Cats, pigeons and Teacher's....

[Chrysalis]

Yes, I think it is. Do you know of any offers they haven't told shareholders about, then?

Ahh the old "you cant prove it so tough".

There maybe no offers, but we keep hearing from foxes trust negotiations are ongoing for a 'acceptable offer' meaning milan must be giving draft offers to the board who are rejecting them instead of passing each one onto the shareholders.

 

[PFKAKTF FOX]

The guts of this potential takeover were lost some time ago.

I didn't read the situation as MM manouevering for a better deal......just the full realisation of the very difficult financial position of the club.

The shareholders in the former Leicester City company lost all their money and those that were generous enough to fund the new company clearly did it out of commitment rather than as an investment.....unfortunately the lack of sufficient funds and relegation has caught up with things. You certainly can't blame the suppporters. ST sales and support in general has been -imo- exceptional given the dire persormances on the pitch.

I agree Redditch, however should this takeover collapse, which IMO now appears doomed, then the shockwaves and recriminations will have a devastating long term effect on the club.

IMO the recent attendences have been boosted by the excitement generated by Mandarics' proposed takeover, if this falls through the realisation that the club is deeply rooted in mediocrity with little or no money to help turn the situation around, an inexperienced manager wholacks the bravery to turn it around and some of the worst football witnessed for many a year. With all these factors taken into account should the Mandaric deal falter I would not be at all suprised to see home attendances dip below 15k by the end of the season.

With many season ticket holders currently debating whether to continue attending games there must be a genuine fear for the financial future of the club, especially after this current season, what does the future hold for the club without Mandaric's involvement

 

[Durham Fox]

I agree Redditch, however should this takeover collapse, which IMO now appears doomed, then the shockwaves and recriminations will have a devastating long term effect on the club.

IMO the recent attendences have been boosted by the excitement generated by Mandarics' proposed takeover, if this falls through the realisation that the club is deeply rooted in mediocrity with little or no money to help turn the situation around, an inexperienced manager wholacks the bravery to turn it around and some of the worst football witnessed for many a year. With all these factors taken into account should the Mandaric deal falter I would not be at all suprised to see home attendances dip below 15k by the end of the season.

With many season ticket holders currently debating whether to continue attending games there must be a genuine fear for the financial future of the club, especially after this current season, what does the future hold for the club without Mandaric's involvement

League One IMO, maybe not this season but next

 

[step]

You sound like a self obsessesed, self righteous wanker with nothing sensible to say, so **** off

Self obsessed, how because I aint on here complaining about everything and anything. But I agree I aint got anything sensible to say about the takeover because like evry on else I nor has anyone else on here knows what is going on.

But I do know that:

1) The board want the deal to succeed
2) The share holders invested in the club knowing they might not get their money back
3) The trust are a group of fans that give up a a lot of their own time to try and influence the club.

How many of you moaners have invested £50,000 plus in city, how many of give up your free time to try and help the fans and the club. Very few, so how can you question the motives of those that do.

No body on here knows what is going on, every body is making massive assumption about what has happened and why its happened, then using those assumption to attack the board, the share holders and the trust, infact anyone who might be involved is being blamed for something by someone
and it is all crap.

BECAUSE WE DONT KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON

 

[Durham Fox]

Self obsessed, how because I aint on here complaining about everything and anything. But I agree I aint got anything sensible to say about the takeover because like evry on else I nor has anyone else on here knows what is going on.

But I do know that:

1) The board want the deal to succeed
2) The share holders invested in the club knowing they might not get their money back
3) The trust are a group of fans that give up a a lot of their own time to try and influence the club.

How many of you moaners have invested £50,000 plus in city, how many of give up your free time to try and help the fans and the club. Very few, so how can you question the motives of those that do.

No body on here knows what is going on, every body is making massive assumption about what has happened and why its happened, then using those assumption to attack the board, the share holders and the trust, infact anyone who might be involved is being blamed for something by someone
and it is all crap.

BECAUSE WE DONT KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON

I see 20-30,000 most saturdays giving up there free time to help the club and the fans. I would also wager they would give the club £50,000 if they could afford it!!

 

[Melton Fox]

Self obsessed, how because I aint on here complaining about everything and anything.

No, because you seem to think you have a god given right to tell us all to shut up because we don't have any facts. If we had facts we wouldn't need to debate this whole bollox

You're above post wasn't ground breaking and didn't tell us anything we didn't know.

You say the board want the deal to succeed, why do you think this?. IMO the board only want this deal to succeed if their pockets are lined with more gold than they deserve.

