Speculation Konchesky to QPR

[Foxes_Trust]

Thanks for update FT. When will you/we find out if they have converted their loans into equity prior to 31/05/13? (One suspects they have not done so given how rigorously LCFC have frozen/virtually frozen recruitment)
Btw, the owners management fees of £1.2m, is this a reduction on the year before? Whatever it is, cannot be taken as anything other than nice work if you can get it....
Chrysallis - yes that huge figure of £28m debt was in the Sven era; it must still stand at a figure hugely over the FFP allowable limit of £8m (unless of course much or most of the loans have been converted into equity...)

Doubt we will find out until the next set of published accounts, so end of Feb 2014 (based on past years timeframes). If the club is willing to share some information with the Trust on this aspect (we keep asking) it is likely to be done on a confidential basis, so we would not be able to reveal prior to the accounts being released. We have been party to this kind of agreement before but not with the current owners.

The management fee for the 2010/11 season was £1.1m, so the figure has increased.

 

[Foxes_Trust]

It could indeed, we'd need to know the particulars of the loan. If only we had a trust who might reasonably be expected to know things like this.

You try asking the club for financial information. other than the published accounts and see how you get on....

As other current & former FCC members can verify, the club shares little or no information on their plans to meet FFP targets.

However we continue to ask

 

[alex]

I don't think he's anything like the bad player some on here reckon actually..

 

[pork pie fox]

I don't think he's anything like the bad player some on here reckon actually..

Who the feck do you think you are? Coming in here, talking about the actual thread title, lunatic!!

 

[Motown Fox]

Id forgot what the OP was about tbh

 

[H T B]

I don't think he's anything like the bad player some on here reckon actually..

Like Richie Wellens, Ol' Father Time has caught up with him.
If we continue with 3 - 5 - 2, PK is not the answer down the left as he hasn't got the legs for the role anymore.
Whether he can offer cover as the left side CB, I'm not sure. (Expensive cover?)

 

[Lako42]

I will always remember that goal that Derby scored against us last season where all he had to do was actually jump to stop the goal, but decided instead to stand there in the 6 yard box with his feet firmly planted on the floor.

Oh and he can't pass for the life of him.

 

[Matt_B]

You try asking the club for financial information. other than the published accounts and see how you get on....

As other current & former FCC members can verify, the club shares little or no information on their plans to meet FFP targets.

However we continue to ask

Maybe if the FT had tried building good relationships with the club it might be easier? It seems the FT is rather more self serving than that, though.

 

[LeeCovFox]

Maybe if the FT had tried building good relationships with the club it might be easier? It seems the FT is rather more self serving than that, though.

Is it really the role of the FT to build a good relationship with the club? Obviously I can see why it might be beneficial but it isn't a realistic expectation when the FT has as part of its remit to hold the club to account.

Anyway, it should be up to the club to build links with the supporters and wider community. That's what a football club should be for. The people in charge won't do that (although they'll pretend to care) because they prefer to run a dictatorship whilst they rip the club off for all they can ger.

 

[Blue Maniac]

Is it really the role of the FT to build a good relationship with the club?

No. The FT are, by definition, fans and customers of the club like all of us are or have been at some time. It is not the role of customers to build a good relationship with the company they're handing money to.

 

[FryattFox]

Maybe if the FT had tried building good relationships with the club it might be easier? It seems the FT is rather more self serving than that, though.

How many other clubs give their fans, or their supporters, early or additional financial information?

I can't think of any.

 

[Matt_B]

How many other clubs give their fans, or their supporters, early or additional financial information?

I can't think of any.

I have no idea because I don't concern myself with other clubs. Do you? If thwarted FT want information, it stands to reason that a good relationship with the holders of that information would be a good idea.

 

[Matt_B]

No. The FT are, by definition, fans and customers of the club like all of us are or have been at some time. It is not the role of customers to build a good relationship with the company they're handing money to.

I keep getting told that football isn't the same as other companies though. You don't boo at the theatre, or keep buying from Tesco if you don't like the product.

 

[Blue Maniac]

I keep getting told that football isn't the same as other companies though. You don't boo at the theatre, or keep buying from Tesco if you don't like the product.

The only difference I can see is football clubs enjoy a level of brand loyalty not realistically available to other businesses.

 

[Biffa Bacon]

No. The FT are, by definition, fans and customers of the club like all of us are or have been at some time. It is not the role of customers to build a good relationship with the company they're handing money to.

I think you've got the definition of a football trust very wrong, they are not a supporters club, they are supposed to be a charitable trust devoted to better management and running of the club. At a club like leicester (wholly owned by one group) the only ways to fulfil this remit are either to have a good working relationship with the owners or to be a disruptive campaigning organisation. The foxes trust seems to fail to do either of these but they are very good at taking notes.

 

[Blue Maniac]

I think you've got the definition of a football trust very wrong, they are not a supporters club, they are supposed to be a charitable trust devoted to better management and running of the club.

I'm not disagreeing with any of this; I didn't claim to be defining supporters trusts, I was just pointing out that their members are by definition fans and therefore customers of the club. It is the job of the seller to build and maintain good relations with their buyers, surely?

At a club like leicester (wholly owned by one group) the only ways to fulfil this remit are either to have a good working relationship with the owners or to be a disruptive campaigning organisation. The foxes trust seems to fail to do either of these but they are very good at taking notes.

They are good at writing things down. They must get through a lot of pens.

 

[FryattFox]

I have no idea because I don't concern myself with other clubs. Do you? If thwarted FT want information, it stands to reason that a good relationship with the holders of that information would be a good idea.

I follow football finances, yes. But mainly at a PL level.

It's fair to say that whatever relationship the FT had with the current owners, they would be very unlikely to receive any information that isn't publicly available. And, in the unlikely event that they did, they probably wouldn't be able to share it anyway.

 

[spionfox]

Anyway, it should be up to the club to build links with the supporters and wider community. That's what a football club should be for. The people in charge won't do that (although they'll pretend to care) because they prefer to run a dictatorship whilst they rip the club off for all they can ger.

I'll wait to see what happens with regard to relocating loyal supporters away from seats they have had since the stadium opened before I comment on that.

 

[LeeCovFox]

I'll wait to see what happens with regard to relocating loyal supporters away from seats they have had since the stadium opened before I comment on that.

Is this happening? I barely pay attention over the summer so have probably missed something.

 

[Chrysalis]

In the 2011/12 results, the management fees were £1.2m

The interest paid back on loans was £3.919m, with £63.1m loans @ 8% interest, £4.4m @ 6% interest). The interest rate on the additional £15.6m invested in 2012/13 up to 30/11/12 is not known.

If all loans were converted to Equity prior to 31/05/13, then those interest charges would be gone, however if that isn't the case the owners can only convert £5m into Equity now, because any value above that breaks FFP rules. We have checked this directly with the Football League.

The other contributing factor is the change to King Power ownership of the stadium, that removes the £1.1m interest paid to Teachers, it just depends if any charge will be made from King Power (e.g. the management fee could increase)

Another indication of how daft FFP is, so a owner removing large amounts of debt above 5million from the club is forbidden.