Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Ken Bates
- Thread starter ditchy
- Start date
KPMG come across as a complete shower of shite in this, do they not?
Which would make them the perfect partner for Leeds United, of course.
Which would make them the perfect partner for Leeds United, of course.
SussexHoop
New member
- Dec 7, 2003
- 887
I'm no expert in these matters but have been affected by a company going into receivership. It was suggested at the time that if the majority of creditors agreed to it, they could appoint their own administrators rather than those appointed by the insolvent company.
If you can do that and their investigations find a link between Bates and the off-shore companies, the ability of the offshore companies to vote may be compromised and one of the other consortiums may have a chance of getting a 75% vote themselves?
Sadly, none of this is likely to happen before HMRC have their day in court.
If you can do that and their investigations find a link between Bates and the off-shore companies, the ability of the offshore companies to vote may be compromised and one of the other consortiums may have a chance of getting a 75% vote themselves?
Sadly, none of this is likely to happen before HMRC have their day in court.
robbied69
New member
This is taken from Waccoe from a 20-year season ticket holder who was also present:
I was at Friday's meeting as a 20 year season ticket holder, thought I'd share my observations...
Here's a summary of the most notable points of interest as I saw them, and there's a lot to read here:
* The meeting was held in the Banqueting Suite, and was attended by somewhere in the region of 200 people, most of whom had significant holdings in the club. There were maybe about 10 'normal' season ticket holders there. The only person there who is instantly familiar to Leeds fans was Gerald Krasner. Although at the ground, Bates was not present at the meeting, nor was Shaun Harvey, the third element of the new 'ownership team'; Mark Taylor, a senior judge, was Bates' sole representative. Duncan Revie was not in attendance, and having seen a very brief display of what rival consortiums were proposing to offer creditors, it seems that his backer declined to make a bid at this stage.
* There were 6 bids in total, 5 from the UK and the other from a US based group. However, the administrators continually stressed that the Astor Group and Krato Trust would only support the Bates bid, regardless, and held a sufficient share of votes to defeat any other bid.
* As a consequence of the above, very little time was given to publicising the merits of the other bids. Morris' bid was the most generous, amounting to a settlement that would return 18p in the pound to creditors.
* Bates' consortium actually forwarded a modified bid during the first meeting, worth potentially an extra £5m, if Leeds were to return to the Premiership within five seasons, a move which was met with astonishment and anger by many of the consortium representatives in the room.
* Despite the fact that all other consortiums had to prove proof of funds to the tune of £10m, KPMG confirmed that Bates has at no stage provided any proof of further funds, beyond the intial £500,000 he has offered for the creditors.
* The £500,000 offer includes legal fees and KPMG's fees, so the 1p in th epound offer could be in fact, far less.
* An 'embarrassment clause' exists that dictates that Bates must pay 50% of all profits to creditors if the club is sold for in excess of £5m in the 6 months following resumption of ownership.....so obviously, no official new owners until December under those circumstances.
* Krasner was the main voice when questions were opened up to the floor, he was there representing creditors who were owed in the region of £14m. That said there were two or three other key people in the room, one of whom openly said he was representing a rival bid, and another being there on behalf of the Football League.
*The panel hosting the meeting - comprising three men from KPMG, and two from the clubs' appointed solicitors, Walker Morris - struggled desperately to answer many of the questions put to them, especially those in regard to the Astor Group. When asked for definitive answers, they could only offer "as far as I'm aware" responses.
* Neither the administrators nor the solicitors knew the identities of any of the main benefactors in the Astor Group......the same group who for the purposes of the vote, could not have any links to Bates et al!!!!
* A number of recent statements made by Bates and put in the creditors documents were found to be misleading; the threat of definite liquidation was for example shot down by the Football League rep, who stated that they would speak to the administrators and instruct them to try and find an alternative bidder should no bid be successful.
* Astor loaned the club £12.1m less than a couple of months ago (pushing the debt way above £30m), shortly after they served a final demand for a £5m payment for their due debts.....now I'm no expert, but why else would the club borrow such a sum in April
Surely this was only to push the club debt to such a level that administration could be justified?!?!? And of course to increase Astors' share in the voting process to such an extent that they could dictate the outcome.
* It emerged that one of the main creditors; FSF, did have links with Bates. However, a couple of months ago they forfeited their shares to another of those creditors, the Astor Group, therefore ensuring that the voting strength behind Bates would remain maximised.
