fleckneymike Posted 3 July 2013 Share Posted 3 July 2013 We're sensibly attempting to shift players we don't need and therefore don't need to replace. Sell a Kasper or a Morgan and part of the money 'saved' has to be immediately reinvested in a replacement. Shift a Danns, Beckford, SSL etc and that money goes straight in the bank/debt and there's no huge pressure to replace them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lasty Posted 4 July 2013 Share Posted 4 July 2013 A lot of that big loss last season was due to the purchase of the stadium. It was actually a very smart move, as the owners knew that this was coming and took action before it fell under the jurisdiction of the new rules. We are not half as bad off as some people will have you believe. I cannot argue that we are in debt, but its the losses posted THIS YEAR that will count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bert Posted 4 July 2013 Share Posted 4 July 2013 Jermaine Beckford's sale will free up some funds. I totally agree a left-back is a major priority as well. Sadly it won't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cropwellfox Posted 4 July 2013 Share Posted 4 July 2013 Sadly it won't. Clearly the case - which makes rejecting the chance to do business for Schmeichel all the more odd. The squad we have got (taking out the players NP doesn't want around) is beyond paper-thin. Seems likely that numbers will only be boosted by loaning younger prem players which won't help add the steel we need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tielemans63 Posted 4 July 2013 Share Posted 4 July 2013 Clearly the case - which makes rejecting the chance to do business for Schmeichel all the more odd. The squad we have got (taking out the players NP doesn't want around) is beyond paper-thin. Seems likely that numbers will only be boosted by loaning younger prem players which won't help add the steel we need. No point seling someone if it's not a good deal. We only have media reports and no facts. If they did offer £3million it might not have been up front - it could have been installments / add-ons etc etc which might not represent a good deal. It could also be that Kasper isn't on mega bucks compared to some - he did come from Notts Co after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wymsey Posted 4 July 2013 Share Posted 4 July 2013 Sadly it won't. What fee did we sell Beckford for? I heard just over £1m? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattolcfc Posted 4 July 2013 Share Posted 4 July 2013 Unfortunately however much we think Kasper's worth, a player is only worth as much as someone is willing to pay, and at the moment that is not over £2m. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sylofox Posted 4 July 2013 Share Posted 4 July 2013 A lot of that big loss last season was due to the purchase of the stadium. It was actually a very smart move, as the owners knew that this was coming and took action before it fell under the jurisdiction of the new rules. We are not half as bad off as some people will have you believe. I cannot argue that we are in debt, but its the losses posted THIS YEAR that will count. Spending on facilities does not come under FFP only wages and transfers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxes_Trust Posted 4 July 2013 Share Posted 4 July 2013 Though the main reason is to be within FFP regulations, the club are just about inside it, but buying players would take them over, the main priority is reducing the wage bill more than anything. How do you work that one out ? Last season (as stated in the 2011/12 published accounts) the owners had to plough in £15.7m up to 30/11/12 (and who knows if anymore was put in for the rest of the season). So to cut to keep within the £5m allowed investment next season, that appears to show a need to save £10m, Beckford of the wage bill (if media reports are correct) saves 15% of that amount, there have been no other big wage earners leave so far so indicates still a long way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxes_Trust Posted 4 July 2013 Share Posted 4 July 2013 A lot of that big loss last season was due to the purchase of the stadium. It was actually a very smart move, as the owners knew that this was coming and took action before it fell under the jurisdiction of the new rules. We are not half as bad off as some people will have you believe. I cannot argue that we are in debt, but its the losses posted THIS YEAR that will count. We won't know what the loss for last season was until Feb 2014 when the accounts come out, the £29.7m loss related to 2011/12 before the stadium was purchased However the purchase of the stadium was made by King Power Holdings, so not touching LCFC accounts, so has no impact on the losses at all in the way you mean. However the club paid £1.1m/year in interest to the previous stadium owners Teachers, now it depends if King Power Holdings levy a charge for stadium use or whether there is no charge at all from the KP group, in which case that is £1.1m spend saved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aus Fox Posted 4 July 2013 Share Posted 4 July 2013 We won't sell our first team players, our first 11 is as good as any in this division. And the best way to avoid FFP is to get out of this league. Add a couple of loanies and we could challenge again. Beckford gone saving $2 million also included in the big loss is 17 million in the stadium buy back, figures which don't count in FFP, all this means the 27 million loss last year is down to a maximum of 8 million. We are not nearly as bad as people think. A quiet year on the transfer front this year but the future is looking bright. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mack Posted 5 July 2013 Share Posted 5 July 2013 We dont NEED to sell to buy, the owners want us to sell before buying. Shows a lack of commitment and a falling out of love with the club and it's situation to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teblin Posted 5 July 2013 Share Posted 5 July 2013 We dont NEED to sell to buy, the owners want us to sell before buying. Shows a lack of commitment and a falling out of love with the club and it's situation to me. No it shows that they are starting to try to run the club like a business. Also with FFP if we gamble again and sign players, if we don't go up we will end up with a needless fine and maybe even a transfer embargo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col city fan Posted 7 July 2013 Share Posted 7 July 2013 Again, who on here REALLY knows whether we have to sell to buy? It makes sound financial sense, sure, but can anyone give a definitive answer in terms of this is what we MUST do? Take Beckford for example. I think Pearson wants to get rid of Beckford cos he don't fancy him as a player. End of... If Nugent or Wes was earning what Beckford is purportedly on, I don't think Nige would be as keen to sell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mack Posted 7 July 2013 Share Posted 7 July 2013 No it shows that they are starting to try to run the club like a business. Also with FFP if we gamble again and sign players, if we don't go up we will end up with a needless fine and maybe even a transfer embargo. There is a lot of misunderstanding about running a business on here. They have