What's going on?

[Steven]

I think most fans are pretty indifferent as to the machinations in the boardroom, to be honest. Anyway, it is a bit of a sweeping statement to make - I don't particularly subscribe to the view you espouse, but that is not to say I am not in a minority, but who knows? Without holding a referendum, we are all guessing.

More fools them if that is the case. Any Club has to be well run from top to bottom. :icon_wink

 

[PFKAKTF FOX]

But it also excludes any possibility that a breakfast cereal magnate could buy the club out and get people in that can run it properly who know something about the game and business.

Rather than the Harry Enfield and Chums we currently have who no one likes, trusts, respects or thinks can do their job.

IMO if Martin George is serious about trying to buy the club out, then the leaking of these recent events down Filbo Way could be part of his PR exercise to put pressure on the existing board and try to engineer fans support for his takeover bid.

 

[Babylon]

:icon_lol: :icon_lol: :icon_lol:

 

[Brauny Blue]

OK an ex player who plays for the club lets just say for two years,
he doesnt pull up any trees but he gives consistent service and is paid well above the average wage to do so.
On the other hand you have a supporter with an average wage,wife and two kids,struggling to get by,now he spends his hard earned cash on season tickets for him and his kids lets just say for the last 16 years and will continue to do so until he turns his toes up.

who deserves the odd free ticket

I wouldn't dispute what you say,but i can see both sides. whilst fans give hero type worship towards the players it seems slightly contradictory that they then have a kind of bitterness towards the amount they earn. IMO, yes players do earn too much money but its not that much different from most other forms of employment. The bosses,fat cats and all that earn obscene amounts of money whilst they'll pay their workers little more than the minimum wage. Thats the way it go's whether we like it or not. Where the players are concerned they are a very small percentage that have made it to the top .

 

[Real Sharapova]

I wouldn't dispute what you say,but i can see both sides. whilst fans give hero type worship towards the players it seems slightly contradictory that they then have a kind of bitterness towards the amount they earn. IMO, yes players do earn too much money but its not that much different from most other forms of employment. The bosses,fat cats and all that earn obscene amounts of money whilst they'll pay their workers little more than the minimum wage. Thats the way it go's whether we like it or not. Where the players are concerned they are a very small percentage that have made it to the top .

I don't have a massive problem with what they earn, it's a free market after all, but it is then expecting freebies after they have left the club that gets my goat. Effectively, we, as paying supporters are being made to pay for the free tickets, hospitality, etc.

 

[Dunc]

I think most fans are pretty indifferent as to the machinations in the boardroom, to be honest. Anyway, it is a bit of a sweeping statement to make - I don't particularly subscribe to the view you espouse, but that is not to say I am not in a minority, but who knows? Without holding a referendum, we are all guessing.

I was talking more about those who work at the club not the fans in general, and I was referring to a Harry Enfield Character not the board as a whole.

 

[Redditch Fox]

Apart from the fact it would be like setting fire to £350,000.

Putting aside any reference to individual,s the fact is that it is extremely unlikely that any middle sized club - like our's - could ever compete effectively in the top tier without having people willing to speculate with serious money.

OK - we know that they are not at all likely to make anything out of football, but there is the kudos.

The way that Leicester City is currently financially/ constitutionally structured is an obvious impediment to the club ever being successful at the higher level.

I appreciate that people who want to restrict the power of any one shareholder and those who inhabit the Foxes Trust etc are very well intentioned and have the best interests of the club at heart....but its just not going to lead to the rehabilitation of Leicester City.

 

[webmaster]

Putting aside any reference to individual,s the fact is that it is extremely unlikely that any middle sized club - like our's - could ever compete effectively in the top tier without having people willing to speculate with serious money.

OK - we know that they are not at all likely to make anything out of football, but there is the kudos.

The way that Leicester City is currently financially/ constitutionally structured is an obvious impediment to the club ever being successful at the higher level.

I appreciate that people who want to restrict the power of any one shareholder and those who inhabit the Foxes Trust etc are very well intentioned and have the best interests of the club at heart....but its just not going to lead to the rehabilitation of Leicester City.

When was the last time the club had one person controlling the club and putting money in?

It certainly isn't something that's happened in my memory, and we've had success during that time, so why should it need to be any different now?

A well managed club of our size can get to the Premiership and stay there, without relying on one person to take control.

 

[Redditch Fox]

When was the last time the club had one person controlling the club and putting money in?

It certainly isn't something that's happened in my memory, and we've had success during that time, so why should it need to be any different now?

A well managed club of our size can get to the Premiership and stay there, without relying on one person to take control.