* While waiting for the announcement about the second vote, I spoke to one of Krasner's people. Liquidation would appear VERY unlikely under any circumstances. It would mean Bates and his pals would walk away with nothing, and lose any influence should attempts be made to resurrect the club.
So my conclusions from the meeting....
* There is undoubtedly a link between Bates and the major creditors. Both Astor and Krato were willing to even give up their one penny in the pound dividend, and to reject any other offer, regardless....you don't do that unless you stand to gain substantially under the new Bates regime. Everybody in the room knew there was a link, nobody has yet been able to prove it.
* A court case looks absolutely inevitable. Had one single 20 year season ticket holder voted against Bates, rather than for him, then the vote would have been lost. The mis-information in the documentation and in the press could undoubtedly be argued to have been enough to sway around £2000 worth of creditors votes. Investigations into possible links between Bates and the major creditors will continue by rival bidders, with proof would come certain defeat for Bates with a loss of his power of veto.
* Any hopes of greater transparency emerging yesterday proved to be a mere pipe dream.
* Bates no longer regards the club as a long term project, the whole administration process is now merely about securing the maximum possible return for him and his creditor friends.
* My previous statements about Bates being a criminal, completely lacking in moral fibre were wide of the mark. They truly undersold the man. Who else would offer a children's hospice £8.65 for the £865 they are owed?!?!
I was at Friday's meeting as a 20 year season ticket holder, thought I'd share my observations...
Here's a summary of the most notable points of interest as I saw them, and there's a lot to read here:
* The meeting was held in the Banqueting Suite, and was attended by somewhere in the region of 200 people, most of whom had significant holdings in the club. There were maybe about 10 'normal' season ticket holders there. The only person there who is instantly familiar to Leeds fans was Gerald Krasner. Although at the ground, Bates was not present at the meeting, nor was Shaun Harvey, the third element of the new 'ownership team'; Mark Taylor, a senior judge, was Bates' sole representative. Duncan Revie was not in attendance, and having seen a very brief display of what rival consortiums were proposing to offer creditors, it seems that his backer declined to make a bid at this stage.
* There were 6 bids in total, 5 from the UK and the other from a US based group. However, the administrators continually stressed that the Astor Group and Krato Trust would only support the Bates bid, regardless, and held a sufficient share of votes to defeat any other bid.
* As a consequence of the above, very little time was given to publicising the merits of the other bids. Morris' bid was the most generous, amounting to a settlement that would return 18p in the pound to creditors.
* Bates' consortium actually forwarded a modified bid during the first meeting, worth potentially an extra £5m, if Leeds were to return to the Premiership within five seasons, a move which was met with astonishment and anger by many of the consortium representatives in the room.
* Despite the fact that all other consortiums had to prove proof of funds to the tune of £10m, KPMG confirmed that Bates has at no stage provided any proof of further funds, beyond the intial £500,000 he has offered for the creditors.
* The £500,000 offer includes legal fees and KPMG's fees, so the 1p in th epound offer could be in fact, far less.
* An 'embarrassment clause' exists that dictates that Bates must pay 50% of all profits to creditors if the club is sold for in excess of £5m in the 6 months following resumption of ownership.....so obviously, no official new owners until December under those circumstances.
* Krasner was the main voice when questions were opened up to the floor, he was there representing creditors who were owed in the region of £14m. That said there were two or three other key people in the room, one of whom openly said he was representing a rival bid, and another being there on behalf of the Football League.
*The panel hosting the meeting - comprising three men from KPMG, and two from the clubs' appointed solicitors, Walker Morris - struggled desperately to answer many of the questions put to them, especially those in regard to the Astor Group. When asked for definitive answers, they could only offer "as far as I'm aware" responses.
* Neither the administrators nor the solicitors knew the identities of any of the main benefactors in the Astor Group......the same group who for the purposes of the vote, could not have any links to Bates et al!!!!
* A number of recent statements made by Bates and put in the creditors documents were found to be misleading; the threat of definite liquidation was for example shot down by the Football League rep, who stated that they would speak to the administrators and instruct them to try and find an alternative bidder should no bid be successful.
* Astor loaned the club £12.1m less than a couple of months ago (pushing the debt way above £30m), shortly after they served a final demand for a £5m payment for their due debts.....now I'm no expert, but why else would the club borrow such a sum in April
Surely this was only to push the club debt to such a level that administration could be justified?!?!? And of course to increase Astors' share in the voting process to such an extent that they could dictate the outcome.* It emerged that one of the main creditors; FSF, did have links with Bates. However, a couple of months ago they forfeited their shares to another of those creditors, the Astor Group, therefore ensuring that the voting strength behind Bates would remain maximised.
