Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
-
- Posts: 25697
- Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
- Been Liked: 4644 times
- Has Liked: 9849 times
- Location: Glasgow
Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Major improvements planned at the King Power, this illustrates exactly what Burnley are up against in trying to sustain ourselves at this level.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/57994358
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/57994358
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Not really.
We swim in a completely different sea to Leicester.
We just need to ensure we’re better than 3 other teams every season.
We swim in a completely different sea to Leicester.
We just need to ensure we’re better than 3 other teams every season.
-
- Posts: 7040
- Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:50 pm
- Been Liked: 2167 times
- Has Liked: 3100 times
- Location: Praha
- Contact:
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Hope the builders get paid in advance
These 11 users liked this post: Bosscat boatshed bill HandforthClaret superdimitri longhair longsidepies basil6345789 Juan Tanamera bfcjg AfloatinClaret Buxtonclaret
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
And I doubt those involved had any guilt whatsoever towards those local companies who lost out.
Just wrong on every level.
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Oh dear......40, 000 happy clappers !
-
- Posts: 25697
- Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
- Been Liked: 4644 times
- Has Liked: 9849 times
- Location: Glasgow
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
We are now I agree, but it wasn't that long ago that we were competing on parity with them, now yes they are on a different level financially and even in terms of their playing squad they're miles ahead of us alas.
This is what can happen when you're lucky enough to attract a wealthy owner, which unfortunately at this moment in time BFC isn't in a position to do.
-
- Posts: 13442
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
- Been Liked: 3087 times
- Has Liked: 3808 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Good on them for investing in the training ground (£100m - and bloody spectacular) and ground though. We need that investment in infrastructure to ensure the Premier League as the best league in the world.
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Totally immoral that clubs who default and don’t pay their creditors don’t do the decent thing and pay them back from their multi millions in future years
Premier League clubs and probably other clubs should have stars above their badge
Black star for every administration
Makes me laugh when the press quote Leicester and Southampton as well run clubs
-
- Posts: 19376
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3153 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
The expansion plans have been in discussion for some time now It is telling that the development also includes entertainment facilities - whatever that may be - they have to find revenue from many sources - though it sounds like a watered down version of what is going on at the Etihad
-
- Posts: 13442
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
- Been Liked: 3087 times
- Has Liked: 3808 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
What’s going on at the Etihad? The Coop arena?Chester Perry wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:02 pmThe expansion plans have been in discussion for some time now It is telling that the development also includes entertainment facilities - whatever that may be - they have to find revenue from many sources - though it sounds like a watered down version of what is going on at the Etihad
-
- Posts: 14566
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3435 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
-
- Posts: 19376
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3153 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
-
- Posts: 15233
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3156 times
- Has Liked: 6743 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Absolutely spot on.Spike wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:00 pmTotally immoral that clubs who default and don’t pay their creditors don’t do the decent thing and pay them back from their multi millions in future years
Premier League clubs and probably other clubs should have stars above their badge
Black star for every administration
Makes me laugh when the press quote Leicester and Southampton as well run clubs
Didn't their old board even default on the St. John's Ambulance? Nice
-
- Posts: 7211
- Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2016 6:11 pm
- Been Liked: 2378 times
- Has Liked: 3804 times
- Location: Padiham
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Leicester have had the better squad for many years with plenty great young players too.
-
- Posts: 4955
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 6:04 pm
- Been Liked: 1007 times
- Has Liked: 725 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
They can make the packet bigger, but it doesn't mean they'll be more crisps. Like a crisp packet, it will be all air.
These 2 users liked this post: tim_noone AfloatinClaret
-
- Posts: 630
- Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2021 5:47 pm
- Been Liked: 110 times
- Has Liked: 77 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Population of Burnley - 87k
Population of Leicester - 357k
We are doing well to get 20k. I don't think we could ever fill 30k bit anytime soon anyway.
Population of Leicester - 357k
We are doing well to get 20k. I don't think we could ever fill 30k bit anytime soon anyway.
This user liked this post: Gordaleman
-
- Posts: 4955
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 11:47 am
- Been Liked: 1087 times
- Has Liked: 996 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Out of interest, when was this? I’ve no idea!boatshed bill wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:58 pmAbsolutely spot on.
