Leicester City £100m action plan revealed in worst-case scenario

[MPH]

13 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

Did the other relegated clubs also get relegated just as they'd built a new stadium and then get sued by a former player for unfair dismissal?

 

 

The idea that Leicester City have this unique situation and that we are special just doesn't make any sense.   Time to take off the blue tinted specs. The reality is we don't know anything about the goings on at the other relegated clubs - other than that despite relegation and the folding of the tv deal they were able to keep on going and not go into administration.  They probably budgeted accordingly as we do also know that neither of them got back into the premier league  that season.

[sacreblueits442]

1 hour ago, MPH said:

did the other relegated clubs go into administration?

... Probably a more pertinent question to ask would be how many of the other relegated clubs had built a new stadium!!!

 

The £37 million cost of the new stadium, combined with relegation from the Premiership, the collapse of the English transfer market due to the introduction of the transfer window and the collapse of ITV Digital meant Leicester went into receivership shortly after moving to the new stadium. Birse Construction who had built the stadium therefore lost a large part of their fee, and they withdrew from football ground construction.^[8]

As part of the deal which brought the club out of receivership, the stadium's ownership reverted to American academic retirement fund TIAA–CREF, who had supplied £28 million via a bond scheme towards the stadium's construction, with the club taking a long-term lease while the bond repayments were made.

On 1 March 2013, owners King Power purchased the stadium through their company K Power Holdings Co, Ltd.^[

 

NB.

  ^{The club was saved by a Lineker consortium with people such as Heskey putting in £100,000.00 which they never got back.} 

Edited 31 October 2023 by sacreblueits442
Update.

[The Doctor]

40 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

 

The idea that Leicester City have this unique situation and that we are special just doesn't make any sense.   Time to take off the blue tinted specs. The reality is we don't know anything about the goings on at the other relegated clubs - other than that despite relegation and the folding of the tv deal they were able to keep on going and not go into administration.  They probably budgeted accordingly as we do also know that neither of them got back into the premier league  that season.

At the time we were in a unique situation because we do absolutely know that Ipswich and derby weren't building a new ground while getting relegated. Come on dude, you're smarter than this contrarian nonsense 

[MPH]

23 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

At the time we were in a unique situation because we do absolutely know that Ipswich and derby weren't building a new ground while getting relegated. Come on dude, you're smarter than this contrarian nonsense 

 

oh please don't give me that rubbish., What im smart enough to do is take off the blue tinted specs and realize that we are just one of many clubs with different challenges all going on at the same time. 

 

[MPH]

27 minutes ago, sacreblueits442 said:

... Probably a more pertinent question to ask would be how many of the other relegated clubs had built a new stadium!!!

 

The £37 million cost of the new stadium, combined with relegation from the Premiership, the collapse of the English transfer market due to the introduction of the transfer window and the collapse of ITV Digital meant Leicester went into receivership shortly after moving to the new stadium. Birse Construction who had built the stadium therefore lost a large part of their fee, and they withdrew from football ground construction.^[8]

As part of the deal which brought the club out of receivership, the stadium's ownership reverted to American academic retirement fund TIAA–CREF, who had supplied £28 million via a bond scheme towards the stadium's construction, with the club taking a long-term lease while the bond repayments were made.

On 1 March 2013, owners King Power purchased the stadium through their company K Power Holdings Co, Ltd.^[

 

NB.

  ^{The club was saved by a Lineker consortium with people such as Heskey putting in £100,000.00 which they never got back.} 

 

 

see above post. saying we are special because we were building a  stadium is such a cheap line to use.

[sacreblueits442]

9 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

 

see above post. saying we are special because we were building a  stadium is such a cheap line to use.

...there was nothing "special" about going under, the circumstances were however unique at the time!!!

As a business, you look ahead and plan accordingly with a budget put in place that will see you through a certain period, and then you reassess when you encounter a new phase. The collapse of ITV Digital would have decimated that budget and our figures no doubt could not hold water. In this instance you look at all the options available and how you can survive. We chose to go into Receivership, it offered us a way out due to the structure of the process. We owed people money who could not recoup their money against us, was that a moral thing to do, clearly with the potential of people losing their jobs and not paying our bills the answer is no, but pragmatism comes before morals in business.

  There is the "family" the staff you have running the club right down to the tea lady, they are the faces that you see and the ones counting on you to keep them in a job, so you make a choice.

  I understand your argument, "people in glass houses....", and judging by the posts in this thread many agree with you.

