big interest in LCFC.
Jace Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 We did that under Smeaton I think, didn't realise we were allowed to become a PLC again. I don't think anyone realises what's going on, no doubt the Thais didn't plan for this when they purchased the club though. Might be trying the same thing as what the Glazers have done but on a smaller scale. These won't be public shares so no plans we are currently aware of to become a PLC again if it is allowable, my evalutation of what the Thais have done is much more secure than the Glazers as the Thais have not had to borrow to secure the money required to purchase the shares. The ammount of interest the Glazers pay is incredible although with that comes a tidy profit through Man Utd FC
unreachable Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 You don't to be a great accountant to realise breaking the record for losses in a Championship season isn't a fantastic thing to happen. It depends upon whether we get promotion this season. My point was that shallow discussion on financial matters is pointless.
Jace Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 Why are they charging interest? It wouldn't be a legitimate business loan if they didn't, but the loan will not be required any longer anyway
Guest MattP Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 These won't be public shares so no plans we are currently aware of to become a PLC again if it is allowable, my evalutation of what the Thais have done is much more secure than the Glazers as the Thais have not had to borrow to secure the money required to purchase the shares. The ammount of interest the Glazers pay is incredible although with that comes a tidy profit through Man Utd FC They gambled and won, how they got away with it no one quite knows but they have done. I don't understand how you clear that sort of debt without becoming a PLC though, shareholders will surely want an end product. It depends upon whether we get promotion this season. My point was that shallow discussion on financial matters is pointless. Not really, those figures were last season, that outlay already failed.
Jace Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 They gambled and won, how they got away with it no one quite knows but they have done. I don't understand how you clear that sort of debt without becoming a PLC though, shareholders will surely want an end product. Not really, those figures were last season, that outlay already failed. Yeah their gambling seems to have paid off so far, I can see why the Man Utd fans objected so much to them in the beginning though. My opinion on it was if they cannot afford to buy the club then how could they afford to continue to invest in £30 million + players every season to keep them at the top but it appears things have turned out ok for them so far
MooseBreath Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 shareholders will surely want an end product. What shareholders? They are the only shareholders. edit, assuming you're taking about Leicester and not Manu
cc_star Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 Bet the owners wished they had bought into another club now No, but I bet they wish they'd have had a tighter grip on a disastrous previous regime. And people wonder why we've not signed x, y AND z in January or signed 5 players on loan. Fact is, the pot isn't just empty.... it's long since been pissed away
unreachable Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 Does anyone know whether King Power can offset all their losses relating to LCFC against their worldwide profits? Will an expert in international accounting step forward?
Guest MattP Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 What shareholders? They are the only shareholders. edit, assuming you're taking about Leicester and not Manu Was talking about the potential solution of covering our loans through selling shares.
okie fox Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 Why is everyone so surprised it's a loan? Who would put £60M into a football club and not ask for it back? I read somewhere a while back that it is advantageous taxwise for owners to loan money to clubs rather than just give it.
Jace Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 Does anyone know whether King Power can offset all their losses relating to LCFC against their worldwide profits? Will an expert in international accounting step forward? Yes the losses will be accounted for in the investment in new shares within King Power clearing the clubs debt hopefully, this is acceptable to do at the moment but there will be a limit on this once FFP is fully enforced. The ownership of the club is within the King Power holdings which gives the club fantastic security but our main concern at the moment is how will money be invested long term regarding future losses with the new regulations.
MooseBreath Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 Was talking about the potential solution of covering our loans through selling shares. They're not selling shares, they're converting their own loans into equity in a club they already own. Basically just absorbing the debt.
Jace Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 Was talking about the potential solution of covering our loans through selling shares. They're not selling shares, they're converting their own loans into equity in a club they already own. Basically just absorbing the debt. You are both right in what you are trying to say the method in which the loans can be coverted into equity would be to create new shares in the club and sell them back though to the existing owners. This allows the investment of the new shares to be paid to the club to pay off the debt. I don't think we would be looking at any new shareholders to be introduced in this it's just a legitimate way for King Power to invest
Chrysalis Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 the article did miss that they plan to change the loans into equity.