I can also guarantee that anybody that invested £50,00 had it spare in the first place. I'd be interested to see if anybody wagered their life savings or remortgaged their house to save this club

 

[step]

Every thing we know indicates the board are doing the best for the club so why do you think they are out to line their pockets. Oh yes, I forgot. Fact less assumptions rule.

Anyone that has invested £50k deserves an effing medal and you make an excellent point a lot of fans could have taken out £50k mortgage to invest in city. So, why did'nt they. Simple, they where not willing to take that risk for the club. But some did find £50k from somewhere and yet you all question their loyalty.

All I can say is thank god we have the board who have managed to turn the club from a total loss to a profitable organisation so that it can be sold on and I hope the board continue to apply their business acumen to forge a deal with Mandric that is in the best long term interest of the club.

A big thank you to the members of the trust who have had a very difficult situation to deal with.

And an extra big thanks you to all the shareholders who risked their money to save the club.

I and like many do appreciate what has been done for our club, so to the board, the shareholders and the trust I ask that you continue to do what is best for the long term future of the club and that you don’t let childish assumptions get in the way.

 

[Redditch Fox]

Self obsessed, how because I aint on here complaining about everything and anything. But I agree I aint got anything sensible to say about the takeover because like evry on else I nor has anyone else on here knows what is going on.

But I do know that:

1) The board want the deal to succeed
2) The share holders invested in the club knowing they might not get their money back
3) The trust are a group of fans that give up a a lot of their own time to try and influence the club.

How many of you moaners have invested £50,000 plus in city, how many of give up your free time to try and help the fans and the club. Very few, so how can you question the motives of those that do.

No body on here knows what is going on, every body is making massive assumption about what has happened and why its happened, then using those assumption to attack the board, the share holders and the trust, infact anyone who might be involved is being blamed for something by someone
and it is all crap.

BECAUSE WE DONT KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON

I think there is sufficient evidence to suggest that the takeover is most likely going out of the window and that will leave the club in a very weak position. It doesn't take rocket science to work out that the due diligence conducted on behalf of MM will deter any other potential bidders - not that there are or are likely to be any.

The FT is trying to cover its tracks now...but during that period leading up to the special board meeting, FT appeared to be busy down mouthing the MM approach and talking up other potential (actually non-existent) options.

All this is now largely froth...but I suspect that the reality will kick in when it comes to the time for supporters to renew STs.

I wouldn't pretend to have a clue where the club goes from here....but i think you should be able to understand people fearing the worse.

I suppose one chink of light might be that someone might come along knowing that the club can be bought on the cheap....but I don't think that this would compare with getting on board a football man with money like MM.

 

[Boy Genius]

Every thing we know indicates the board are doing the best for the club so why do you think they are out to line their pockets. Oh yes, I forgot. Fact less assumptions rule.

Anyone that has invested £50k deserves an effing medal and you make an excellent point a lot of fans could have taken out £50k mortgage to invest in city. So, why did'nt they. Simple, they where not willing to take that risk for the club. But some did find £50k from somewhere and yet you all question their loyalty.

All I can say is thank god we have the board who have managed to turn the club from a total loss to a profitable organisation so that it can be sold on and I hope the board continue to apply their business acumen to forge a deal with Mandric that is in the best long term interest of the club.

A big thank you to the members of the trust who have had a very difficult situation to deal with.

And an extra big thanks you to all the shareholders who risked their money to save the club.

I and like many do appreciate what has been done for our club, so to the board, the shareholders and the trust I ask that you continue to do what is best for the long term future of the club and that you don’t let childish assumptions get in the way.

I thought we made a loss recently, and a slight profit last season due to the sale of David Connelly

 

[Chrysalis]

If MM doesnt come we are faced with a approx 8mill shortfall every annum if last year is anything to go by as we made a 1.2 mill profit with an extra 10 mill turnover we wouldnt normally get. Inevitably I cant see how we could avoid selling players and I would be surprised if only one was sold, the groundshare would almost certianly happen and I think there would be further investment from current shareholders to both rest upset fanbase following collapse of deal and to keep the books balanced for another year.

The more and more I think about the current shareholders the more I think some of them look to have put money in as a investment rather then for the love of the club. Evident by them been upset that they been offered a reduced price on their shares and the fact when they got the club it was on a almost clean slate with premiership revenues looking very likely for following season, and I wonder if they were hoping to cash in in on a few years of premiership football and the fallback plan was if relegated to just sit tight and hope for repromotion without further investment.

 

[DesertFox]

The more and more I think about the current shareholders...

Maybe you should STOP thinking about the shareholders!

... the more I think some of them look to have put money in as a investment rather then for the love of the club.

