S1.C53. TELL ME WHY - KING POWER

BY CLOUDY - King Power’s collapse exposes the risks of overreliance, poor diversification, and unchecked ambition—putting thousands of jobs and Leicester City’s future in serious jeopardy.

The recent upheaval at King Power International Group, Thailand’s dominant duty-free conglomerate, has cast a long shadow over the future of Leicester City Football Club. At the heart of this unfolding crisis is Aiyawatt “Top” Srivaddhanaprabha, who has stepped down as CEO amidst mounting financial pressures. This dramatic leadership change comes as the company grapples with substantial losses and looming insolvency risks. Although Top will remain as group executive chairman, responsible for shaping long-term strategy, the move signals a pivotal shift in both business direction and financial capability.

King Power’s once-dominant revenue model, built on a 30-year near-monopoly over duty-free concessions at Thailand’s main airports, is now facing existential threats. The COVID-19 pandemic, along with broader economic headwinds, has decimated tourism revenue. In response, King Power has sought complete rental fee waivers for four major airport contracts—an appeal that was promptly rejected by Airports of Thailand (AOT), a state-owned enterprise. This standoff threatens over £450 million in public revenue and has been described by AOT's leadership as akin to "a patient surviving on oxygen," illustrating the severity of the situation. Should negotiations fail, King Power may be forced to withdraw from the duty-free sector, a move that would collapse its primary income stream.

The ramifications extend far beyond corporate boardrooms. With approximately 7,000 employees under its payroll, King Power’s turmoil places thousands of livelihoods at risk. Without a clear financial rescue or restructured agreement with AOT, mass layoffs and operational downsizing appear increasingly likely. The company’s inability to meet obligations has turned what was once a crown jewel of Thai enterprise into a cautionary tale of overextension and vulnerability.

These business failures are deeply intertwined with the fate of Leicester City Football Club. Under the Srivaddhanaprabha family’s ownership, King Power has bankrolled the club’s rise, culminating in their fairytale Premier League title in the 2015–16 season and further successes in domestic cup competitions. However, recent events have seen Leicester relegated from the Premier League, severely affecting revenue and team morale. Moreover, the club may now face a points deduction for alleged breaches of Financial Sustainability Rules during their 2023–24 promotion campaign—a potential setback that could derail their return to top-flight football.

Manager Ruud van Nistelrooy is also expected to leave amidst the instability, further compounding the challenges. The once-proud synergy between business leadership and football ambition is disintegrating under financial stress. With the loss of capital injection from King Power, Leicester’s ability to invest in players, infrastructure, and future planning stands in jeopardy.

Ultimately, the twin crises at King Power and Leicester City highlight the fragile interdependence between corporate health and sports ownership. As the company fights for survival, so too does the football club that once embodied its global success. What lies ahead is uncertain, but one thing is clear: without swift financial reform and strategic recalibration, both institutions may struggle to recover their former glory.

---

Here are 3 questions for you :

• What are our contingency plans if our airport-based revenue drops by 50% or more?”

  • This question could have spurred early diversification into other retail, digital commerce, or travel sectors, reducing dependence on a fragile tourism model.

  • Risk assessments and scenario planning were likely underused or not acted upon.

• “Should our business model be this dependent on government contracts and exclusive concessions?”

  • Their long-term lease agreements gave a false sense of security. A healthier approach might involve shared-risk partnerships or investment in non-government-reliant assets.

  • Exploring public-private partnerships or mixed-use developments could have offered more control and flexibility.

• “Are our investments—such as in Leicester City—aligned with our current risk profile and cash flow capacity?”

  • Strategic investments in global sports were bold, but liquidity stress testing and ROI projections should have been continuously reevaluated.

  • A more cautious, phased funding model for Leicester City could have reduced pressure during downturns.

---

Provide the question# on your comment when you answer.

READ MORE SCORE MORE

PREVIOUS

NEXT

if you have difficulties accessing any of these documents to read, please feel free to revert to us

Here is a quick guide if you want to change the article into languages of your choice…. but you already know this

07. TRANSLATE IT ALL - ANY LANGUAGE