Deucalion Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 King Power has a turnover of £1 billion a year according to the club's financial statement. I don't think the King Power pot is anywhere near empty, although they might have to be creative to still invest once FFP is running for real. Cue people accusing me of blind faith, but I actually do have faith in these owners. The may have made a poor decision with Sven and allowed him to run riot with the chequebook, but they appear to be on the verge of putting this mistake right by effectively wiping the debt. I don't see how converting debt to equity helps them, other than to allow them to continue to invest in the football club. Back when David Pleat was manager, a member of the board held his position because he had invested £1000 into the club a number of years ago, as a loan. Does anyone want to return to unambitious boards enjoying the directors box while doing precious little to improve the club? The Owners are ok and haven't done that much wrong in my opinion, and they have done a lot of things right. Let's try to remember which side our bread is buttered!
Chairman of the Bored Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 I can feel an impending sense of doom arriving (again) if we don't go up this year.
Vale Blue Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 King Power has a turnover of £1 billion a year according to the club's financial statement. I don't think the King Power pot is anywhere near empty, although they might have to be creative to still invest once FFP is running for real. Cue people accusing me of blind faith, but I actually do have faith in these owners. The may have made a poor decision with Sven and allowed him to run riot with the chequebook, but they appear to be on the verge of putting this mistake right by effectively wiping the debt. I don't see how converting debt to equity helps them, other than to allow them to continue to invest in the football club. Back when David Pleat was manager, a member of the board held his position because he had invested £1000 into the club a number of years ago, as a loan. Does anyone want to return to unambitious boards enjoying the directors box while doing precious little to improve the club? The Owners are ok and haven't done that much wrong in my opinion, and they have done a lot of things right. Let's try to remember which side our bread is buttered! The problem is, that their methods at the moment, in converting debt into a share reissue, aren't going to happen after this season or should I say only a very small amount is aloud and that decreases each year.Our overspend this year will be at least 25million and next season without buying players will probably be 10-15million over the FFP limit. Difficult to see how we will generate that money, as players will become relatively worthless, as everyone panics and tries to get the wage bill down. The gamble on promotion now looks akin to a plunge on a racehorse.
promised land Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 King Power has a turnover of £1 billion a year according to the club's financial statement. I don't think the King Power pot is anywhere near empty, although they might have to be creative to still invest once FFP is running for real. Turnover is one thing, net profit is something entirely different. They could have for all we know a turnover of 1 billion and but actual outlay in the same period of 2 billion. Just because a business has a high turnover doesn't mean they are making a load of profit.
shiv Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 Mansoor, Ambramovic, Lerner, Gatzidis, Peter Coates, Theo Papitis? Could name 50. I'd be all for a Chairman who was actually intending to spend their money on the football club for success rather than to end up with a profit, the latter is rarely successful. Mansoor and Abramovic did exactly what Top and his dad said they are going to do in turning the debt into equity. And actually, Chelsea have a very complex structure so even thought they may be debt free each year, Abramovic is doing through various holding companies. Gazidis doesn't own Arsenal (he's CEO), they are a public company (via Arsenal Holdings plc) and Randy Lerner is owed £130 million by Aston Villa. Stoke are pretty fortunate with their owner, but I'm sure he will have also converted the debt into equity.
Foxblogger Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 Is it really that helpful to have discussions on Radio Leicester by people who are not qualified accountants? Seems like bad journalism to me. Don't agree with that. It's perfectly legitimate to discuss issues with a journalist who has thoroughly researched a story.
unreachable Posted 4 March 2013 Posted 4 March 2013 Don't agree with that. It's perfectly legitimate to discuss issues with a journalist who has thoroughly researched a story. I don't agree. How can unqualified persons reach authoritative conclusions since they neither have full possession of all of the facts and lack the intellectual ability to interpret them.It is also naive to expect LCFC to explain their reasons and motive to third parties (apart from the Football League) in view of the accounting implications. Fine to have a chat about it and raise concerns but it is just peering through the windows of the club.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.