* While waiting for the announcement about the second vote, I spoke to one of Krasner's people. Liquidation would appear VERY unlikely under any circumstances. It would mean Bates and his pals would walk away with nothing, and lose any influence should attempts be made to resurrect the club.
So my conclusions from the meeting....
* There is undoubtedly a link between Bates and the major creditors. Both Astor and Krato were willing to even give up their one penny in the pound dividend, and to reject any other offer, regardless....you don't do that unless you stand to gain substantially under the new Bates regime. Everybody in the room knew there was a link, nobody has yet been able to prove it.
* A court case looks absolutely inevitable. Had one single 20 year season ticket holder voted against Bates, rather than for him, then the vote would have been lost. The mis-information in the documentation and in the press could undoubtedly be argued to have been enough to sway around £2000 worth of creditors votes. Investigations into possible links between Bates and the major creditors will continue by rival bidders, with proof would come certain defeat for Bates with a loss of his power of veto.
* Any hopes of greater transparency emerging yesterday proved to be a mere pipe dream.
* Bates no longer regards the club as a long term project, the whole administration process is now merely about securing the maximum possible return for him and his creditor friends.
* My previous statements about Bates being a criminal, completely lacking in moral fibre were wide of the mark. They truly undersold the man. Who else would offer a children's hospice £8.65 for the £865 they are owed?!?!
robbied69 said:* Astor loaned the club £12.1m less than a couple of months ago (pushing the debt way above £30m), shortly after they served a final demand for a £5m payment for their due debts.....now I'm no expert, but why else would the club borrow such a sum in April
They planned to execute the buy back clause on Elland Road and secure the debt then against the ground, before realising that 'Morris' or whomever is now acting for him, has his grubby mitts on a part (albeit very small) of that deal and they couldn't do so.
The part about the link is probably going to be the key tomorrow. It won't be over by a long shot.
Lord Bracknell
On fire
As I asked earlier, did this £12.1 million actually exist?robbied69 said:* Astor loaned the club £12.1m less than a couple of months ago (pushing the debt way above £30m), shortly after they served a final demand for a £5m payment for their due debts.....now I'm no expert, but why else would the club borrow such a sum in April
Or was it simply a number written on a piece of paper, for the sole purpose of achieving the outcome that Astor want?
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,878
Lord Bracknell said:
That's what I'm confused about
robbied69
New member
Starry said:
I know, this will go on throughout the summer now, hindering our chances of signing anyone. Still can't believe we're favourites to win the league next season.
Curious Orange
Punxsatawney Phil
From the BBC:
Court case then...
Court case then...
- Thread starter
- #91
Curious Orange said:
That so stinks .. i hope it goes to court and the right thing is done and creditors get the best deal avaliable , not the Ken Bates F--k you over a barrel deal
At least they wont be able to sign anyone in the near future .
does it also mean the departure of players who are out of contract , and those who have not been paid , can they walk ?
surrey jim
Not in Surrey
something does seem very fishy about the whole deal
Nemesis
SERIOUSLY!
surrey jim said:
With Ken Bates involved-surely not? A quick look at some of the creditors he's trying to screw shows what a total **** the man is. With a capital 'C'.
Storer68
New member
Nothing fishy - its just that Bates understands the insolvency law better than most.
he controlled 45 % of the votes which meant that none of the other offers (one of which was offering creditors 18p in the £ as opposed to his plan's 1p in the £) had a chance of gaining the required 75% of the votes.
So don't be suprised if Leeds now start waving some serious cash about as their debt is now effectively £350,000 as opposed to £35,000,000
he controlled 45 % of the votes which meant that none of the other offers (one of which was offering creditors 18p in the £ as opposed to his plan's 1p in the £) had a chance of gaining the required 75% of the votes.
So don't be suprised if Leeds now start waving some serious cash about as their debt is now effectively £350,000 as opposed to £35,000,000
Storer68
New member
Lord Bracknell said:
Astor is one of Ken Bates' companies.
So he effectively loaned hiomself £12m to ensure that the deal went through
Nemesis
SERIOUSLY!
Storer68 said:
It won't happen but I really hope no other club will deal with them if they get away with it. Talk about gaining an unfair advantage whilst screwing everybody out of £35 Million. I don't really need another reason to hate scummy Leeds thanks Mr(?) Bates.