There is no evidence for that whatsoever. Nobody who had money to invest expecting a return would EVER have invested in LCFC at that time. Makes zero financial sense. Might as well have flushed it down the shitter. You are talking about people using sizable funds to make financial investments - these people KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING and haven't got to the position they're in by bailing out bankrupt football clubs, believe me!

Evident by them been upset that they been offered a reduced price on their shares

There is not one shred of evidence for that being the case. We have heard rumours about a couple of shareholders possibly trying to block the deal, but the rumours may be utterly false as well. The only shareholders I have heard quoted have been Lineker and Heskey, who both have given up on the cash as far as I am aware (although Lineker said he'd like to maintain a small interest if he could). But to say "the shareholders" are "upset that they been offered a reduced price on their shares" is completely made up toss IMO - evidenced by the fact that they will almost certainly take a sizable hit when they sell their shares. And that was always likely to be the case, so what more proof do you want or need than that?!!!

when they got the club it was on a almost clean slate with premiership revenues looking very likely for following season, and I wonder if they were hoping to cash in in on a few years of premiership football and the fallback plan was if relegated to just sit tight and hope for repromotion without further investment.

Again, do you honestly think that shrewd, ruthless bisuness tycoons would be putting down sizable amounts to gamble on Leicester City going from administration, massive crippling debts and total chaos all around to a stable Premiership club in a few years and then raking it in? NO WAY!

Serious investors are either looking for safe bets and playing the numbers game, or they're looking to take the odd risk but with the promise of big returns and only an outside chance of complete financial ruin. MM falls into the latter category but our current predicament is nothing like the case a few years back. Why do you think there were no foreign investors sniffing around us then?

Imagine this scenario - you, Chrysalis, have at least 10mil in the bank. LCFC is in serious danger of going under. They call you, as a well known fan with cash, and ask for, say, 250K. What do you do? Put some cash in to save the club - which according to some people on here makes you a backstabbing money grabber trying to take advantage of our proud club and its poor put-upon fans... or do you turn them down - making you a tight-fisted money grabber who hates the fans, would rather watch the Tigers anyway and..... see where this is going?

Anyway, HAPPY CHRISTMAS CHRYSY BABY! :icon_bigg :icon_wink

 

[Jeff]

If MM doesnt come we are faced with a approx 8mill shortfall every annum if last year is anything to go by

But last year isn't anything to go by. Most of the Connolly money was spent on new players. We won't be buying new players this year (unless someone puts some money in), so you can take that off your shortfall. Wages have also been reduced since the last financial year, some of the higher paid players have left, and the squad is smaller now. So that also comes off the shortfall.

The club should be in a position where it can survive financially at this level without needing new investment - with the right management on and off the pitch.
The money paying for the stadium is a bit of a red herring. I'm sure our average attendances would be around 5,000 lower if we were still at Filbert St - and those extra 5,000 should be bringing in enough to pay for the stadium loan - along with the extra corporate income, so we shouldn't be any worse off financially than we would have been if we hadn't got the new stadium.

 

[Redditch Fox]

But last year isn't anything to go by. Most of the Connolly money was spent on new players. We won't be buying new players this year (unless someone puts some money in), so you can take that off your shortfall. Wages have also been reduced since the last financial year, some of the higher paid players have left, and the squad is smaller now. So that also comes off the shortfall.

The club should be in a position where it can survive financially at this level without needing new investment - with the right management on and off the pitch.
The money paying for the stadium is a bit of a red herring. I'm sure our average attendances would be around 5,000 lower if we were still at Filbert St - and those extra 5,000 should be bringing in enough to pay for the stadium loan - along with the extra corporate income, so we shouldn't be any worse off financially than we would have been if we hadn't got the new stadium.

Well argued stuff......but unfortunately it omits the impact of the stagnation on future ST sales etc. STs etc are sold on hope and it's going to take marketing skills never seen before to convince ST holders that they should renew in numbers for next season.

 

[Chrysalis]

But last year isn't anything to go by. Most of the Connolly money was spent on new players. We won't be buying new players this year (unless someone puts some money in), so you can take that off your shortfall. Wages have also been reduced since the last financial year, some of the higher paid players have left, and the squad is smaller now. So that also comes off the shortfall.

The club should be in a position where it can survive financially at this level without needing new investment - with the right management on and off the pitch.
The money paying for the stadium is a bit of a red herring. I'm sure our average attendances would be around 5,000 lower if we were still at Filbert St - and those extra 5,000 should be bringing in enough to pay for the stadium loan - along with the extra corporate income, so we shouldn't be any worse off financially than we would have been if we hadn't got the new stadium.

Even if you take connoly out of the equation its still a loss of greater then 4.5million which you made no comment on, the stadium payments of 1 million are actually only a very small portion of this, if we owned the stadium tommorow we would still be in a mess, the situation is much worse then many people realise.

