Wesley Fofana - He is no more - finished - forgotten.

[Dames]

Just now, Babylon said:

Few teams had a wage % to revenue that we did. 

Few teams have invested in infrastructure that we have. 

Few teams spent £60m on the back of massive losses lost season. 

Even then the new FFP rules don't count next season and with the amount of players out of contract next summer we'd arguably naturally fall back into compliance.

[ronnup]

2 minutes ago, Pliskin said:

He’s massively rated in the football world. Lots of talk about him at academy level. But quality players often get lost at clubs like Chelsea. It’s a certainly that Gallagher will end up leaving eventually. They’re one of the worst clubs to play for if you’re an academy player. 

He's untested however still the top level , I'm not disagreeing , but some mediocre CBs have looked ace in the championship 

[fox_up_north]

So is he going or not? Feels like a merry go round this year that only Kasper is getting off. 

[turlo]

7 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

I’ve asked this question a few times but as always never been answered (apart from Ric).

Those on here who have stated ‘ok then, 80 mill plus Colwill’, why?

Do you know he’s any good, ever seen him play? What footed is he? Is he a regular CB, can he play elsewhere?

left footed/sided CB who's played 1 full season in the championship. Rubbish on football manager

[An Sionnach]

4 minutes ago, los dedos said:

I agree with all your points. But we've really got to look at Leicester as a City of 500,000 plus . Basically the Leicester urban area and on top of that Leicestershire is getting closer to 1m

 

 

 

Exactly and as a close example, Leicester Tigers think big and for a rugby club they are big. They have taken risks way above their pay grade but in rugby circles they are world famous and you see their shirts everywhere even in the States.

Edited 3 August 2022 by An Sionnach

[coolhandfox]

12 minutes ago, Dames said:

Feels like a smoke screen, why are we the only club in the league taking it seriously? Every other club is spending money.

The big 6 have a massive turnover advantage so not bothered by it, the 3 coming up are coming from a lower base and are going to have an extra 80m in their pocket.

 

We spent big last summer 60m (by our standards) with little outgoing, and have lost European football which means less money.

 

For example: 

Everton has sold Richarlison 60m and only spent 20m 

Leeds have sold 100m worth of talent and spent 95m 

Brighton have sold Bissouma 25m and only spent on 1 player 9m and look like selling Cucurella

Villa spent about 45m but cashed in on Grealish last summer 100m. 

West Ham has another year of European football so have little more cash. 

Palace clear out loads of deadwood last summer with loads of contracts ending (The position we will be in next season) 

 

I haven't got time to go through everyone, but you get my drift. 

 

 

 

 

Edited 3 August 2022 by coolhandfox

[MarriedaLeicesterGirl]

15 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

The club needs to generate more money from other sources , not just buying and selling players , hardly any clubs make much profit from that , at least not at our level. Our profile needs expanding , we are not cool or sexy as a club. The fanbase would expand considerably with more exposure. So we need a commercial manager with drive and creativity. Last and not least , the stadium is Too Small !.This joke of supposed planned expansion is a disgrace. We are down over 100'000 tickets a season and as a city of 350,000 people and being the only club in it we are losing a huge amount of money. If we want to think big we need to have the profile to match it.

Yep. I think our club is gaining a lot of exposure as the ones who can bloody the nose of the big boys and it is becoming part of our identity since the league title. The club needs to figure out a way to promote and monetize it. 

 

But we also need to realize we were in the Championship less than a decade ago, and building the marketing side of the game is a process.

[Bucks fox]

24 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

The club needs to generate more money from other sources , not just buying and selling players , hardly any clubs make much profit from that , at least not at our level. Our profile needs expanding , we are not cool or sexy as a club. The fanbase would expand considerably with more exposure. So we need a commercial manager with drive and creativity. Last and not least , the stadium is Too Small !.This joke of supposed planned expansion is a disgrace. We are down over 100'000 tickets a season and as a city of 350,000 people and being the only club in it we are losing a huge amount of money. If we want to think big we need to have the profile to match it.

We can't even sell out the first home game of the season, no matter who we play to me this proves we are at the level now we can achieve. Yes, a game against the likes of Man Utd, Liverpool may sell out in a 40,000 stadium, but I think the majority of games even with a Commercial Manager won't sell out. What does breed the need for increased capacity is either living in large growing populous cities or being constantly successful and we need to ensure we are at the right level and personally I think we are there now.

Edited 3 August 2022 by Bucks fox

[Dames]

5 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

The big 6 have a massive turnover advantage so not bothered by it, the 3 coming up are coming from a lower base and are going to have an extra 80m in their pocket.

 

We spent big last summer 60m (by our standards) with little outgoing, and have lost European football which means less money.

 

For example: 

Everton has sold Richarlison 60m and only spent 20m 

Leeds have sold 100m worth of talent and spent 95m 

Brighton have sold Bissouma 25m and only spent on 1 player 9m and look like selling Cucurella

Villa spent about 45m but cashed in on Grealish last summer 100m. 

West Ham has another year of European football so have little more cash. 