Didn't their old board even default on the St. John's Ambulance? Nice
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Another thing that Leicester do that we don't is trade their players. Mahrez, Kante, Chillwell, Drinkwater. They sell for big money when it's on the table something that we don't do because "we don't need the money". If we'd kept the same wages as 2017 and sold Dwight, Pope, Tarkowski etc when big money was on the table Dyche would have had over 200m more to spend, admittedly with three players to replace.
If Leicester finish 5th this season they'll be disappointed, if we finish 15th we'll be quite happy. We're nowhere near the same level.
If Leicester finish 5th this season they'll be disappointed, if we finish 15th we'll be quite happy. We're nowhere near the same level.
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Those were the days when clubs could literally wipe out any debt without any penalty, yet keep all their players.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... ory.sport5
Ipswich did the same.
Quite simply, there should have been only one penalty - both clubs should be have been made to sell players, and if that didn't meet all the shortfalls then they should have been liquidated and kicked out of football.
There are absolutely no mitigating circumstances in those situations, none whatsoever.
-
- Posts: 14566
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3435 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
In all fairness, Leicester appeared to have a clear plan of when to replace those players so the club didn't slide backwards and has actually continued to push forwards to become a top 6 regular instead of a one off title win and then falling away like Rovers did.dibraidio wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 8:22 amAnother thing that Leicester do that we don't is trade their players. Mahrez, Kante, Chillwell, Drinkwater. They sell for big money when it's on the table something that we don't do because "we don't need the money". If we'd kept the same wages as 2017 and sold Dwight, Pope, Tarkowski etc when big money was on the table Dyche would have had over 200m more to spend, admittedly with three players to replace.
If Leicester finish 5th this season they'll be disappointed, if we finish 15th we'll be quite happy. We're nowhere near the same level.
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
With the backing of their owner, Leicester have been able to speculate heavily, and can afford expensive mistakes which comes with the territory of being a genuine top 6-8 club.
We can’t afford anything like a Slimani or a Ghezzal.
On a separate note, Man United reportedly looked at 804 right backs before settling for Wan Bissaka. Now that really does show what we’re up against.
The idea that we can uncover the next Mahrez or Kante is just fanciful.
We’re absolutely doing the right thing with our Academy and I’m really hopeful that within the next 5 years it will begin to bear fruit. We’ve just got to be patient until the academy kicks in, and hopefully stay at the top table for as long as possible.
We can’t afford anything like a Slimani or a Ghezzal.
On a separate note, Man United reportedly looked at 804 right backs before settling for Wan Bissaka. Now that really does show what we’re up against.
The idea that we can uncover the next Mahrez or Kante is just fanciful.
We’re absolutely doing the right thing with our Academy and I’m really hopeful that within the next 5 years it will begin to bear fruit. We’ve just got to be patient until the academy kicks in, and hopefully stay at the top table for as long as possible.
-
- Posts: 17108
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:12 pm
- Been Liked: 4384 times
- Has Liked: 15117 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
superdimitri wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 2:30 amThey can make the packet bigger, but it doesn't mean they'll be more crisps. Like a crisp packet, it will be all air.
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Clearly their recruitment has been far better than our for years. I'm not suggesting that we can compete with that.TsarBomba wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 9:05 amWith the backing of their owner, Leicester have been able to speculate heavily, and can afford expensive mistakes which comes with the territory of being a genuine top 6-8 club.
We can’t afford anything like a Slimani or a Ghezzal.
On a separate note, Man United reportedly looked at 804 right backs before settling for Wan Bissaka. Now that really does show what we’re up against.
The idea that we can uncover the next Mahrez or Kante is just fanciful.
We’re absolutely doing the right thing with our Academy and I’m really hopeful that within the next 5 years it will begin to bear fruit. We’ve just got to be patient until the academy kicks in, and hopefully stay at the top table for as long as possible.
Leicester may have been able to speculate but they've also sold players for BIG money when the opportunity has arisen. Something Sean Dyche doesn't like to do. The only big money sales we've had were Gray and Keane and they funded our only spending spree in the Premier League. Unfortunately that money went on the likes of Brady and Hendrick who were allowed to leave for nothing.