Storer68
New member
Amid the wreckage of Leeds United, in the appalling, familiar list of those left unpaid by another bust football club, sits an organisation which does not even charge for its services, just asks clubs to contribute towards expenses. Nevertheless, there it is again, in the £35m mountain of debts which Ken Bates's Leeds is not paying: St John Ambulance, owed £165.
At what is expected to be an angry creditors' meeting on Friday, the administrator, Richard Fleming of accountants KPMG, is proposing that Leeds be sold to a new company headed by Bates, in return for a payment of only 1p for every pound of debt. That proposal is backed by the three anonymously-owned, offshore companies who claim collectively to be owed £17.78m. If it is passed, St John Ambulance will be given £1.65 and will still be expected to turn up again next season to tend to the Elland Road injured.
Other organisations which will suffer the same fate, contained in a tightly-typed, 25-page list of creditors produced by the administrators, include suppliers of all the basics to a football club: local schools, hospitals and universities, the gas, electricity and water utilities, and Leeds City Council's leisure department, which is owed £124,121.
The speed with which the deal to sell the club was done, and questions about the identity and motives of the offshore companies, have infuriated many people in Leeds, a city now deeply embarrassed by the car-crash plight of its only professional football club. Bates, despite being a belligerent and unabashed chairman, is not even officially a shareholder; Leeds United is owned by the Forward Sports Fund, registered at a Cayman Islands PO box, with a Swiss-based company Chateau Fiduciaire named as its director. Bates's solicitor, Mark Taylor, has described Bates as Forward's "UK representative", the closest Bates comes to ownership of the club.
On May 4, the same day that Leeds were placed in administration, Fleming announced the deal to sell the club for 1p in the £1 to a new company, of which Bates and Taylor are directors, again owned by the Forward Sport Fund. It will have to pay what are known as "football creditors" - players and other clubs owed money - in full if the club is to be allowed to compete in League One next season, but all other debts will be all but wiped out.
Forward, according to club records cited in the administrators' report, paid £4.5m to take over Leeds in January 2005 from the previous owners, a group of local businessmen chaired by the insolvency accountant, Gerald Krasner. Forward now claims it is owed £2.419m, loaned in the failed attempt to keep the ailing club in business.
One of the two other offshore companies, Krato Trust, registered at a PO box in Charlestown, Nevis in the West Indies, claims to be owed £2.5m, having lent the club £2.25m between December 2005 and June 2006. Astor Investment Holdings, registered at a PO box in the British Virgin Islands, with an office in another tax haven, Guernsey, claims to be owed £12,839,309, having loaned the club £11,285,269 between August 2005 and October last year.
Both Krato and Astor Investment have told the administrator they have no connection to Bates, Forward Sports Fund or any other director of Leeds. Fleming told me his firm had made "fairly extensive inquiries" to confirm there was no legal connection between them and said, in fact, the owners of Astor were unknown.
Krato and Astor have stated that they have no connection with Forward or Bates. Nevertheless they have agreed to the proposal to sell the club to Forward for 1p in the pound, even agreeing to reduce the amount they will receive. Astor has agreed to write off half its claim if creditors approve the sale, while Krato has agreed to accept nothing at all.
Asked why the two anonymously-owned offshore entities should agree so dramatically to write off millions of pounds put into Leeds, in return for a sale to a new company in which they state they have no interest, Fleming said: "At the time we agreed it, there were no other offers. Maybe they had football in their hearts and wanted the club to survive."
The proposals need 75% of creditors to agree, so the offshore companies can block any alternative because their debts amount to 45% of the total. However, the transfer of the club is not expected to proceed without a storm. Several creditors have said they intend to challenge the administrator, demanding to know who is behind Astor and Krato to see proof they are not connected to Bates, and ask for solid evidence of the money the offshore trusts claim to have put in. Krasner, the former chairman, has offered to represent creditors free of charge to challenge the sale to Forward for what he describes as: "A derisory offer to creditors, people who have supported Leeds through thick and thin."
After a season in which Leeds were relegated, often watched by a depressed, half-full Elland Road where adult ticket prices averaged about £35, there is not a great popular appetite for Bates retaining control. Rick Duniec, chair of the Leeds United Supporters Trust, says:"Our main concern is to see our club restored to health, and it seems quite a widespread opinion that people want a change to more local ownership."
