The Prophet Posted Thursday at 12:00 Share Posted Thursday at 12:00 3 hours ago, gbandit said: While I agree to a decent extent that we are controlling some flow of information, when it comes to the transfers and PSR stuff then there would have been far more people involved both internally and externally who would have been able to tell if we were in trouble. A leak could have come from many places. In terms of Mitchell, the leak could only have come from within or from Mitchell so it’s a much smaller pool. I think we have overplayed our PSR mess but I also think some of it has probably been shared by people outside of our circles Aye, completely agree with this, for example the Kilman stuff came from the Wolves end. ...but the club were briefing anyone who would listen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted Thursday at 13:02 Share Posted Thursday at 13:02 1 hour ago, madras said: There's far too much we don't know to say "It is". Did we not need to raise my money than we got for the Minteh sale? You don't think we can surmise that at least? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted Thursday at 13:09 Share Posted Thursday at 13:09 (edited) Don’t subscribe Edited Thursday at 13:10 by FloydianMag Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keegans Export Posted Thursday at 13:18 Share Posted Thursday at 13:18 8 minutes ago, FloydianMag said: Don’t subscribe You're not missing anything, it's just a general comment on various sports cases. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted Thursday at 13:44 Share Posted Thursday at 13:44 (edited) 41 minutes ago, The College Dropout said: Did we not need to raise my money than we got for the Minteh sale? You don't think we can surmise that at least? We had to raise some, no idea if the Minteh sale was enough or if we needed more. Edited Thursday at 13:45 by madras Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted Thursday at 13:46 Share Posted Thursday at 13:46 1 minute ago, madras said: We had to raise some, no idea if the Minteh sale was enough or if we needed more. Do you not think it's likely that we needed more? Considering we made another sale + agreed comp for Ashworth by the deadline? Like.. if this was Man Utd - wouldn't you assume safely that's what they needed to do? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted Thursday at 13:47 Share Posted Thursday at 13:47 Just now, The College Dropout said: Do you not think it's likely that we needed more? Considering we made another sale + agreed comp for Ashworth by the deadline? Like.. if this was Man Utd - wouldn't you assume safely that's what they needed to do? No. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted Thursday at 13:49 Share Posted Thursday at 13:49 Just now, madras said: No. It's not likely? Considering you know... we did make 2 outgoing deals for that PSR deadline? Aight man. You got it. I'm out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted Thursday at 13:58 Share Posted Thursday at 13:58 8 minutes ago, The College Dropout said: It's not likely? Considering you know... we did make 2 outgoing deals for that PSR deadline? Aight man. You got it. I'm out. It's possible but far too much missing for anything conclusive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted Thursday at 16:00 Share Posted Thursday at 16:00 Like clockwork Waugh, Hope and Edwards all drop pieces on the PSR last weekends shenanigans. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eveready Posted Thursday at 17:10 Share Posted Thursday at 17:10 I'm assuming that we did need those sales for PSR reasons. From a planning sense it would be easier to manage more consistent losses over the 3 year period than big peaks and troughs in annual results. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucasol Posted Thursday at 19:19 Share Posted Thursday at 19:19 https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c9x83ngge69o Leicester's appeal against the Premier League's Profit and Sustainability charge has been rejected by an independent commission. The commission has ruled the top flight can punish the Foxes for an alleged breach for the three seasons leading up to 2022-23 after they were charged in March. Leicester appealed against the charge as they were in the English Football League (EFL) at the time it was issued and felt the Premier League had no jurisdiction, having been relegated in 2023, but the commission has ruled English football's top flight can continue pursuing them. Leicester are appealing against the latest ruling. A statement said: “LCFC notes the publication today of the decision of the Premier League Commission. The Club is disappointed with the decision, which does not appear to reflect the wording of the Premier League’s Rules, and has lodged an appeal.” The Premier League confirmed the appeal had been dismissed. "An independent Commission has dismissed a challenge by Leicester City FC that it has no jurisdiction to consider an alleged breach of Profitability and Sustainability Rules (PSRs)," a statement read. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfcastle Posted Thursday at 19:35 Share Posted Thursday at 19:35 Punishing a club that has no financial difficulty as we've known it for a century and a half for not having their finances in order as relates new rules by pushing them towards a situation (relegations) that effects their actual finances in old school terms and with regards the new rules. