LCFC FINED £880K....

[weller54]

8 hours ago, AKCJ said:

Can anyone explain this in terms a simpleton like myself could understand?

We've been fined Mahrez x 2.

[hebangsthedrums]

22 minutes ago, Babylon said:

So you can restrict sale price then by offering painfully slim discounts to only a few people actually allowed to sell your product… so exactly like I said then. 

Nope thats not restricting the sale price, the retailer still has the choice to sell at a skinny margin or a loss.

But anyway, its the fact we've colluded on a pricing strategy thats got us in trouble which is a different thing again..

 

6 minutes ago, Gravel said:

I wouldn't  be at all surprised if most clubs do something.similar. We were just clumsy enough to be caught.

Absolutely this

 

[Dames]

4 hours ago, Babylon said:

Didn’t know about what? The deal or the actual finer details of the contract?

 

As I said they’d be in the loop, but not necessarily on the finer details at all. That’s the commercial directors actual job. 

Making sure JD don’t undercut them isn’t just a fine detail though, no doubt the entire contract rested on that condition being met so yes the higher ups would have been more than aware and likely involved.

[TJQuik]

2 hours ago, Nick said:

The owners of the club that brought us the Premier League title and the FA cup.

 

I don’t dispute the elements of mismanagement but some of the comments in this thread are shameful.

It's hard to tell if posts like these are a parody or the real thing.

[Nick]

42 minutes ago, TJQuik said:

It's hard to tell if posts like these are a parody or the real thing.

It’s a difficult time for everybody.

[Bob Weasel Fox]

Does make me laugh when we get fined for this but Man City break 773 rules but fvck all happens 

 

double standards right there

 

corrupt game can go fvck itself 

[Lako42]

17 hours ago, coolhandfox said:

 

Stop with this sensible approach. 

 

The masses seem to think Top, Whelan and Rudkin have a hand in everything 

They clearly don't have a hand in enough then. 

 

Sleepwalk into every situation. 

 

Still highlights the piss poor leadership that we seem to becoming known for at all levels. 

[Babylon]

11 hours ago, Dames said:

Making sure JD don’t undercut them isn’t just a fine detail though, no doubt the entire contract rested on that condition being met so yes the higher ups would have been more than aware and likely involved.

That's the commercial directors job FFS. 

[Babylon]

12 hours ago, hebangsthedrums said:

Nope thats not restricting the sale price, the retailer still has the choice to sell at a skinny margin or a loss.

But anyway, its the fact we've colluded on a pricing strategy thats got us in trouble which is a different thing again..

 

Absolutely this

 

Which nobody is going to do, or if they do it's barely noticeable, and it can only be done through approved resellers who won't get re approved if they start undercutting them. Call it what you will, it's set up entirely to restrict the price in a legal way. 

[Sol thewall Bamba]

10 hours ago, Bob Weasel Fox said:

Does make me laugh when we get fined for this but Man City break 773 rules but fvck all happens 

 

double standards right there

 

corrupt game can go fvck itself 

The CMA have nothing to do with the game

[Les-TA-Jon]

10 hours ago, Bob Weasel Fox said:

Does make me laugh when we get fined for this but Man City break 773 rules but fvck all happens 

 

double standards right there

 

corrupt game can go fvck itself 

Because the CMA is a government body that has power and teeth. 

 

The PL is a self governing body that is full of conflicts of interest

[Dames]

23 minutes ago, Babylon said:

That's the commercial directors job FFS. 

And you honestly believe the CEO would not know the main details of a deal with a national retailer? This sort of deal has to have sign off at all levels. 

 

(And yes placing conditions on the sale of the goods is a main detail).

[Dames]

11 hours ago, TJQuik said:

It's hard to tell if posts like these are a parody or the real thing.

Its the real thing. A lot of our fans think like this and the real lack of demand for change or improvement is why we are in the situation we are in now. Its all too comfortable and senior management think they can keep pulling the wool and getting away with it. 

 

The comment they made to the press absolutely reeks of arrogance and entitlement. We aren't stupid, even if the last commercial director left in 2019 and we were still at it in 2020. Surely the replacement will have reviewed all deals and clearly alerted more senior members to any potential concerns. 

[Bob Weasel Fox]

30 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

The CMA have nothing to do with the game

Yeah I know but you also know the point I am making surely? So many double standards in the game - If we deserve the fine then great but if another body finds Man City guilty of 10 billion offences then that should be acted on also . . . . 🤔

[Daggers]

The idea that this was a rogue manager going off-piste with a maveric agreement that no one else knew about is nothing short of laughable. It was brought to the attention of and signed off at board level. 
 

Pearl clutchers need to put down their jewellery and smell the ground Arabica. 