My point was that Leicester have made big profits on player trading, something that we don't. Sean prefers stability and would rather keep players that he can trust than cash in and find new ones. The problem with that is that he has tried to keep them happy by paying them more and our wage bill has gone up from 63m to 93m with essentially the same playing staff and no budget left for new signings. If the wage budget had remained the same as 2017 he'd have had 30m a year extra to spend on players and we may well have actually landed our targets in the last 6 windows and be in a more comfortable position right now. You can see a huge difference though, our top players are linked to Villa, Everton and West Ham. Leicester's are sold to Man Utd, Man City and Chelsea.
-
- Posts: 19376
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3153 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
almost every case of Administration left St John's Ambulance short - it is as people say a disgraceboatshed bill wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:58 pmAbsolutely spot on.
Didn't their old board even default on the St. John's Ambulance? Nice
-
- Posts: 1843
- Joined: Sat May 26, 2018 7:16 pm
- Been Liked: 562 times
- Has Liked: 1406 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Back when I was in the business I worked for a company when we had several opportunities to build new/major extension projects for football clubs, indeed Leicester's might well have been one of them; whilst we did submit prices for a couple, though even those were not too keen, we declined all the rest. The constraints/restrictions were usually too much aggravation, the delay penalties invariably horrendous and often to be unreasonably interpreted and without there being a known source of finance to underwrite the project such as a supermarket wanting the existing stadium site for redevelopment, the non-payment risk just too high.
In construction as in most other aspects of life, the football world seems to think that it's a special case and not subject to the rules and contract conditions that apply to mere mortals.
-
- Posts: 25697
- Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
- Been Liked: 4644 times
- Has Liked: 9849 times
- Location: Glasgow
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
I don't disagree with your valid points, however I doubt our wage bill is as high as 93m, if it is then we're not getting value for money out of our squad.dibraidio wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 10:40 amClearly their recruitment has been far better than our for years. I'm not suggesting that we can compete with that.
Leicester may have been able to speculate but they've also sold players for BIG money when the opportunity has arisen. Something Sean Dyche doesn't like to do. The only big money sales we've had were Gray and Keane and they funded our only spending spree in the Premier League. Unfortunately that money went on the likes of Brady and Hendrick who were allowed to leave for nothing.
My point was that Leicester have made big profits on player trading, something that we don't. Sean prefers stability and would rather keep players that he can trust than cash in and find new ones. The problem with that is that he has tried to keep them happy by paying them more and our wage bill has gone up from 63m to 93m with essentially the same playing staff and no budget left for new signings. If the wage budget had remained the same as 2017 he'd have had 30m a year extra to spend on players and we may well have actually landed our targets in the last 6 windows and be in a more comfortable position right now. You can see a huge difference though, our top players are linked to Villa, Everton and West Ham. Leicester's are sold to Man Utd, Man City and Chelsea.
The highest figure I can recall seeing our salaries added up to 81m, but that was before we cleared the decks of several high earners, Brady, Hart, Hendrick & Lennon being the most notable, so if our wage bill is much over 70m in the next set of accounts I'll be surprised.
The major difference between us and Leicester is they have a thriving academy, which has produced several gems in recent years which they've integrated into their 1st team squad, and some have been sold on for decent money, we aren't at that level yet, but hopefully in the coming years we'll start reaping the fruits of Barnfield, already the early signs are more encouraging in this respect with the likes of Benson perhaps and Dunne going to Championship clubs for reasonable fees.
It's a tricky balance to strike, we also face losing Tarks on a free in under a year, as happened with Brady & Hendrick who we spent big money on, but the longer we remain at the PL table the more likely this scenario is too rear it's ugly head every season, fortunately apart from JT, the rest of our coveted stars are tied down on lengthy contracts, so if clubs want them they'll need to stump the readies.
Plus Leicester have a strong European scouting network which allows them to identify players that they can then pick up for relative peanuts, and then sell on for big money a year or two down the line, again this is something which ALK are trying to address, but it won't happen overnight so we'll need to be patient.