Leeds, a city which has been thriving economically, still has no major venue capable of hosting concerts and Elland Road has long seemed an obvious site for development, especially if it had a thriving modern football club at its heart. United's debt-laden collapse since the team reached the 2001 Champions League semi-final is infamous enough, but the detail of the last three years, chronicled in the administrator's report, still makes shocking reading.
Krasner and his consortium took over in March 2004, with £95.5m of the debts taken on by the former chairman, Peter Ridsdale, and his board written off. Krasner's consortium sold Paul Robinson, Alan Smith, James Milner, Mark Viduka, Elland Road, the Thorpe Arch training ground and, for £5m, an option to develop Elland Road, but still could not stem the club's losses.
In January 2005, with the Inland Revenue pressing for payment of £1.2m, the consortium sold the club to the Forward Sports Fund. Bates became the chairman and the offshore companies put their millions in, yet despite reaching the play-off final in 2006, selling Rob Hulse and Matthew Kilgallon, and receiving £4m compensation from Chelsea for two youth players, Tom Taiwo and Michael Woods, Leeds continued to haemorrhage money. The administrator's report does not make clear why that happened. Creditors piled up and last month HM Revenue and Customs issued a winding-up petition. Leeds owe almost £7m in unpaid tax and VAT.
It will be a surprise if the taxman accepts 1p in the pound, and with ordinary creditors likely to challenge too, the club's destiny appears to lie with the decision on Friday of two opaque funds, registered in the West Indies and BVI.
St John Ambulance, though, is unlikely to involve itself in any rows. The charity has tended not to make a fuss and avoided public statements, as it has been left unpaid, time and again, by football in its boom time.
Money owed
£631,595
Wages still owed to several former players including Michael Ricketts, Paul Butler, Eirik Bakke, Steve Stone and Jermaine Wright
£216,667
Money still owed to Danny Mills, who last played a competitive match for Leeds in May 2003
£3,839
Owed to New Burley Window Cleaners
£46,604
Owed to Leeds Metropolitan University
£2,900
Owed to Boo's Disco of Bramhope in Leeds for the hiring of mobile discos
£8,997
Owed to the West Yorkshire Ambulance Service
At what is expected to be an angry creditors' meeting on Friday, the administrator, Richard Fleming of accountants KPMG, is proposing that Leeds be sold to a new company headed by Bates, in return for a payment of only 1p for every pound of debt. That proposal is backed by the three anonymously-owned, offshore companies who claim collectively to be owed £17.78m. If it is passed, St John Ambulance will be given £1.65 and will still be expected to turn up again next season to tend to the Elland Road injured.
Other organisations which will suffer the same fate, contained in a tightly-typed, 25-page list of creditors produced by the administrators, include suppliers of all the basics to a football club: local schools, hospitals and universities, the gas, electricity and water utilities, and Leeds City Council's leisure department, which is owed £124,121.
The speed with which the deal to sell the club was done, and questions about the identity and motives of the offshore companies, have infuriated many people in Leeds, a city now deeply embarrassed by the car-crash plight of its only professional football club. Bates, despite being a belligerent and unabashed chairman, is not even officially a shareholder; Leeds United is owned by the Forward Sports Fund, registered at a Cayman Islands PO box, with a Swiss-based company Chateau Fiduciaire named as its director. Bates's solicitor, Mark Taylor, has described Bates as Forward's "UK representative", the closest Bates comes to ownership of the club.
On May 4, the same day that Leeds were placed in administration, Fleming announced the deal to sell the club for 1p in the £1 to a new company, of which Bates and Taylor are directors, again owned by the Forward Sport Fund. It will have to pay what are known as "football creditors" - players and other clubs owed money - in full if the club is to be allowed to compete in League One next season, but all other debts will be all but wiped out.
Forward, according to club records cited in the administrators' report, paid £4.5m to take over Leeds in January 2005 from the previous owners, a group of local businessmen chaired by the insolvency accountant, Gerald Krasner. Forward now claims it is owed £2.419m, loaned in the failed attempt to keep the ailing club in business.
One of the two other offshore companies, Krato Trust, registered at a PO box in Charlestown, Nevis in the West Indies, claims to be owed £2.5m, having lent the club £2.25m between December 2005 and June 2006. Astor Investment Holdings, registered at a PO box in the British Virgin Islands, with an office in another tax haven, Guernsey, claims to be owed £12,839,309, having loaned the club £11,285,269 between August 2005 and October last year.
Both Krato and Astor Investment have told the administrator they have no connection to Bates, Forward Sports Fund or any other director of Leeds. Fleming told me his firm had made "fairly extensive inquiries" to confirm there was no legal connection between them and said, in fact, the owners of Astor were unknown.
