Its a deal

[Foxes_Trust]

I shall be laughing alongside Bill Anderson at everyone of you lot when MM is installed, and then once again the moment his total expenditure exceeds the £25 mill barrier

Define expenditure?

When the consortium bought the club for around £6m, didn't every Mercury story talk about a £5-6m figure, did it ever quote a figure inclusive of the stadium deal with Teachers?

So what's different now?

 

[drew]

We don't know what the savings have been this year, but we do know that attendances have fallen and the parachute payments are gone. Thats a pretty big void to fill.

Based on the fact that we are paying £1million straight to teachers every year i think we would be ****ed pretty quickly at the current rate.

 

[drew]

FT can you tell us if the board have cut costs by £8 million?

 

[Jeff]

Based on the fact that we are paying £1million straight to teachers every year i think we would be ****ed pretty quickly at the current rate.

If we were still at Filbert Street we'd probably be averaging crowds of around 16,000. The extra 6,000 average crowd we're getting as a result of having a shiny new stadium is enough to pay for the £1 million a year to Teachers. So the Teachers loan is a red herring, we should be able to survive financially with this debt. If we can't it's down to bad management on and off the pitch.

 

[Durham Fox]

Yes. Well, the last published ones, anyway. No sign of any immediate danger (or at least it wouldn't be for any other club). If it got sticky, you'd want some of the covenant lifted: otherwise you might be trying to get money from selling assets, rather than merely borrowing some money against those assets. But assets - even on their book value - still outweighed debts by some margin so administration would seem an odd course. What's your take on them, then?

And do you not think that Anderson has just swallowed everything MM has told him? £25million, FFS. Is that out by a factor of 50, or just by 4?

Selling assets you say? Well we will be trying that pretty soon I'd say, although it didnt work last time....

 

[Foxes_Trust]

FT can you tell us if the board have cut costs by £8 million?

No, as in costs haven't been reduced by that level (presuming you mean this season in comparison to last).

 

[Dour]

If we were still at Filbert Street we'd probably be averaging crowds of around 16,000. The extra 6,000 average crowd we're getting as a result of having a shiny new stadium is enough to pay for the £1 million a year to Teachers. So the Teachers loan is a red herring, we should be able to survive financially with this debt. If we can't it's down to bad management on and off the pitch.

If everything else remained static, it would gradually throttle us. Especially if attendances generally continue to dwindle and are only offset by special offers.

 

[Dour]

Selling assets you say? Well we will be trying that pretty soon I'd say, although it didnt work last time....

I'm not saying that would be the sensible choice. But there again, if it means flogging Stearman, why not?

 

[Jeff]

If everything else remained static, it would gradually throttle us. Especially if attendances generally continue to dwindle and are only offset by special offers.

If we can't handle the stadium payments it's down to bad management.
The stadium payment is the equivalent of maybe 3,000 season ticket holders.
No matter how bad we are on the pitch I'm sure we'll have crowds of at least 3,000 more than clubs like Burnley, Preston, Plymouth etc. If those clubs can manage to survive with a much lower income than us we should be able to as well.

 

[Durham Fox]

I'm not saying that would be the sensible choice. But there again, if it means flogging Stearman, why not?

It is the sensible choice if it's the only one left! Stearman will be gone dont worry

 

[drew]

No, as in costs haven't been reduced by that level (presuming you mean this season in comparison to last).

So this year we are heading deep into the red then.... So MM's bid constitutes of buying the shares and bailing the shareholders out at the same time. The only alternative way of balancing the books is to sell players that have been devalued by themselves and the manager.

 

[foxes123]

hi taken from another board.

Some questions you should now be able to answer:

1. Is it true one of the non-exec Directors, James Johnson a solicitor from Messrs Clifford Chance (one of the biggest law firms in the world - if not the biggest) has resigned in protest at the final offer from MM?
2. Has the Board recommended or will the Board recommend to the shareholders that MM final bid is accepted?
3. Is there still a need for an EGM of the shareholders before acceptance? If not why not given that everyone said that there was a legal requirement for such a meeting on 14 days notice?
4. Do we now have a formal bid in from MM?
5. If there is not to be an EGM are the shareholders individually replying to an offer by agreeing to sell their shares in writing rather than in a meeting?
6. Do the Trust expect that at least 90% of the shareholders will accept MM's final offer?
7. When will Kelly be booted out and who is MM lining up for the job?
8. Will this deal be done by 13 Jan as E Midlands Today says - or by 31 Jan as Radio Leicester says?
9. Will the Trust be accepting the offer in respect of their shares?
10. Is it true that MM has offered to set up an "advisory board" with the Trust being appointed to that board? Who else will be on that "advisory board"?
11. Is it true that if the MM deal does not go through LCFC will be forced into administration again before the end of the season with the prospect of a minimum of a 10 point deduction?