 

[Chrysalis]

Maybe you should STOP thinking about the shareholders!

HAPPY CHRISTMAS CHRYSY BABY! :icon_bigg :icon_wink

For what reason?

Happy christmas to you also

On your last question if I had 10 mill in the bank and they asked for 250k, I would say no for the reason I felt they couldnt manage my money properly, I would offer a few million for a controlling interest and then invest another 3 million in the club itself.

 

[Jeff]

Even if you take connoly out of the equation its still a loss of greater then 4.5million which you made no comment on, the stadium payments of 1 million are actually only a very small portion of this, if we owned the stadium tommorow we would still be in a mess, the situation is much worse then many people realise.

You haven't taken into account the big reduction in the wage bill.
And can you explain where you get the figure of 4.5 million from?



The point I'm trying to make is that there's no reason the club should be running at a loss, other clubs manage to survive in this division with much smaller incomes than ours.

I suspect the problem is because the budget for the playing squad for the last few seasons has been based on a promotion challenging team - so the lower gates we've had have contributed to the shortfall. So it could be argued that the club should have played safe by setting a budget based on having a poor season - with less spent on the playing squad. But if they'd done that the board would have been accused of having no ambition.

But whatever happens, the income the club receives, even with the stadium debt, should be enough to sustain us comfortably at this level. If this isn't happening it's down to bad management on and/or off the pitch.

 

[Redditch Fox]

I suspect the problem is because the budget for the playing squad for the last few seasons has been based on a promotion challenging team - so the lower gates we've had have contributed to the shortfall. So it could be argued that the club should have played safe by setting a budget based on having a poor season - with less spent on the playing squad. But if they'd done that the board would have been accused of having no ambition.
.

I think that the board has to take account public expectations and the difficulty with your line is that I doubt if anything like the present level of support could be maintained once people had sussed that the club is content with just survival.

Moreover, we have skirted with a relegation battle at our present levels of spending. Now I do think this is largely down to poorish management both in terms of dodgy acquisitions and inability to motivate. However, further cutbacks and i think there is every chance of relegation next season.

Basically, the board is caught between supporter expectations and financial reality...and they don't match.That's why it was so important to get MM on board.....without him I think we are in new territory and it looks pretty bleak.

 

[Chrysalis]

You haven't taken into account the big reduction in the wage bill.
And can you explain where you get the figure of 4.5 million from?



The point I'm trying to make is that there's no reason the club should be running at a loss, other clubs manage to survive in this division with much smaller incomes than ours.

I suspect the problem is because the budget for the playing squad for the last few seasons has been based on a promotion challenging team - so the lower gates we've had have contributed to the shortfall. So it could be argued that the club should have played safe by setting a budget based on having a poor season - with less spent on the playing squad. But if they'd done that the board would have been accused of having no ambition.

But whatever happens, the income the club receives, even with the stadium debt, should be enough to sustain us comfortably at this level. If this isn't happening it's down to bad management on and/or off the pitch.

I agree there is no reason why we should be running at a loss, why do you think I am disullusioned with the current board?

I already explained it but will again.

Last reported financial year 1.2million profit.

this year included 7 million parchute money.

to calculate profit/loss in a normal year do 1.2 million - 7 million, its more then 4.5million but I chose a conservative number and I removed connolly money from the equation.

Has our wage bill decreased by 4.5million since last season? De vries and joey werent that big earners.

 

[BOB HAZELL]

Initial deal - MM offers a guaranteed 75p in the pound with another 25p based on the clubs performance over a given time.

MM inspects clubs books spending nearly £250k

MM reduces offer to 25p in the pound, has a major bust up with the board and doesnt show for the Barnsley game.

Does sound 'along the lines' of what I've been told to be the case.....

More "muscle-flexing" and "posturing" still to go I'm afraid folks - but all is not lost just yet.....

 

[highland fox]

You haven't taken into account the big reduction in the wage bill.
And can you explain where you get the figure of 4.5 million from?



The point I'm trying to make is that there's no reason the club should be running at a loss, other clubs manage to survive in this division with much smaller incomes than ours.
I suspect the problem is because the budget for the playing squad for the last few seasons has been based on a promotion challenging team - so the lower gates we've had have contributed to the shortfall. So it could be argued that the club should have played safe by setting a budget based on having a poor season - with less spent on the playing squad. But if they'd done that the board would have been accused of having no ambition.

But whatever happens, the income the club receives, even with the stadium debt, should be enough to sustain us comfortably at this level. If this isn't happening it's down to bad management on and/or off the pitch.

How about if we aren't in this Division though ?