In this discussion, I would assume that you would elect to have resolved all outstanding debts and take the additional time in the second tier.

 

[davieG]

As I remember it we wouldn't have needed to go into administration other than because of the Wise situation. The club had put together a business plan to see us through and to pay any debts.

 

Even then we only survived because we sold players and others took a cut depending on whether we got promoted. Some of the players payed for some of the non-playing staff. We then recruited 2 players who played for nothing.

[MPH]

5 minutes ago, sacreblueits442 said:

...there was nothing "special" about going under, the circumstances were however unique at the time!!!

As a business, you look ahead and plan accordingly with a budget put in place that will see you through a certain period, and then you reassess when you encounter a new phase. The collapse of ITV Digital would have decimated that budget and our figures no doubt could not hold water. In this instance you look at all the options available and how you can survive. We chose to go into Receivership, it offered us a way out due to the structure of the process. We owed people money who could not recoup their money against us, was that a moral thing to do, clearly with the potential of people losing their jobs and not paying our bills the answer is no, but pragmatism comes before morals in business.

  There is the "family" the staff you have running the club right down to the tea lady, they are the faces that you see and the ones counting on you to keep them in a job, so you make a choice.

  I understand your argument, "people in glass houses....", and judging by the posts in this thread many agree with you.

In this discussion, I would assume that you would elect to have resolved all outstanding debts and take the additional time in the second tier.

 

 

 

But everyone had that deal collapse is my point. and we'd be a bit naïve to think we were the only club that had financial constraints on us ,, to us it was a stadium, to someone else it might have been something different... we'd have to have an intricate knowledge of everyone elses finances to truly say ours was unique.. and we dont.

[SemperEadem]

1 minute ago, davieG said:

As I remember it we wouldn't have needed to go into administration other than because of the Wise situation. The club had put together a business plan to see us through and to pay any debts.

 

Even then we only survived because we sold players and others took a cut depending on whether we got promoted. Some of the players payed for some of the non-playing staff. We then recruited 2 players who played for nothing.

Summerbee and who?

[davieG]

2 minutes ago, SemperEadem said:

Summerbee and who?

Billy McKinlay

[MPH]

2 minutes ago, davieG said:

As I remember it we wouldn't have needed to go into administration other than because of the Wise situation. The club had put together a business plan to see us through and to pay any debts.

 

Even then we only survived because we sold players and others took a cut depending on whether we got promoted. Some of the players payed for some of the non-playing staff. We then recruited 2 players who played for nothing.

 

 

For the Dennis wise situation, if i remember correctly, we fined him 2 weeks wages and then sacked him and under british employment law you cant punish someone twice for the same offense. Such a calamitous handling of the situation...

[sacreblueits442]

2 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

 

But everyone had that deal collapse is my point. and we'd be a bit naïve to think we were the only club that had financial constraints on us ,, to us it was a stadium, to someone else it might have been something different... we'd have to have an intricate knowledge of everyone elses finances to truly say ours was unique.. and we dont.

...without a forensic look at all the books for the clubs involved, we are not going to be able to give you an answer, nor you will be able to justify your argument!!!

If Dennis Wise's agent elects to call for a winding-up order to be issued, and he pays the necessary amount of money to implement the process, then there will be nothing that we can do but follow the process.

[Paninistickers]

1 hour ago, sacreblueits442 said:

The club was saved by a Lineker consortium

I'd love to be reminded of who was in that consortium. From memory it was about 70 or 80 individuals who put in 100k each. I wonder what their story was and if they are still involved as fans or box holders. How did it feel to 'save the club'?

 

Be a good feature piece for, say, rob tanner or Jordan Blackwell to do

[SemperEadem]

3 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

I'd love to be reminded of who was in that consortium. From memory it was about 70 or 80 individuals who put in 100k each. I wonder what their story was and if they are still involved as fans or box holders. How did it feel to 'save the club'?

 

Be a good feature piece for, say, rob tanner or Jordan Blackwell to do

The BSLB podcast episode on this was fascinating. 

[The Doctor]

24 minutes ago, davieG said:

As I remember it we wouldn't have needed to go into administration other than because of the Wise situation. The club had put together a business plan to see us through and to pay any debts.

 

Even then we only survived because we sold players and others took a cut depending on whether we got promoted. Some of the players payed for some of the non-playing staff. We then recruited 2 players who played for nothing.

Correct. We'd agreed repayment plans with all other creditors, but Wise and Hall rejected it, and caused the club to have to file for administration instead 

[MPH]

17 minutes ago, sacreblueits442 said:

...without a forensic look at all the books for the clubs involved, we are not going to be able to give you an answer, nor you will be able to justify your argument!!!