foxes trust answer


1. Yes, but the reasoning may relate more to not being comfortable with Q2, as in recommending
2. We believe they will, but nothing has been received as of tonight
3. There will need to be an EGM, however if it is established in writing (must be in writing) that enough backing is achieved, the EGM becomes a formality and things can move on the player front prior to the EGM
4. We haven't seen it as yet, but believe it has been received
5. See 3 above
6. We don't know, it depends what the final offer includes, the difference between personal guarantees of future payments and bank guarantees is huge in some shareholders eyes, this may be the key issue (but LCFC reps have repeatedly told MM this)
7. Can't answer that one due to conflicting information from reliable sources, MM said directly to us after the Sheff Weds game that he thought RK was doing a good job with the resources he had available and he wanted to help him (there again the West Ham new owner said......)
8. Don't know at this stage, too early to call really all determined by the shareholders reaction + the Russian guy paying up to MM has to be another factor.
9. We may not have to sell, cannot expand on this point, but it doesn't mean we are trying to block the bid
10. Yes, an MM representative has said we will be on it, do not know the make up of it though
11. No, but we wouldn't rule out either player sales or another option appearing out of necessity

 

[Lako42]

hi taken from another board.

Some questions you should now be able to answer:

1. Is it true one of the non-exec Directors, James Johnson a solicitor from Messrs Clifford Chance (one of the biggest law firms in the world - if not the biggest) has resigned in protest at the final offer from MM?
2. Has the Board recommended or will the Board recommend to the shareholders that MM final bid is accepted?
3. Is there still a need for an EGM of the shareholders before acceptance? If not why not given that everyone said that there was a legal requirement for such a meeting on 14 days notice?
4. Do we now have a formal bid in from MM?
5. If there is not to be an EGM are the shareholders individually replying to an offer by agreeing to sell their shares in writing rather than in a meeting?
6. Do the Trust expect that at least 90% of the shareholders will accept MM's final offer?
7. When will Kelly be booted out and who is MM lining up for the job?
8. Will this deal be done by 13 Jan as E Midlands Today says - or by 31 Jan as Radio Leicester says?
9. Will the Trust be accepting the offer in respect of their shares?
10. Is it true that MM has offered to set up an "advisory board" with the Trust being appointed to that board? Who else will be on that "advisory board"?
11. Is it true that if the MM deal does not go through LCFC will be forced into administration again before the end of the season with the prospect of a minimum of a 10 point deduction?


foxes trust answer


1. Yes, but the reasoning may relate more to not being comfortable with Q2, as in recommending
2. We believe they will, but nothing has been received as of tonight
3. There will need to be an EGM, however if it is established in writing (must be in writing) that enough backing is achieved, the EGM becomes a formality and things can move on the player front prior to the EGM
4. We haven't seen it as yet, but believe it has been received
5. See 3 above
6. We don't know, it depends what the final offer includes, the difference between personal guarantees of future payments and bank guarantees is huge in some shareholders eyes, this may be the key issue (but LCFC reps have repeatedly told MM this)
7. Can't answer that one due to conflicting information from reliable sources, MM said directly to us after the Sheff Weds game that he thought RK was doing a good job with the resources he had available and he wanted to help him (there again the West Ham new owner said......)
8. Don't know at this stage, too early to call really all determined by the shareholders reaction + the Russian guy paying up to MM has to be another factor.
9. We may not have to sell, cannot expand on this point, but it doesn't mean we are trying to block the bid
10. Yes, an MM representative has said we will be on it, do not know the make up of it though
11. No, but we wouldn't rule out either player sales or another option appearing out of necessity

quite informing, i still think from that reply that iff mm doesnt come in we are fecked financially.

 

[Dour]

quite informing, i still think from that reply that iff mm doesnt come in we are fecked financially.

Don't see that myself, in what's posted there.

 

[Graz]

The FT get a lot of stick, so I'd just to say fair play to them for answering all those questions posted above. Some of it is quite informative and is stuff we didn't know about.


I hadn't heard about an "advisory board" being set up, and I'm glad the EGM thing has been explained.

 

[stevewalshwasgod]

I think I will be glad when its either a DONE DEAL or TITS UP to be fair, all this will they wont they... driving me insane!

 

[Redditch Fox]

Don't see that myself, in what's posted there.

Not financially stuffed without MM, eh ! Something about the Titanic and an iceberg here, I'm afraid.

 

[BOB HAZELL]

I suspect all of the people who work at the club haven't got a clue what's really going on...........

Me too, Jeff.

 

[Melton Fox]

Define expenditure?

Money that has been put into or spent on the club by Milan Mandaric. Money that if it wasn't for Leicester City he would be using for something else

 

[Matt_B]

Money that has been put into or spent on the club by Milan Mandaric. Money that if it wasn't for Leicester City he would be using for something else

Porn