Krato and Astor have stated that they have no connection with Forward or Bates. Nevertheless they have agreed to the proposal to sell the club to Forward for 1p in the pound, even agreeing to reduce the amount they will receive. Astor has agreed to write off half its claim if creditors approve the sale, while Krato has agreed to accept nothing at all.
Asked why the two anonymously-owned offshore entities should agree so dramatically to write off millions of pounds put into Leeds, in return for a sale to a new company in which they state they have no interest, Fleming said: "At the time we agreed it, there were no other offers. Maybe they had football in their hearts and wanted the club to survive."
The proposals need 75% of creditors to agree, so the offshore companies can block any alternative because their debts amount to 45% of the total. However, the transfer of the club is not expected to proceed without a storm. Several creditors have said they intend to challenge the administrator, demanding to know who is behind Astor and Krato to see proof they are not connected to Bates, and ask for solid evidence of the money the offshore trusts claim to have put in. Krasner, the former chairman, has offered to represent creditors free of charge to challenge the sale to Forward for what he describes as: "A derisory offer to creditors, people who have supported Leeds through thick and thin."
After a season in which Leeds were relegated, often watched by a depressed, half-full Elland Road where adult ticket prices averaged about £35, there is not a great popular appetite for Bates retaining control. Rick Duniec, chair of the Leeds United Supporters Trust, says:"Our main concern is to see our club restored to health, and it seems quite a widespread opinion that people want a change to more local ownership."
Leeds, a city which has been thriving economically, still has no major venue capable of hosting concerts and Elland Road has long seemed an obvious site for development, especially if it had a thriving modern football club at its heart. United's debt-laden collapse since the team reached the 2001 Champions League semi-final is infamous enough, but the detail of the last three years, chronicled in the administrator's report, still makes shocking reading.
Krasner and his consortium took over in March 2004, with £95.5m of the debts taken on by the former chairman, Peter Ridsdale, and his board written off. Krasner's consortium sold Paul Robinson, Alan Smith, James Milner, Mark Viduka, Elland Road, the Thorpe Arch training ground and, for £5m, an option to develop Elland Road, but still could not stem the club's losses.
In January 2005, with the Inland Revenue pressing for payment of £1.2m, the consortium sold the club to the Forward Sports Fund. Bates became the chairman and the offshore companies put their millions in, yet despite reaching the play-off final in 2006, selling Rob Hulse and Matthew Kilgallon, and receiving £4m compensation from Chelsea for two youth players, Tom Taiwo and Michael Woods, Leeds continued to haemorrhage money. The administrator's report does not make clear why that happened. Creditors piled up and last month HM Revenue and Customs issued a winding-up petition. Leeds owe almost £7m in unpaid tax and VAT.
It will be a surprise if the taxman accepts 1p in the pound, and with ordinary creditors likely to challenge too, the club's destiny appears to lie with the decision on Friday of two opaque funds, registered in the West Indies and BVI.
St John Ambulance, though, is unlikely to involve itself in any rows. The charity has tended not to make a fuss and avoided public statements, as it has been left unpaid, time and again, by football in its boom time.
Money owed
£631,595
Wages still owed to several former players including Michael Ricketts, Paul Butler, Eirik Bakke, Steve Stone and Jermaine Wright
£216,667
Money still owed to Danny Mills, who last played a competitive match for Leeds in May 2003
£3,839
Owed to New Burley Window Cleaners
£46,604
Owed to Leeds Metropolitan University
£2,900
Owed to Boo's Disco of Bramhope in Leeds for the hiring of mobile discos
£8,997
Owed to the West Yorkshire Ambulance Service
The Large One
Who's Next?
Not QUITE as simple as that.Storer68 said:
Some of the debtors are other clubs and ex-Leeds players (including about £220,000 to Danny Mills, who left Leeds four years ago). They must be paid in full if they are to be allowed to compete in League One.
Storer68
New member
True - but they'll be settled 'out of court' so to speak.
One good thing to comp out of this is that they'll still have that idiot Wise in charge.
One good thing to comp out of this is that they'll still have that idiot Wise in charge.
Storer68 said:
The whole point is that there is no proven link between Bates and the major creditors, let alone that he controlled them.
If the link between Bates and Astor/Krato could be proved, Bates couldn't do what he is doing right now.
Of course, the reason the link can't be proven is, as you say, because Bates understands insolvency law with intimate detail.