Leeds being asset stripped?

[3gulls]

But you'd be very welcome too if you ever felt the need. They are very pro-falmer

Perhapse it is because they just want more than 700 tickets for a nice trip to the seaside - like the fun they had at Bournmouth a few years ago? Most people hate Leeds - they were the original Manure, supported by gloryhunting twats all over the country in the 70s.

 

[3gulls]

Surely not true Yorkie? Almost all of the clubs mentioned, with the exception of York, are capable of drawing decent crowds by the standards of the divisions they're in. The problem as I see it (admittedly from a distance) is that several of those clubs tried punching above their financial weight (thinking of Leeds, Bradford, Barnsley and Huddersfield in particular) and are still paying the penalties.

Yes, decent crowds at 5bob a ticket! If they charged Brighton/London prices the places would be empty.

 

[Icy Gull]

Sort of, except i am not posting on a Weeds message board!

Do you want to re-read and edit that or are you a Palace fan?

 

[3gulls]

Do you want to re-read and edit that or are you a Palace fan?

No? Weeds United! What are you on?

 

[Icy Gull]

No? Weeds United! What are you on?

Clue- what is the scum's nickname for the Albion

 

[Albion Rob]

Small Town in Beeston!

And on a brighter note Leeds fans just may have something to smile about in a big way by this time next week.

In fairness, you've been saying that about once a fortnight since ou started posting on here. Is it always looking likely and then people actually realise the scale of the debt and back away or is it just egotistical bastards looking to get their names in the paper.

I don't mind Leeds, they weren't a particularly big club when I started following football and they beat ManUre to the title in 1992 which stops them banging on about being the last winners of the First Division AND first winners of the Premier League.

 

[Ex Shelton Seagull]

This is from the Guardian.

"Leeds United appeared to lurch towards administration last night as it emerged that key backers for Sebastien Sainsbury's takeover approach had withdrawn their funding.
Sources close to the deal state that final due diligence threw up previously unknown liabilities which are set to cost the club £10m between now and April. Among these are thought to be imminent obligations including tax and PAYE payments totalling £2.5m.

"Upon completion of due diligence by our potential funders, the true scale of Leeds United's debt and liabilities have become clear," said Sainsbury last night. "It was obviously more than we, they, and many others had envisaged."

Sainsbury is desperately attempting to construct a new proposal with secondary funders who had been informed of their position as a contingency in the event of a collapse of the first bid. It is understood these backers, whose identity is unknown, have so far pledged to continue the takeover and it is anticipated that £2.5m can be drafted into a lawyer's account within five working days.

If the second funders pursue their interest in the bid and Leeds find the approach acceptable, sources say the takeover could be completed within 10 days.

A third bid, from the local businessman Norman Stubbs, is now in the balance. It is understood that Stubbs has recognised his £8m of funding to be insufficient to mount an independent takeover and he is willing to pledge it towards a successful bid.

"We do have a possible contingency plan," said Sainsbury. "Over the next 24 hours we shall be considering our options. There's no way I want to see [Leeds] go into administration, but should that happen I will not try to rescue it."

Leeds's chairman Gerald Krasner was unavailable for comment last night. It is understood that Sainsbury's £25m approach was the only offer to satisfy the £4m in directors' loans, however the club's board is understood to be considering alternative proposals.

One is believed to be headed by the Freeserve founder Peter Wilkinson, however this bid would require first that Leeds file for administration. That would incur the Championship club a 10-point penalty, putting them fourth-bottom, level on points with Gillingham in the relegation zone."

It doesn't look good, does it? Would a 10 point deduction be acceptable if it would help secure the future of the club?

 

[Starry]

Beeb says sainsburys have now pulled out - what next?

He hasn't pulled out. One of his backers have, and it was over the due dilligence and the fact that in the next two months no matter what they do, what deal they seal Leeds Utd will lose £10m.

 

[Starry]

In fairness, you've been saying that about once a fortnight since ou started posting on here. Is it always looking likely and then people actually realise the scale of the debt and back away or is it just egotistical bastards looking to get their names in the paper.

I don't mind Leeds, they weren't a particularly big club when I started following football and they beat ManUre to the title in 1992 which stops them banging on about being the last winners of the First Division AND first winners of the Premier League.

My smiling in a big way in that post was referring to Krasner and Co being out of the football club. Right now, and after all the damage they have done that is all we can hope for. It wasn't in reference to a glorious takeover that is going to save us and make us rich.

As for egotistical names, I think Seb has a streak of that - but I believe he genuinely has the best interests of Leeds at heart. He has tried and not walked away numerous times to buy this club. They will not sell to him and keep on hindering his deal, you might ask why they do that and it couldn't possibly be because the current board have so so many dodgy deals to cover up.

 

[El Presidente]

I do sympathise with Leeds plight, but we have had to make do with signing free transfers to keep within our budget, and they spend £500,000 on Gregan (which could rise to a million), and £600,000 for Healey.

I know that Leeds fans will claim that these players were signed by individual fans rather than the club, but surely these 'fans' should be putting their money into the club to help prevent it going into administration rather than big money players. Smacks of financial irresponsibility all over again.

 

[Albion Rob]

I have to say that a 10 point deduction for Leeds would have a positive effect on our season. They could be the third side to go down (along with Gillingham and Rotherham), then have a couple of years in League One (they have terraces there boys, you'll love it) sorting themselves out and then start rising again if they can.

That pretty much suits everyone. Well, almost everyone.

 

[Starry]

I know that Leeds fans will claim that these players were signed by individual fans rather than the club, but surely these 'fans' should be putting their money into the club to help prevent it going into administration rather than big money players. Smacks of financial irresponsibility all over again.

Not fans, board members. Tax evasion.

As I said elsewhere Healys fee was not even over 500k, it only rises to 600k dependant on appearances/promotion etc.

 

[Chopper West]

Not fans, board members. Tax evasion.

As I said elsewhere Healys fee was not even over 500k, it only rises to 600k dependant on appearances/promotion etc.

When you are a club that has only paid more than £100,000 for a player once in the last 15 years, 'not even £500k' still sounds a lot of money.

Hope you sort it out and get rid of the tossers in control, although I will miss wetting myself laughing at Krasner's hilarious voice every time he is on the TV or radio

 

[Tom Bombadil]

So what will Leeds get for Carson. I see they turned down Chelseas £1m bid before the latest takeover collapsed.
They're now apparently going back to Chelsea and Liverpool cos they'll have to sell.

 

[Starry]

The £1m from chelsea was turned down because they didn't want to pay up front. Not going back to Chelsea or Liverpool (who incidentally have never made an official bid for the lad), Chelsea came back with an improved offer - I assume that means the money up front. The ball is in Scotts court now.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

Well if i was Chelsea I'd wait. Leeds need to sell.

 

[Starry]

Scott has another offer from another club, so if Chelsea really want him they'd have to act now or risk missing out.

 

[The Laughing Bluebird]

As the latest takeover bid has collapsed, perhaps Leeds should sell all of their decent players immediately. Like today. So they can't play tomorrow. Which would be handy.

 

[El Presidente]

That would mean you would be up against 11 Michael Duberry's then LB

 

[The Laughing Bluebird]

That would mean you would be up against 11 Michael Duberry's then LB

Yes please!