If Dennis Wise's agent elects to call for a winding-up order to be issued, and he pays the necessary amount of money to implement the process, then there will be nothing that we can do but follow the process.

Then neither can you?

[sacreblueits442]

28 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

I'd love to be reminded of who was in that consortium. From memory it was about 70 or 80 individuals who put in 100k each. I wonder what their story was and if they are still involved as fans or box holders. How did it feel to 'save the club'?

 

Be a good feature piece for, say, rob tanner or Jordan Blackwell to do

...what about the storyteller himself @kushiro!!!

[sacreblueits442]

14 minutes ago, MPH said:

Then neither can you?

...that is what I said!!!

[MPH]

18 minutes ago, sacreblueits442 said:

...that is what I said!!!

 

sort of

[sacreblueits442]

7 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

sort of

...with all the information laid out in front of you, you are still basing your argument on the financial state of other clubs at that time!!!

If the collapse of ITV digital, a new stadium being built and a winding up order being issued, at the same time, and for you does not constitute a unique circumstance, then there is no more that can be said.

  Sorry, I am not going to go down this rabbit hole with you, I feel that there could be much more going on here than you digging in for the sake of it.

[MPH]

11 minutes ago, sacreblueits442 said:

...with all the information laid out in front of you, you are still basing your argument on the financial state of other clubs at that time!!!

If the collapse of ITV digital, a new stadium being built and a winding up order being issued, at the same time, and for you does not constitute a unique circumstance, then there is no more that can be said.

  Sorry, I am not going to go down this rabbit hole with you, I feel that there could be much more going on here than you digging in for the sake of it.

 

probably best to leave it anyway if you’re getting triggered…

[davieG]

1 hour ago, MPH said:

 

 

For the Dennis wise situation, if i remember correctly, we fined him 2 weeks wages and then sacked him and under british employment law you cant punish someone twice for the same offense. Such a calamitous handling of the situation...

Emotions and laws don't always fit together. Micky Adams made an on the spot decision with the fine as he didn't have the authority to sack him. It was later felt by the club in an emotional free environment that the correct action considering the horrendous and physically damaging circumstances that he should be sacked.

 

It was calamitous but it seems entirely wrong to use that as means of justifying your opinion talk about holier than thou attitude.

 

What was outrageous was the action taken by Wise & Hall.  When Wise should have been charge with common assault or whatever was the most appropriate law. The guy was a complete and utter coward.

 

As said above I'm out of this rabbit hole.

[MPH]

3 minutes ago, davieG said:

Emotions and laws don't always fit together. Micky Adams made an on the spot decision with the fine as he didn't have the authority to sack him. It was later felt by the club in an emotional free environment that the correct action considering the horrendous and physically damaging circumstances that he should be sacked.

 

It was calamitous but it seems entirely wrong to use that as means of justifying your opinion talk about holier than thou attitude.

 

What was outrageous was the action taken by Wise & Hall.  When Wise should have been charge with common assault or whatever was the most appropriate law. The guy was a complete and utter coward.

 

As said above I'm out of this rabbit hole.

 

ive listed a few different reasons of course but yeah prob best to leave it there 

[filbertway]

Reading this last page or 2 and all I can think is, MPH is Mac from always sunny 

 

 

 

 

[The Doctor]

5 hours ago, MPH said:

 

oh please don't give me that rubbish., What im smart enough to do is take off the blue tinted specs and realize that we are just one of many clubs with different challenges all going on at the same time. 

 

Ok then, you're not smart enough to avoid devolving into contrarian nonsense??

 

A lot of clubs faced challenges from the collapse of ITVDigital, we were the only ones who had the storm of a premier league wage bill, new stadium and lawsuit from a former player who alongside his lawyer rejected a payment plan to service the debts, filing a winding up petition and causing us to have to opt for administration vs ceasing to exist. Our playing budget was non existent already that season, we signed two free agents on pay-as-you-play deals and tried to sell everyone we could but many rejected moves (e.g. Muzzy Izzet, £6m bid accepted from Middlesbrough but he turned down the move to get us back up). You talk as if we delayed going to administration when we knew it was inevitable to get an unfair advantage, but we didn't, we went in when a single creditor rejected a repayment plan having not invested in the squad at all, instead selling as many as we could to make up the deficit (but as we found the last couple of years, you can't force other teams to bid for players and can't force players to agree to those moves).