[Daggers]

2 minutes ago, Bob Weasel Fox said:

Yeah I know but you also know the point I am making surely? So many double standards in the game - If we deserve the fine then great but if another body finds Man City guilty of 10 billion offences then that should be acted on also . . . . 🤔

1. Broke the law. It’s a legal thing. 

vs.

2. Broke some football rules. It’s a football thing. 

[Sol thewall Bamba]

1 hour ago, Bob Weasel Fox said:

Yeah I know but you also know the point I am making surely? So many double standards in the game - If we deserve the fine then great but if another body finds Man City guilty of 10 billion offences then that should be acted on also . . . . 🤔

They're completely different jurisdictions though? 

[Babylon]

34 minutes ago, Daggers said:

The idea that this was a rogue manager going off-piste with a maveric agreement that no one else knew about is nothing short of laughable. It was brought to the attention of and signed off at board level. 
 

Pearl clutchers need to put down their jewellery and smell the ground Arabica. 

Well, speaking from experience it's really not.

 

One of my clients is a large national retailer that uses a very specific piece of software, one of their directors totally on their own, and without the knowledge of the other directors and owner, signed a deal that effectively made that software redundant in 30 days time, and they didn't find out until day 30 when the software stopped working and didn't have new software in place, or their staff trained to use said software. 

 

The idea that people who are quite high up in a company can't make individual decisions that negatively impact their company, without knowledge of these higher up is just false, it can and does happen all the time. 

[Babylon]

57 minutes ago, Dames said:

And you honestly believe the CEO would not know the main details of a deal with a national retailer?

Yes, it's entirely plausible in a company employing about 400 full time employees, with a turnover at the time that makes said deal comparatively a pittance. Imagine how much of a paper trail there is for a business like Leicester, how many deals we do, how much time getting the training ground sorted would take, let alone also working on stadium expansions etc. 

 

If you want to argue those at the top are ultimately responsible for their employees, then that's a different argument. But expecting basically just one person to know the finer details of all deals is laughable, it's what they employ people for. As I said, we changed commercial director just after these deals were done, it's likely to have been them (we don't know), but it's not Dorris the tea lady doing a deal that needs signing off. 

[Daggers]

20 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Well, speaking from experience it's really not.

 

One of my clients is a large national retailer that uses a very specific piece of software, one of their directors totally on their own, and without the knowledge of the other directors and owner, signed a deal that effectively made that software redundant in 30 days time, and they didn't find out until day 30 when the software stopped working and didn't have new software in place, or their staff trained to use said software. 

 

The idea that people who are quite high up in a company can't make individual decisions that negatively impact their company, without knowledge of these higher up is just false, it can and does happen all the time. 

I wouldn’t normally take anecdote over my experience, but it’s you, so I will slink to a corner and stfu for an hour or so 😁

[hebangsthedrums]

2 hours ago, Babylon said:

Which nobody is going to do, or if they do it's barely noticeable, and it can only be done through approved resellers who won't get re approved if they start undercutting them. Call it what you will, it's set up entirely to restrict the price in a legal way. 

But people do do it (accept a small margin and in a minority of cases accept a loss), ie Apple as you pointed out.

I think we're debating the semantics - I read your initial point as a manufacturer can say to a reseller 'you can't sell this product for less than x' - they can't.

But like you say there are ways and means of controlling the price legally but its a very grey area and just takes one clumsy email/conversation to come a cropper.

 

I'm only droning on as I will never get back the many hours I had to spend with  legal bods after a sales guy who worked for me minuted in a meeting that a retailer should not sell a product for x price.

 

I still find it insane this could get signed off at whatever level as given the volume I'd guess we are talking for our shirts, the fine is probably many many multiples of the margin/profit doing it was expected to retain.

 

Sad indictment of the club either way - the fact that we wanted to play the system when ultimately it hurts fans, and that we were too stupid to do it 

 

Edited 6 July 2023 by hebangsthedrums

[Merging Cultures]

Meh who cares?

 

Other clubs do the same, but upfront, not how our people ended up doing it. So we've not lost anything financially as a club, or as fans.

 

This is a slap on the wrist and I do hope the people who didn't get the contract right in the first place have been replaced with much more savvy people who can 'screw the fans over' with out us finding out after the fact.

[OntarioFox]

Just checking something here - is this JD Sports the national retailer, or JC Sports the independent local shop by the market?

 

If it's the latter, this will ruin them. Always thought it was odd that LCFC don't have their own shop in town.

[Jono1604]

5 hours ago, Lako42 said:

They clearly don't have a hand in enough then. 

 

Sleepwalk into every situation. 

 

Still highlights the piss poor leadership that we seem to becoming known for at all levels. 

Exactly piss poor leadership showing how poor this club is run cannot believe Whelan or Top wasnt aware of this which is in effect ripping your own fans off  ! What the hell does she do all day ! 

[Bob Weasel Fox]

3 hours ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

They're completely different jurisdictions though? 

Doesn't matter, same principle surely?