Palace clear out loads of deadwood last summer with loads of contracts ending (The position we will be in next season) 

 

I haven't got time to go through everyone, but you get my drift. 

 

 

 

 

Completely get and understand that but the word is that the club are expecting to sell or shift on some players why haven't we taken even the most short term risk of getting more players in? If money isn't a problem why aren't we willing to risk a few weeks overlap on wages in vs wages out? 

 

Even if we don't shift players out there are so many out of contract in the summer that naturally things will begin to balance out. There must be something more to it if the club aren't even willing to take the shortest term risks. 

Edited 3 August 2022 by Dames

[Bluetintedspecs]

7 minutes ago, Bucks fox said:

We can't even sell out the first home game of the season, no matter who we play to me this proves we are at the level now we can achieve. Yes, a game against the likes of Man Utd, Liverpool may sell out in a 40,000 stadium, but I think the majority of games even with a Commercial Manager won't sell out. What does breed the need for increased capacity is either living in large populous city's or being constantly successful and we need to ensure we are at the right level and personally I think we are there now.

Curious,  how many have we sold approximately then? 

[st albans fox]

The thread is veering way off course ….

[Mickyblueeyes]

Just now, st albans fox said:

The thread is veering way off course ….

Long may it continue.....longer it does, the longer there is no news on Wes. Which can only be good news. 

[Frank Large's Black Book]

Why don't we............

 

Hang out the negotiations until the last moments of the window then give Rudkin the Fax machine.

 

Sorted.

[Guest Col city fan]

3 minutes ago, Frank Large's Black Book said:

Why don't we............

 

Hang out the negotiations until the last moments of the window then give Rudkin the Fax machine.

 

Sorted.

Now hold on.. I’m an old bloke but even I know it ain’t done by fax anymore (Is it?)

😊

[An Sionnach]

7 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

The thread is veering way off course ….

I should think everybody on the forum has aired their views by now so a period of quiet might be a good idea.There are plenty of other things that need discussing.

[Guest Col city fan]

Just now, An Sionnach said:

I should think everybody on the forum has aired their views by now so a period of quiet might be a good idea.There are plenty of other things that need discussing.

Cue another 250 posts 

[coolhandfox]

20 minutes ago, Dames said:

Completely get and understand that but the word is that the club are expecting to sell or shift on some players why haven't we taken even the most short term risk of getting more players in? If money isn't a problem why aren't we willing to risk a few weeks overlap on wages in vs wages out? willing to take the shortest term risks. 

I assume because they reviewed the risk and decided to manage it in why they deemed is the appropriate way. 

 

We have 31 players over 21 who need to be registered in the 25, let's say we loan out Wright and Hirst which seems logical. 

 

We then bring in 2 new players, taking us back to 31, so we have 6 players we can't register. 

 

Let's say we can't sell them for whatever reason and the 6 are not registered. (Now we can argue who that 6 would be and how much they get paid, but let's just go with this for this example) 

 

Vesterguarrd (75k) 

Hamza (60k) 

Perez (70k)

Mendy (30k)

Praet (60k)  

Amartery (50K)

 

That's 345k a week or 18m a year. For sitting watching.

 

Without adding the salaries of the new players and their cost. 

 

Yes, we could take the risk and probably sell them after we get new players and before the window shuts, but it's a big risk if it goes tits up. 

 

Add to that the need to give the likes of Maddison a new contract.

 

How close are we to FFP breach, I don't know.

What are the sanctions, I'm not sure.

 

But the club does and I assume has factored that into the reasons why we are working this way. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited 3 August 2022 by coolhandfox

[los dedos]

18 minutes ago, Bucks fox said:

We can't even sell out the first home game of the season, no matter who we play to me this proves we are at the level now we can achieve. Yes, a game against the likes of Man Utd, Liverpool may sell out in a 40,000 stadium, but I think the majority of games even with a Commercial Manager won't sell out. What does breed the need for increased capacity is either living in large growing populous cities or being constantly successful and we need to ensure we are at the right level and personally I think we are there now.

Literally every time a team has increased stadium capacity or built a bigger ground . Attendances have gone up !

I'm sure someone else will be along soon with the list of how we achieve closer to 100% attendance than anyone else in the prem .

I could write all the other reasons on how City don't make it easy for the casual user. But I would be here for ever .😅

[mozartfox]

5 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

I should think everybody on the forum has aired their views by now so a period of quiet might be a good idea.There are plenty of other things that need discussing.

Agree - some Maintenance by the Mods - back on line on September 02 would be pure bliss.  It may save some lives too.

[Dames]

2 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

I assume because they reviewed the risk and decided to manage it in why they deemed is the appropriate way. 

 

We have 31 players over 21 who need to be registered in the 25, let's say we loan out Wright and Hirst which seems logical. 

 

We then bring in 2 new players, taking us back to 31, so we have 6 players we can't register. 

 

Let's say we can't sell them for whatever reason and the 6 are not registered. (Now we can argue who that 6 would be and how much they get paid, but let's just go with this for this example) 

 

Vesterguarrd (75k) 

Hamza (60k) 

Perez (70k)

Mendy (30k)

Praet (60k)  

Amartery (50K)

 

That's 345k a week 18m a year. For sitting watching.