-
- Posts: 3982
- Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
- Been Liked: 855 times
- Has Liked: 604 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
As padihamthickneck wrote.dibraidio wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 8:22 amAnother thing that Leicester do that we don't is trade their players. Mahrez, Kante, Chillwell, Drinkwater. They sell for big money when it's on the table something that we don't do because "we don't need the money". If we'd kept the same wages as 2017 and sold Dwight, Pope, Tarkowski etc when big money was on the table Dyche would have had over 200m more to spend, admittedly with three players to replace.
If Leicester finish 5th this season they'll be disappointed, if we finish 15th we'll be quite happy. We're nowhere near the same level.
"Population of Burnley - 87k
Population of Leicester - 357k
We are doing well to get 20k. I don't think we could ever fill 30k bit anytime soon anyway."
Try living in the real world.
-
- Posts: 9902
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
- Been Liked: 2350 times
- Has Liked: 3178 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
dibraidio wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 10:40 amClearly their recruitment has been far better than our for years. I'm not suggesting that we can compete with that.
Leicester may have been able to speculate but they've also sold players for BIG money when the opportunity has arisen. Something Sean Dyche doesn't like to do. The only big money sales we've had were Gray and Keane and they funded our only spending spree in the Premier League. Unfortunately that money went on the likes of Brady and Hendrick who were allowed to leave for nothing.
My point was that Leicester have made big profits on player trading, something that we don't. Sean prefers stability and would rather keep players that he can trust than cash in and find new ones. The problem with that is that he has tried to keep them happy by paying them more and our wage bill has gone up from 63m to 93m with essentially the same playing staff and no budget left for new signings. If the wage budget had remained the same as 2017 he'd have had 30m a year extra to spend on players and we may well have actually landed our targets in the last 6 windows and be in a more comfortable position right now. You can see a huge difference though, our top players are linked to Villa, Everton and West Ham. Leicester's are sold to Man Utd, Man City and Chelsea.
Hi dibradio and tiger76, just commenting on the players' wages - which, (without checking), was, I recall, recorded as £93m on an adjusted 12 months in the accounts to 31st July 2020. Of course, that figure includes all the employees of the club, including Sean Dyche and the coaching staff, plus all the "back office" teams that keep the club running. You suggest, dibradio, that if the wages had been kept at £63m, the figure from 2017, 3 years earlier, we'd have more money to spend on signing/buying new players, and maybe only James Tarkowski, Dwight McNeil and Nick Pope would have been sold - because they would have wanted more money and got more money at other clubs. But, what about the other players who've extended their contracts since 2017, don't you think they might have chosen to go elsewhere if BFC wasn't paying them what they are worth as Premier League footballers? Similarly, do you think we'd have been able to sign the players that we have signed (I know it's not a vast number) if we hadn't offered them 2018/19/20 wages, relative to their skills and experiences and ambitions?tiger76 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 4:34 pm
I don't disagree with your valid points, however I doubt our wage bill is as high as 93m, if it is then we're not getting value for money out of our squad.
The highest figure I can recall seeing our salaries added up to 81m, but that was before we cleared the decks of several high earners, Brady, Hart, Hendrick & Lennon being the most notable, so if our wage bill is much over 70m in the next set of accounts I'll be surprised.
The major difference between us and Leicester is they have a thriving academy, which has produced several gems in recent years which they've integrated into their 1st team squad, and some have been sold on for decent money, we aren't at that level yet, but hopefully in the coming years we'll start reaping the fruits of Barnfield, already the early signs are more encouraging in this respect with the likes of Benson perhaps and Dunne going to Championship clubs for reasonable fees.
It's a tricky balance to strike, we also face losing Tarks on a free in under a year, as happened with Brady & Hendrick who we spent big money on, but the longer we remain at the PL table the more likely this scenario is too rear it's ugly head every season, fortunately apart from JT, the rest of our coveted stars are tied down on lengthy contracts, so if clubs want them they'll need to stump the readies.
Plus Leicester have a strong European scouting network which allows them to identify players that they can then pick up for relative peanuts, and then sell on for big money a year or two down the line, again this is something which ALK are trying to address, but it won't happen overnight so we'll need to be patient.