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted Thursday at 20:10 Share Posted Thursday at 20:10 6 hours ago, madras said: No. If we didn’t need the money then the agreements were beyond stupid. Why rush them through before the 1st July when doing so afterwards would be far more beneficial to PSR this season? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted Thursday at 20:32 Share Posted Thursday at 20:32 18 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said: If we didn’t need the money then the agreements were beyond stupid. Why rush them through before the 1st July when doing so afterwards would be far more beneficial to PSR this season? Was 35mill for Anderson stupid ? Most are thinking it was a massively inflated price. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted Thursday at 21:05 Share Posted Thursday at 21:05 31 minutes ago, madras said: Was 35mill for Anderson stupid ? Most are thinking it was a massively inflated price. It is an insane amount for him - but it would be the stupidest thing imaginable to agree to sell him before that deadline unless it was needed because we were fucked under PSR. Wait a couple of days and suddenly that 35m in this season's PSR calcs. Which provides the substantiation that NUFC were a long, long way short on PSR - and Minteh's sale wasn't close to enough Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McDog Posted Thursday at 21:21 Share Posted Thursday at 21:21 10 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said: It is an insane amount for him - but it would be the stupidest thing imaginable to agree to sell him before that deadline unless it was needed because we were fucked under PSR. Wait a couple of days and suddenly that 35m in this season's PSR calcs. Which provides the substantiation that NUFC were a long, long way short on PSR - and Minteh's sale wasn't close to enough Makes complete sense tbf. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timeEd32 Posted Thursday at 21:43 Share Posted Thursday at 21:43 It’s possible we only needed a portion of Anderson’s fee on top of Minteh. If we needed all or most of it I’m honestly scared what our cost base has risen to. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colos Short and Curlies Posted Thursday at 23:21 Share Posted Thursday at 23:21 1 hour ago, TheBrownBottle said: It is an insane amount for him - but it would be the stupidest thing imaginable to agree to sell him before that deadline unless it was needed because we were fucked under PSR. Wait a couple of days and suddenly that 35m in this season's PSR calcs. Which provides the substantiation that NUFC were a long, long way short on PSR - and Minteh's sale wasn't close to enough It doesn’t make much difference for this year, we had to make a net loss of £35m (ish) over 2023/2024 and 2024/2025 with the only provision being that a gain of at least £35m had to be in 2023/2024. so if we made an opportunistic sale In 2023/2024 of say £30m on top of achieving the £35m profit the. We’ve simply got a position where we can make a bigger loss this year. Its only year 3 where you have difference as the profit in year 0 drops out where you could have delayed this by a year by selling 01.07 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebelrouser Posted Friday at 00:03 Share Posted Friday at 00:03 This interview says we found ourselves needing £50-60M by the deadline. We sold Anderson for £35M and Minteh for £30 to cover that and we sold Ashworth for at least £10 so we are starting out with some money for the next year I would think. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Jinx Posted Friday at 00:18 Share Posted Friday at 00:18 2 hours ago, timeEd32 said: It’s possible we only needed a portion of Anderson’s fee on top of Minteh. If we needed all or most of it I’m honestly scared what our cost base has risen to. They overpaid for sure. I’m guessing there’s an agreement there, they’ll get 15m over the odds for Elanga or MGW.. and balance shall be restored Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonBez comesock Posted Friday at 07:07 Share Posted Friday at 07:07 (edited) Does it not change to squad ratio costs against turnover now ? In line with UEFA model ? Edited Friday at 07:08 by JonBez comesock Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucasol Posted Friday at 07:12 Share Posted Friday at 07:12 4 minutes ago, JonBez comesock said: Does it not change to squad ratio costs against turnover now ? In line with UEFA model ? One more season of our own shitty rules before that even shittier UEFA ones kick in. This season is a shadow one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Jinx Posted Friday at 07:49 Share Posted Friday at 07:49 34 minutes ago, Nucasol said: One more season of our own shitty rules before that even shittier UEFA ones kick in. This season is a shadow one. They’ll be counting on City winning that related transaction thing and then it being thrown out. It will leave the door open then for increasing our revenue in that manner which will see the UEFA constrictions nullified. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted Friday at 07:51 Share Posted Friday at 07:51 1 minute ago, Dr Jinx said: They’ll be counting on City winning that related transaction thing and then it being thrown out. It will leave the door open then for increasing our revenue in that manner which will see the UEFA constrictions nullified. Aye this would seem the most sensible idea great for us Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now