1. Hasn't happened to-date in the way I described.

2. Theoretically what you say is possible.

3. What has changed?......What has changed is that the rich have got much richer (i.e. in the sense of cash rich rather than profitability); the great majority of the best players gravitate to a small number of cash rich clubs - this is very different to the way things were in the past; the financial penalty of being outside the top tier is now devastating (If you go back long enough you will find that there was a time when there was a widely held view that Leicester City was financially better off with a winning team in the second tier rather than a losing team in the top tier). All this makes it difficult to achieve the results we all want by just being a "well managed club of our size."

 

[webmaster]

3. What has changed?......What has changed is that the rich have got much richer (i.e. in the sense of cash rich rather than profitability); the great majority of the best players gravitate to a small number of cash rich clubs - this is very different to the way things were in the past; the financial penalty of being outside the top tier is now devastating (If you go back long enough you will find that there was a time when there was a widely held view that Leicester City was financially better off with a winning team in the second tier rather than a losing team in the top tier). All this makes it difficult to achieve the results we all want by just being a "well managed club of our size."

So you think handing contol of the club over to an autocrat is better than running it the way it is?

What if someone takes control of the club, runs it badly and ends up running up huge debts, which he can't pay back?

What if someone takes over then dies, leaving debts but nothing in place to ensure the financial future of the club?

What if someone comes in who claims to have lots of money, when in fact they're funding it with expensive loans, in the hope that success on the pitch will pay for it?

All of these scenarios I've mentioned above have happened to other clubs, often as the result of a 'Knight in shining armour' who has made promises he's been unable to keep.

After what we went through with administration we can't afford to take that kind of risk, we have to build the club again, and that takes time.

 

[EMC Fox]

I have the feeling that as a supposedly shrewd businessman... the person you're talking about wont put his extra £350K in as it gives him no more say than he has with £150K... that's why he wants to put £5m in and effectively own the club (as majority shareholder)

It's a case of all or nothing... he's not in the habit of chucking money away for no tangible return.

 

[Foxes_Trust]

But it also epitomises what is good about Leicester City these days - a shady individual or consortium cannot come in and run the club into the ground -see Derby County, for one instance.

Precisely, it's exactly why this was put into the constitution

 

[Foxes_Trust]

we currently have who no one likes, trusts, respects or thinks can do their job.

That is a vast assumption of the opinions of many

Do not make the mistake that your opinion is everybody's opinion

 

[Foxes_Trust]

You mean the same one we wanted out when he was chairman?

On thing that was made clear at the open meeting when we formed the Trust by those 700 fans present, was that fans did not want MG involved in the set up that took over the club & certainly not as Chairman.

 

[PFKAKTF FOX]

FT any feedback from last night FCC meeting, regarding the rumours ? Also who was in attendance from the club ?

 

[Durham Fox]

On thing that was made clear at the open meeting when we formed the Trust by those 700 fans present, was that fans did not want MG involved in the set up that took over the club & certainly not as Chairman.

Any ideas on the reasons for that?

 

[Foxes_Trust]

In that case, presumably there is nothing to stop him throwing another £350k at the club if he felt like it.

That is true, but what is his motivation for doing so.

The majority of shareholders are regularly at games, have you ever seen him there?

 

[Foxes_Trust]

I'm not sure how things are set up for issuing more shares, it might be that to get in he'd have to buy the shares from someone else, so the money wouldn't benefit the club.

There are still some shares 'unsubscribed' for want of a better term. Pretty sure more would be created quickly if the intention to invest was there.

The debate held at previous shareholder meetings is that whether any new investors should pay a premium now, as in above £1/share.

Having said that it wouldn't apply to DW, as shareholders who out some money in at the time of crisis would be viewed differently to brand new investors.

No decision has been taken on this, mainly due to no new shareholders on the horizon

 

[Foxes_Trust]

IMO if Martin George is serious about trying to buy the club out, then the leaking of these recent events down Filbo Way could be part of his PR exercise to put pressure on the existing board and try to engineer fans support for his takeover bid.

If we see him tomorrow, we will ask him the question directly

 

[PFKAKTF FOX]

There are still some shares 'unsubscribed' for want of a better term. Pretty sure more would be created quickly if the intention to invest was there.

The debate held at previous shareholder meetings is that whether any new investors should pay a premium now, as in above £1/share.

Having said that it wouldn't apply to DW, as shareholders who out some money in at the time of crisis would be viewed differently to brand new investors.

No decision has been taken on this, mainly due to no new shareholders on the horizon

Why should new investors pay a premium, I could understand it if the club was in the Prem and raking money in, but to be honest I would have thought that to ask for a premium would scare potential investors off.