Yes, it's a challenge, Premier League wages keep on rising and Burnley FC is always playing "catch up" on a limited budget. That's how it is and the club has managed to do that successfully - defined as retaining Premier League status - 5 seasons and are now going into our 6th successive season in the Premier League.
UTC
-
- Posts: 19376
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3153 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Paul it was £94m for 12 months according to the club - though it appears circa £15m of that was on bonuses and Drinkwater
This user liked this post: Paul Waine
-
- Posts: 15233
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3156 times
- Has Liked: 6743 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
On checking I believe it was The East Midlands Ambulance Service, not sure if that is St. John's.Chester Perry wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 3:33 pmalmost every case of Administration left St John's Ambulance short - it is as people say a disgrace
It doesn't make non-payment any less disgraceful whichever service.
There have been calls for the new regime to pay it back (approximately one decent player's wage for a week!) now that they are mega-wealthy., though I don't suppose they will
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
If only we had a multi billionaire owner.
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Paul, the honest answer is we'll never know. All I'm saying is that since we got into Europe we've stagnated and our wage bill has increased by almost 50%. Yes, it's allowed us to find some stability but certainly hasn't allowed us to take things to another level. What it has done is to leave only a tiny budget for new additions. The sale of Gibson has no doubt funded the signing of Collins but I would be extremely surprised if we break our transfer record again because the money just isn't there.Paul Waine wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 5:08 pmHi dibradio and tiger76, just commenting on the players' wages - which, (without checking), was, I recall, recorded as £93m on an adjusted 12 months in the accounts to 31st July 2020. Of course, that figure includes all the employees of the club, including Sean Dyche and the coaching staff, plus all the "back office" teams that keep the club running. You suggest, dibradio, that if the wages had been kept at £63m, the figure from 2017, 3 years earlier, we'd have more money to spend on signing/buying new players, and maybe only James Tarkowski, Dwight McNeil and Nick Pope would have been sold - because they would have wanted more money and got more money at other clubs. But, what about the other players who've extended their contracts since 2017, don't you think they might have chosen to go elsewhere if BFC wasn't paying them what they are worth as Premier League footballers? Similarly, do you think we'd have been able to sign the players that we have signed (I know it's not a vast number) if we hadn't offered them 2018/19/20 wages, relative to their skills and experiences and ambitions?
Yes, it's a challenge, Premier League wages keep on rising and Burnley FC is always playing "catch up" on a limited budget. That's how it is and the club has managed to do that successfully - defined as retaining Premier League status - 5 seasons and are now going into our 6th successive season in the Premier League.
UTC
-
- Posts: 9902
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
- Been Liked: 2350 times
- Has Liked: 3178 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Dibradio, my honest answer is that we do know. We know that BFC is about to start the 6th consecutive season in the Premier League. We know the players who are in the squad today. We know that many of these players have renewed and extended their contracts since they first signed for the club. We know the players that have been in the squad in previous seasons. We know which players have moved on at the end of their contracts. We know which ones we've transferred out to other clubs during their contracts. What we don't know about any of these players, those who have been brought in, those that have signed extended contracts, those that have left, are the individual details of each of those players costs in fees and in wages. However, we can reliably be certain that transfer fees have risen "in the market" and that footballers wages, on average, have risen.dibraidio wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 10:19 pmPaul, the honest answer is we'll never know. All I'm saying is that since we got into Europe we've stagnated and our wage bill has increased by almost 50%. Yes, it's allowed us to find some stability but certainly hasn't allowed us to take things to another level. What it has done is to leave only a tiny budget for new additions. The sale of Gibson has no doubt funded the signing of Collins but I would be extremely surprised if we break our transfer record again because the money just isn't there.
As for BFC's finances. I think the popular idea that "the money just isn't there" for BFC to invest in the playing squad is not correct. Alan Pace and his ALK colleagues are smart people. They will know that buying 84% of BFC for the reported £170 million is a foolish thing for them to do if they haven't got the finances to grow and develop the club and move things forward. I'm sure the money is there to add to the squad - so long as the right players are there for the money to be spent on.