money, they dont NEED to sell to buy, you could buy who you think you need to give the team the best chance this season and sell as and when other teams show an interest. The fact everyone knows we need to sell to buy makes our hand weaker in the open market, and other clubs will be aware of our desperate need to sell before we can acquire, giving them a stronger hand. If the owners were committed to getting what our management think we need for the coming season they would do it regardless of if we have sold any players, after all, I thought the plan was to get up? However the employment of a Director of Football probably shows they have lost some faith in the Walsh / Pearson player acquisition system, and can you blame them when players like Vardy were signed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark_w Posted 7 July 2013 Share Posted 7 July 2013 There is a lot of misunderstanding about running a business on here. They have money, they dont NEED to sell to buy, you could buy who you think you need to give the team the best chance this season and sell as and when other teams show an interest. The fact everyone knows we need to sell to buy makes our hand weaker in the open market, and other clubs will be aware of our desperate need to sell before we can acquire, giving them a stronger hand. If the owners were committed to getting what our management think we need for the coming season they would do it regardless of if we have sold any players, after all, I thought the plan was to get up? However the employment of a Director of Football probably shows they have lost some faith in the Walsh / Pearson player acquisition system, and can you blame them when players like Vardy were signed. Well yes, because players like Knockaert & James were signed and if at any point the owners lose their minds and decide to sell them, they'll probably make a massive profit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teblin Posted 7 July 2013 Share Posted 7 July 2013 There is a lot of misunderstanding about running a business on here. They have money, they dont NEED to sell to buy, you could buy who you think you need to give the team the best chance this season and sell as and when other teams show an interest. The fact everyone knows we need to sell to buy makes our hand weaker in the open market, and other clubs will be aware of our desperate need to sell before we can acquire, giving them a stronger hand. If the owners were committed to getting what our management think we need for the coming season they would do it regardless of if we have sold any players, after all, I thought the plan was to get up? However the employment of a Director of Football probably shows they have lost some faith in the Walsh / Pearson player acquisition system, and can you blame them when players like Vardy were signed. They do NEED to stay within ffp and if they don't it will fined and maybe unable to trade players which is bad business sense is it not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jock2612 Posted 7 July 2013 Share Posted 7 July 2013 Dont the FFP rules with fines etc start next season so couldnt the club invest in what NP needs now and then see where we are in Jan and the if nec pay the contracts of unwanted players up,I know this would be expensive for the owners,but so would another season in the Championship which is what will happen if the squad is not improved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greatness_Since_1884 Posted 7 July 2013 Share Posted 7 July 2013 I think Nigel will have to be pragmatic about this. From the outside it would appear that we can only get a new CB when SSL goes, a new CM when Danns goes etc. so if they don't go, we're going to have to make do with them as 'new signings'. Now those two at their best are good enough for us IMO (ignoring wage and attitude) but do they/NP have it in them to put the past behind and accept that scenario. Also judging by Twitter a few of the younger guys like Taft and Cain seem to be getting more exposure to the 1st team this pre-season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greatness_Since_1884 Posted 7 July 2013 Share Posted 7 July 2013 Dont the FFP rules with fines etc start next season so couldnt the club invest in what NP needs now and then see where we are in Jan and the if nec pay the contracts of unwanted players up,I know this would be expensive for the owners,but so would another season in the Championship which is what will happen if the squad is not improved. The fines are instigated next pre season but based on this 13-14 season. That's why the owners can't do what mack suggests and invest their own capital. The rules simply don't allow it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwyne webster Posted 7 July 2013 Share Posted 7 July 2013 Im sure there are some good keepers still out there that are championship level ,ive mensioned before just one i think would fill in if we did sell kasper and that is Lee Kamp hes on the bench most weeks at Norwich ,and i think he left forest well befor his time was up ,hes one id still rate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sylofox Posted 7 July 2013 Share Posted 7 July 2013 The fines are instigated next pre season but based on this 13-14 season. That's why the owners can't do what mack suggests and invest their own capital. The rules simply don't allow it. I thought the rules did allow it but the money has to be given not loaned. The rules are to safeguard clubs from being the nxt pompey. Not just to make a level playing field. Can anyone tell us what the owners pay in sponsorship for the ground and shirts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lasty Posted 7 July 2013 Share Posted 7 July 2013 The way I see it, we won't know exactly what kind of state the club is in unless they come out and tell us. Seeing as they won't do this, we're all just second guessing the situation and each other. One thing I do know is that there is already evidence that the rules are creating a slump in the transfer market, which could well become a full on depression as they continue to bite. I can only see this leading to clubs running smaller squads in the long run, thus throwing more players on the scrapheap and needlessly wasting talent. I don't claim to be an expert, far from it, but I can't see this doing any good for young players who want to forge a career in the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sylofox Posted 7 July 2013 Share Posted 7 July 2013 At the end of the day FFP is weighted in the favour of the big clubs and the rest of us can go to hell. The league and cups will all be won by the top five or six clubs and no one will be able to gate crash the party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
It's A Knockeart! Posted 8 July 2013 Share Posted 8 July 2013 No point seling someone if it's not a good deal. We only have media reports and no facts. If they did offer £3million it might not have been up front - it could have been installments / add-ons etc etc which might not represent a good deal. It could also be that Kasper isn't on mega bucks compared to some - he did come from Notts Co after all. Actually, he came from Leeds, and is likely to be on big bucks as he was a marquee signing under Sven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.