Leicester City and PSR – Everything you need to know on EFL dispute, player sales, and what next

[LCFCJohn]

4 hours ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

There is a big difference between financing a phoenix rising from non-league to doing that with a Championship/Premier League club.

 

The competitive advantage you can get by simply having finances to play with at that lower level is huge.

I do realise this and what league they are in. See my reply to another post above which highlights why I used them as an example. I think the positive traits they have displayed since taking on that club, are transferrable despite what league you are in, I.e having sensible heads running your club that know the game.

 

I just feel that if Top and the KP family, were more willing to show change behind the scenes and show the club to be well run, they would not being under the kind of pressure they find themselves.

 

Nobody is asking or expecting that we keep winning the league or FA Cup, but currently we just seem a complete shambles on and off the pitch. It honestly wouldn’t bother me to see us relegated if there seemed like a longer term plan in place to come back stronger but we seem stuck between and neither ‘going for it’ nor bringing the finances under control by sensibly investing for the future (in terms of the playing squad).

[CosbehFox]

9 hours ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

There is a big difference between financing a phoenix rising from non-league to doing that with a Championship/Premier League club.

 

The competitive advantage you can get by simply having finances to play with at that lower level is huge.

There’s no doubt a difference of Wrexham but it’s important to note how they employed people in positions where required. Not mentioned but the appointment of Fleur Robinson was big for them. She used to work at burton (daughter of the owner) and she’s seen it from the Championship to League 2. She’s left now but the perfect example of them recognising where the experience is needed for that particularly part of the journey. 
 

Humphrey Ker’s interviews last weekend were really interesting. He admitted that not everything they’ve done has worked and has been successful. The whole approach has been they must consistently review what works and what doesn’t. 
 

But even if we step away from Wrexham and look at recent takeovers at a PL level. A lot of new owners have set about getting the sporting director role right - Newcastle with Ashworth, now at Man U…lots of other examples too. Villa with Monchi another example to push them onto another level. The top of the club must be improved upon and review constantly in the same way your playing squad is 

Edited 17 August by CosbehFox

[when_you're_smiling]

https://www.theguardian.com/football/article/2024/aug/17/leicester-warning-what-can-go-wrong-on-limit-budget

[CosbehFox]

8 minutes ago, when_you're_smiling said:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/article/2024/aug/17/leicester-warning-what-can-go-wrong-on-limit-budget

A far more balanced piece than the Samuel stuff I’ve seen written on it. 
 

I found this bit interesting considering Swiss Ramble is normally spot on with this sort of thing 

 

The football finance blogger Swiss Ramble estimated that, even with a generous reading of permissible deductions, they are likely to be about £29m over the £105m threshold for losses over three years. There could be problems next year as well, with Swiss Ramble projectinganother breach unless Leicester can somehow turn a profit of £12m this season.

Edited 17 August by CosbehFox

[fox_up_north]

It should be noted that Wrexham were basically cherry picked. The TV show (of which I've seen a few episodes but it's very sanitised) was part of the deal. Whoever Rob/ Ryan picked to buy would have received the rocket boost, as the whole thing was geared around commercialisation. 

 

They are very much an outlier and it's important not to compare to them. The "business" is the commercial aspect and getting the big sponsors because they will instantly be on Disney. The club could be any team of any sport. 

[coolhandfox]

2 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

A far more balanced piece than the Samuel stuff I’ve seen written on it. 
 

I found this but interesting considering Swiss Ramble is normally spot on with this sort of thing 

 

The football finance blogger Swiss Ramble estimated that, even with a generous reading of permissible deductions, they are likely to be about £29m over the £105m threshold for losses over three years. There could be problems next year as well, with Swiss Ramble projectinganother breach unless Leicester can somehow turn a profit of £12m this season.

Swish Ramble is probably one of thr best out there, worth the sub.

[CosbehFox]

2 minutes ago, fox_up_north said:

It should be noted that Wrexham were basically cherry picked. The TV show (of which I've seen a few episodes but it's very sanitised) was part of the deal. Whoever Rob/ Ryan picked to buy would have received the rocket boost, as the whole thing was geared around commercialisation. 

 

They are very much an outlier and it's important not to compare to them. The "business" is the commercial aspect and getting the big sponsors because they will instantly be on Disney. The club could be any team of any sport. 