UTC
-
- Posts: 12362
- Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
- Been Liked: 5209 times
- Has Liked: 921 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
This depends on how much of their own money is at risk and this is something we don't know for sure at the moment.Paul Waine wrote: ↑Fri Jul 30, 2021 10:07 amAlan Pace and his ALK colleagues are smart people. They will know that buying 84% of BFC for the reported £170 million is a foolish thing for them to do if they haven't got the finances to grow and develop the club and move things forward.
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Paul you asked two questions, my answer was that we'll never know if the players or targets would have accepted lower wages. Sean Dyche has achieved his primary target by having players he can rely on to help us survive. I'm convinced that Sean will find a couple of players to add to the squad to keep us up once again. I'd expect that ALK believed that they could increase revenue streams for the club by moving from local to global markets for commercial revenues. It appears that they've already done that to an extent with a good shirt sponsorship deal but there's still room for much more when you look how far we are behind a lot of other clubs. Checketts and Page were both involved with Real Salt Lake and I'm sure that they will have lots of ideas from their time there. One of the big areas of investment there was in the academy which I'm sure they're determined to use exploit and develop further. They've already said that their plans are long term and that they won't be splashing the cash. The 2020 books show that there was virtually no profit. If they need to keep balancing the books and not accrue further debt I'd expect that the spending this window will be relatively limited. As you say, if the right players are there for the right money I'm sure they'll be prepared to invest but I can't see them signing anyone for 20m.Paul Waine wrote: ↑Fri Jul 30, 2021 10:07 amDibradio, my honest answer is that we do know. We know that BFC is about to start the 6th consecutive season in the Premier League. We know the players who are in the squad today. We know that many of these players have renewed and extended their contracts since they first signed for the club. We know the players that have been in the squad in previous seasons. We know which players have moved on at the end of their contracts. We know which ones we've transferred out to other clubs during their contracts. What we don't know about any of these players, those who have been brought in, those that have signed extended contracts, those that have left, are the individual details of each of those players costs in fees and in wages. However, we can reliably be certain that transfer fees have risen "in the market" and that footballers wages, on average, have risen.
As for BFC's finances. I think the popular idea that "the money just isn't there" for BFC to invest in the playing squad is not correct. Alan Pace and his ALK colleagues are smart people. They will know that buying 84% of BFC for the reported £170 million is a foolish thing for them to do if they haven't got the finances to grow and develop the club and move things forward. I'm sure the money is there to add to the squad - so long as the right players are there for the money to be spent on.
UTC
-
- Posts: 19376
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3153 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
The evidence at both St Louis Blues (NHL) and Real Salt Lake (MLS) under the ownership/control of Dave Checketts goes some way to disprove that theory Paul - the NHL took back the blues franchise because he didn't have the cash to meet his responsibilities and the partner he brought on board at Real Salt Lake forced him out because he didn't have the cash to contribute to the franchises development, the entry price for both was very substantially less than for our club (though it was not done with borrowing/leverage). That is not to say his tenure didn't significantly improve the situation at the blues or provide a strong foundation in Salt Lake.Paul Waine wrote: ↑Fri Jul 30, 2021 10:07 amAs for BFC's finances. I think the popular idea that "the money just isn't there" for BFC to invest in the playing squad is not correct. Alan Pace and his ALK colleagues are smart people. They will know that buying 84% of BFC for the reported £170 million is a foolish thing for them to do if they haven't got the finances to grow and develop the club and move things forward. I'm sure the money is there to add to the squad - so long as the right players are there for the money to be spent on.
UTC
-
- Posts: 9902
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
- Been Liked: 2350 times
- Has Liked: 3178 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Hi CP, aren't you making some very big assumptions there? Alan Pace is the club's chairman and the leader of ALK Capital. Alan Pace has his own experience in finance, both before and after his involvement with Real Salt Lake. Yes, Dave Checketts has experienced financial distress in the two sports franchisees you mention. As I understand it, Dave Checketts was subject to very different obligations in both the hockey and the soccer franchisees and it's those obligations where things came unstuck for him. Dave Checketts isn't in that franchise type of role with respect to BFC and the club isn't a franchise and doesn't have those types of financial obligations to other parties.Chester Perry wrote: ↑Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:43 pmThe evidence at both St Louis Blues (NHL) and Real Salt Lake (MLS) under the ownership/control of Dave Checketts goes some way to disprove that theory Paul - the NHL took back the blues franchise because he didn't have the cash to meet his responsibilities and the partner he brought on board at Real Salt Lake forced him out because he didn't have the cash to contribute to the franchises development, the entry price for both was very substantially less than for our club (though it was not done with borrowing/leverage). That is not to say his tenure didn't significantly improve the situation at the blues or provide a strong foundation in Salt Lake.