 

Without adding the salaries of the new players. and their cost.

 

Yes, we could take the risk and probably sell them after we get new players and before the window shuts, but it's a big risk if it goes tits up. 

 

Add to that the need to give the likes of Maddison a new contract.

 

How close are we to FFP breach, I don't know.

What are the sanctions, I'm not sure.

 

But the club does and I assume has factored that into the reasons why we are working this way. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

18m a year is a lot of money and it goes back to my original point that its money the club can't afford to waste, FFP or not.

 

If you think about it, 18m is one average transfer, if we had money we'd just take a hit on the transfer kitty and at least get some bodies in, less than we'd like but still an improvement or two. We've not and even after selling our best keeper and top 3 highest earners the word is that we aren't going to replace them due to funds. 

 

My point is I think the club is in a worse financial situation than it is letting on. I hope i'm entirely wrong by the way but it seems odd that our best players are subject to intense speculation all at the exact same time.

[pkonline]

When he was at Saint Étienne he did push through his move to us - could be history repeating itself.

[Clever Fox]

26 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

The club needs to generate more money from other sources , not just buying and selling players , hardly any clubs make much profit from that , at least not at our level. Our profile needs expanding , we are not cool or sexy as a club. The fanbase would expand considerably with more exposure. So we need a commercial manager with drive and creativity. Last and not least , the stadium is Too Small !.This joke of supposed planned expansion is a disgrace. We are down over 100'000 tickets a season and as a city of 350,000 people and being the only club in it we are losing a huge amount of money. If we want to think big we need to have the profile to match it.

Yes we need to generate more money but that's a slow process which I believe we're working our way through.

We have one of the best CEOs not just in Football but in Industry generally, Someone who is highly sought after but stays loyal to the Club and King Power.

The new Training ground and Stadium Expansion are a part of that development. Going forward a few more prodigees coming through will bring in hundreds of millions, like Chilwell Barnes, KDH etc for little outlay. The Stadium expansion will likely bring in 20 to 25 million between Ticket Sales Merchandising and Food etc. That will make a big difference looking forward.

Then we go again with further expansion when we can fill those extra 10k seats.

The worse thing we could do is build a monlith of a Stadiium and have it half Empty. We'd lose atmosphere as Fans but also the Players would lose focus because of the lack of atmosphere in the Stadium.

 Covid was unforseen, But signing firnge players on 3 to 4 year contracts for a 1 year European adventure was a mistake. 

 

We need to keep the faith and believe in the Club, We're still moving upwards even if we've hit a few bumps on the road.

[Babylon]

42 minutes ago, Dames said:

Even then the new FFP rules don't count next season and with the amount of players out of contract next summer we'd arguably naturally fall back into compliance.

They count this season, next season it drops to 80% of revenue and then 70% year after. 
 

And that’s not just wages, that includes money spent on fees and agents fees.

 

So we might have to drop wages from 85/95% of revenue down to something like 50/60% if we want to sign players also, and play in Europe if we get there. 
 

The cuts could be quite astronomical if we want to stay within the uefa ones.

[coolhandfox]

3 minutes ago, Dames said:

18m a year is a lot of money and it goes back to my original point that its money the club can't afford to waste, FFP or not.

 

If you think about it, 18m is one average transfer, if we had money we'd just take a hit on the transfer kitty and at least get some bodies in, less than we'd like but still an improvement or two. We've not and even after selling our best keeper and top 3 highest earners the word is that we aren't going to replace them due to funds. 

 

My point is I think the club is in a worse financial situation than it is letting on. I hope i'm entirely wrong by the way but it seems odd that our best players are subject to intense speculation all at the exact same time.

Wages are different to transfer fees.  

 

Transfer fees are amortised over the length of a contract, an 18m fee over a 4-year contract has an impact of 4.5m a yearly on the accounts. 

 

So we have to spend 72m on a player with a 4-year contract to have the same impact on the yearly accounts (18m) as having 18m of wages on the accounts. 

 

[Ric Flair]

42 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

The big 6 have a massive turnover advantage so not bothered by it, the 3 coming up are coming from a lower base and are going to have an extra 80m in their pocket.

 

We spent big last summer 60m (by our standards) with little outgoing, and have lost European football which means less money.

 

For example: 

Everton has sold Richarlison 60m and only spent 20m 

Leeds have sold 100m worth of talent and spent 95m 

Brighton have sold Bissouma 25m and only spent on 1 player 9m and look like selling Cucurella

Villa spent about 45m but cashed in on Grealish last summer 100m. 

West Ham has another year of European football so have little more cash. 

Palace clear out loads of deadwood last summer with loads of contracts ending (The position we will be in next season) 

 

I haven't got time to go through everyone, but you get my drift. 

 

 

 

 

Villa blew that Grealish money last year. They are heading for big problems if they think they can take on the authorities. They're waiting for a club outside the big boys to make an example of, although they ought to have done that with Everton an'all.