People are comparing their assessment of buying a club and appointing appropriately experienced people to do football roles. 

The whole commercialisation you’d be correct on but at the centre of it to push the football side of it on, even if organisationally they had to get the correct people in. Plenty of clubs have had sheds of cash and pissed it up the walls in the bottom two divisions 

[Ric Flair]

Which financial year's are being quoted there?

[coolhandfox]

11 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Which financial year's are being quoted there?

29m over is for the 3 year period ending 22/23 I think.

 

Pretty sure he was talking about us need to turning a profit for the championship season, which we probably did.

 

I can check as I've got a sub but can't be arsed to get my laptop out.

 

 

Edited 17 August by coolhandfox

[Claudio Fannieri]

8 hours ago, coolhandfox said:

29m over is for the 3 year period ending 22/23 I think.

 

Pretty sure he was talking about us need to turning a profit for the championship season, which we probably did.

 

I can check as I've got a sub but can't be arsed to get my laptop out.

 

 

Sun are reporting that we have made another loss in the Champ, if so I can foresee a whole heap of trouble ahead for our club. 

[UniFox21]

Heresay again. 

Suggesting we may get 2 deductions, we've argued they have no place to deduct us in the championship etc, all the same ground that's already been covered 

 

 

[stu]

25 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

Heresay again. 

Suggesting we may get 2 deductions, we've argued they have no place to deduct us in the championship etc, all the same ground that's already been covered 

 

 

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think this is the first time it’s been reported we’ve failed PSR for last season in the championship?

 

This is the same report as the Sun today, who also reported that the Enzo compensation was the same as selling a player for £50m over amortisation and wiped out any PSR concerns. This appears to be false.

 

However, obviously since we’ve lost KDH which should also go on last year’s figures.

 

So observations, who is leaking this unwelcome news? This on the face of it seems to a malicious attempt to create more unrest (not that we need any more) before the season starts for us. If it is the Football League then what do they gain from doing so? Other than a tit for tat response for a perceived lack of cooperation last season?

 

Also, what was the point in selling KDH when we did if we were likely to breach again? We could have gotten more than the fee we did by continuing to play off Chelsea against Brighton, which could have allowed us to be more aggressive in our transfer targets by having slightly more to play with or even just resisted the advances and kept him for the season if, as it appears to be the case, we are going in to the season with the squad we have.

 

None of this makes any sense.

Edited 18 August by stu

[coolhandfox]

50 minutes ago, Claudio Fannieri said:

Sun are reporting that we have made another loss in the Champ, if so I can foresee a whole heap of trouble ahead for our club. 

I'd advise to ignore anything the Sun report's.

 

 

Edited 18 August by coolhandfox

[st albans fox]

14 minutes ago, stu said:

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think this is the first time it’s been reported we’ve failed PSR for last season in the championship?

 

This is the same report as the Sun today, who also reported that the Enzo compensation was worth £50m on the books and wiped out any PSR concerns.

 

However, obviously since we’ve lost KDH which should also go on last year’s figures.

 

So observations, who is leaking this unwelcome news? This on the face of it seems to a malicious attempt to create more unrest (not that we need any more) before the season starts for us. If it is the Football League then what do they gain from doing so? Other than a tit for tat response for a perceived lack of cooperation last season?

 

Also, what was the point in selling KDH when we did if we were likely to breach again? We could have gotten more than the fee we did by continuing to play off Chelsea against Brighton, which could have allowed us to be more aggressive in our transfer targets by having slightly more to play with or even just resisted the advances and kept him for the season if, as it appears to be the case, we are going in to the season with the squad we have.

 

None of this makes any sense.

agree with the KDH comments - was thinking about this yesterday 

we definitely couldn’t ignore psr last year. PSR runs on three year cycles so the PL are quite in order to punish us based on our position at June 30 2024. Whether they are able to do it this season under their accelerated scheme is a question because we weren’t a PL club last season. We may well argue that point and attempt to get any sanction delayed into next season. (Wherever we may be). We will definitely get our sanction to June 2023 this season.  If we have failed cycle ending June 2024 then come feb/march if we are marooned and clearly going down would we be able to change our tack on that and try to get the second sanction applied same season? You’d assume that the football league would pressure the PL not to do that so they could finally have their ‘pound of flesh’. 
 

we are clearly attempting to control our running breach - otherwise we’d just be spending big to avoid being turned down by players and agents).  I think we are clearly struggling to meet psr obligations and trying to keep the breaches to a level where we will take a 3 point hit (I think to June 23 will be 6). 
 