I continue to hold the view that we've not got the "full facts" on ALK's financial arrangements for their acquisition and ownership of BFC. I don't believe that ALK could borrow £60 million from MSD simply to fund part of the purchase of Mike Garlick's and the other previous directors' shares. I don't believe that MSD would lend money simply on that basis and on the security of BFC assets. Yes, the financial charges are in place, as we expect they should be. (Similar financial charges were in place when the club had got bank borrowings and lines of credit). But, the transfer values of the club's playing staff are too uncertain and uncontrollable to form the basis of security for MSD's loan. (What happens to the security, for example, when a player runs down his contract and leaves on a free? Similarly, what happens to the security when a star player picks up a career threatening injury, or less dramatically an injury that results in them missing most of a season)?
I'm confident that your assertion is incorrect, that Dave Checkett's experiences at St Louis Blues and at Real Salt Lake is evidence that ALK Capital don't have the finances to grow and develop the club and move things forward.
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
We did not get to "keep all of our players", we sold £15m worth of players and accepted any bid that came in. A £6m bid for Izzet was accepted and he turned down a move.Spijed wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 8:47 amThose were the days when clubs could literally wipe out any debt without any penalty, yet keep all their players.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... ory.sport5
Ipswich did the same.
Quite simply, there should have been only one penalty - both clubs should be have been made to sell players, and if that didn't meet all the shortfalls then they should have been liquidated and kicked out of football.
There are absolutely no mitigating circumstances in those situations, none whatsoever.
Once the club went into administration the administrator was in charge of all decisions. It was their choice to keep the team together (within reason) and get promotion, as that meant creditors being given more money back.
Before that even happened, we also agreed with all creditors to longer terms to avoid administration, this was agreed by ALL except for Eric Hall who petitioned for the winding up order in the courts (as per your link). Why would he sacrifice money who was owed to do that... something to do with the club sacking his client for punching another playing in the face and breaking his jaw perhaps.
Once the winding-up order happens, the club is left with no choice. Nobody WANTED to go into administration, the people who owned the club lost control and were never seen again. As for mitigating circumstances, are we forgetting the millions ITV Digital didn't pay clubs that was owned, which is what helped put Ipswich under also.
We didn't get a free ground out of it either, contrary to most of the nonsense I often see posted. We've paid more for the ground than we ever would have had to if we didn't go into administration. Ownership reverted to the bank who charged an arm and a leg in interest, from that point until just recently when the new owners purchased the ground back from them. That debt saw the club slip down to its lowest ever league position, and only incredible management from Nigel Pearson saved the club.
I've seen people saying oh well they should pay back the money now. Presumably, they've never run a company because that's not how it works and there are no mechanisms in place to even do that. But the current owners are embraced by all locally because they give back to the community, one donation alone totalling £2m to help build the new children's hospital. https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news ... me-3450111
Of course, the people who ran the club at the time need to shoulder a large chunk of the blame, but they are individuals, they are not Leicester City, the current owners or the fans. And, they did what they could to avoid it, despite the nonsense often spouted by people who seem to think it was just a scam to save money.
-
- Posts: 15233
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3156 times
- Has Liked: 6743 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Bravo.foxedup wrote: ↑Fri Jul 30, 2021 9:09 pmWe did not get to "keep all of our players", we sold £15m worth of players and accepted any bid that came in. A £6m bid for Izzet was accepted and he turned down a move.
Once the club went into administration the administrator was in charge of all decisions. It was their choice to keep the team together (within reason) and get promotion, as that meant creditors being given more money back.
Before that even happened, we also agreed with all creditors to longer terms to avoid administration, this was agreed by ALL except for Eric Hall who petitioned for the winding up order in the courts (as per your link). Why would he sacrifice money who was owed to do that... something to do with the club sacking his client for punching another playing in the face and breaking his jaw perhaps.
Once the winding-up order happens, the club is left with no choice. Nobody WANTED to go into administration, the people who owned the club lost control and were never seen again. As for mitigating circumstances, are we forgetting the millions ITV Digital didn't pay clubs that was owned, which is what helped put Ipswich under also.
We didn't get a free ground out of it either, contrary to most of the nonsense I often see posted. We've paid more for the ground than we ever would have had to if we didn't go into administration. Ownership reverted to the bank who charged an arm and a leg in interest, from that point until just recently when the new owners purchased the ground back from them. That debt saw the club slip down to its lowest ever league position, and only incredible management from Nigel Pearson saved the club.
I've seen people saying oh well they should pay back the money now. Presumably, they've never run a company because that's not how it works and there are no mechanisms in place to even do that. But the current owners are embraced by all locally because they give back to the community, one donation alone totalling £2m to help build the new children's hospital. https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news ... me-3450111
Of course, the people who ran the club at the time need to shoulder a large chunk of the blame, but they are individuals, they are not Leicester City, the current owners or the fans. And, they did what they could to avoid it, despite the nonsense often spouted by people who seem to think it was just a scam to save money.
So what ambulance service do you use now?
-
- Posts: 12362
- Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
- Been Liked: 5209 times
- Has Liked: 921 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Good most mate but you're wasting your breath talking facts on here,especially when it comes to Spijed logic
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
They've personally donated £4m to local charities and universities, including helping fund a renovation of Leicester Royal Infirmary’s Children’s Outpatient Ward and life-saving equipment for the Children’s Intensive Care Unit with a £2m donation. On top of raising a further £6m for local charities through the late owner's foundation.boatshed bill wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 6:21 pmOn checking I believe it was The East Midlands Ambulance Service, not sure if that is St. John's.
It doesn't make non-payment any less disgraceful whichever service.
There have been calls for the new regime to pay it back (approximately one decent player's wage for a week!) now that they are mega-wealthy., though I don't suppose they will
-
- Posts: 15233
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3156 times
- Has Liked: 6743 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
What are you looking for, a medal?foxedup wrote: ↑Fri Jul 30, 2021 9:19 pmThey've personally donated £4m to local charities and universities, including helping fund a renovation of Leicester Royal Infirmary’s Children’s Outpatient Ward and life-saving equipment for the Children’s Intensive Care Unit with a £2m donation. On top of raising a further £6m for local charities through the late owner's foundation.
Did they pay the for ambulances?
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Whichever one we want I'd imagine.
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
A medal? No. How about facts?boatshed bill wrote: ↑Fri Jul 30, 2021 9:23 pmWhat are you looking for, a medal?
Did they pay the for ambulances?
Why don't you go through all of the charities accounts and see if they haven't donated to them.
-
- Posts: 15233
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3156 times
- Has Liked: 6743 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
So what you are saying is you don't actually have a clue what the club has paid back and to whom through their charitable donations.boatshed bill wrote: ↑Fri Jul 30, 2021 9:27 pmBecause they are all irrelevant to the original point.
Debts were not paid.
I find that unacceptable, you don't have to.
There is no mechanism for paying debts of another company, companies don't work that way. You can make charitable donations, for which you'd need to be a charity, of which we've paid out about £10m in about 4 years. Which of course you've not bothered looking into.
-
- Posts: 15233
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3156 times
- Has Liked: 6743 times
Re: Leicester City plan to increase stadium capacity to 40,000
Bored now, go and justify it to someone else.foxedup wrote: ↑Fri Jul 30, 2021 9:33 pmSo what you are saying is you don't actually have a clue what the club has paid back and to whom through their charitable donations.
There is no mechanism for paying debts of another company, companies don't work that way. You can make charitable donations, for which you'd need to be a charity, of which we've paid out about £10m in about 4 years. Which of course you've not bothered looking into.
One question, did you pay the East Midlands Ambulance Service or not?