EDIT: the sun are clueless as per the enzo 50m comment which was completely without context and highlighted their ignorance. 

Edited 18 August by st albans fox

[ClaphamFox]

37 minutes ago, stu said:

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think this is the first time it’s been reported we’ve failed PSR for last season in the championship?

 

This is the same report as the Sun today, who also reported that the Enzo compensation was the same as selling a player for £50m over amortisation and wiped out any PSR concerns. This appears to be false.

 

However, obviously since we’ve lost KDH which should also go on last year’s figures.

 

So observations, who is leaking this unwelcome news? This on the face of it seems to a malicious attempt to create more unrest (not that we need any more) before the season starts for us. If it is the Football League then what do they gain from doing so? Other than a tit for tat response for a perceived lack of cooperation last season?

 

Also, what was the point in selling KDH when we did if we were likely to breach again? We could have gotten more than the fee we did by continuing to play off Chelsea against Brighton, which could have allowed us to be more aggressive in our transfer targets by having slightly more to play with or even just resisted the advances and kept him for the season if, as it appears to be the case, we are going in to the season with the squad we have.

 

None of this makes any sense.

The article does not state that we breached PSR last season. 

[stu]

27 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

The article does not state that we breached PSR last season. 

Apologies I thought the Mail article was a word for word lift from the Sun article.

 

Definitely says we are expected to in that:

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/29938414/leicester-points-deduction-psr-premier-league/

Edited 18 August by stu

[ClaphamFox]

22 minutes ago, stu said:

Apologies I thought the Mail article was a word for word lift from the Sun article.

 

Definitely says we are expected to in that:

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/29938414/leicester-points-deduction-psr-premier-league/

The Sun article merely repeats the widely-known fact that the EFL was forecasting a breach for last season and slapped a transfer ban on us. It doesn’t make any reference to how the £40m we received for Maresca or KDH may have affected whether we breached last year or not. In short, it provides precisely zero new information.

[HankMarvin]

10 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

The Sun article merely repeats the widely-known fact that the EFL was forecasting a breach for last season and slapped a transfer ban on us. It doesn’t make any reference to how the £40m we received for Maresca or KDH may have affected whether we breached last year or not. In short, it provides precisely zero new information.

Think these articles are published on the back of the guardian article that misinterpreted what Swiss Rambler was quoted in writing in April as we made adjustments later that financial year.

Edited 18 August by HankMarvin

[UniFox21]

Coincidence these stories come back out as we're missing out on signings. 

 

(Obviously this was released pre Skipp)

Edited 18 August by UniFox21

[coolhandfox]

16 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

Coincidence these stories come back out as we're missing out on signings. 

 

(Obviously this was released pre Skipp)

People take 2 + 2 and get 22.

 

 

[UniFox21]

Just now, coolhandfox said:

People take 2 + 2 and get 22.

 

 

Is that how we've gotten to the Skipp fee?

[coolhandfox]

Just now, UniFox21 said:

Is that how we've gotten to the Skipp fee?

More then likely 

[JimmyC74]

Re failing PSR last season, I thought at worst we were looking at a financial penalty as the Prem didn’t enforce EFL sanctions? Such as when we were promoted the last time.

 

 

[stu]

Basically a rehash of the Sun story, but also states we expect to receive a 6 point deduction for 22/23, according to an unnamed club source.

 

Also pushes the narrative that the FL have handed their investigation over to the PL for 23/24 which could show another breach.

[coolhandfox]

19 minutes ago, stu said:

Basically a rehash of the Sun story, but also states we expect to receive a 6 point deduction for 22/23, according to an unnamed club source.

 

Also pushes the narrative that the FL have handed their investigation over to the PL for 23/24 which could show another breach.

I wouldn't worry about it the PL has enough on is hands dealing with its own PSR cases without taking on the EFL.

 

What do the PL gain by taking it on?

 

I also doubt we have finalised, had our accounts audited and shared with EFL, they only closed on the 30th of June.

 

The EFL are forecasting another overspend based on the club refusing to share it financial plans, they are guessing at the moment.

Edited 18 August by coolhandfox