Thanks for the update Starry reading this it dosent brilliant . If they do fold i just hope they come back in some form or other pretty soon , maybe not as fl club but lower leagues and continue marching on ... Nobody likes to see a club fold be it leeds scarborough or even a small sunday side .. Football will be the loser
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Leeds update
- Thread starter DIFFBROOK
- Start date
bhaexpress
New member
I just wonder, what does Bates hope to gain by this ridiculous brinkmanship ? Leeds don't have many assets now as they sold Elland Road a while ago. Most clubs in this division see Leeds as a good payday at the gate so why would they want to see them fail ?
the bit about other clubs, i don't have the document on this computer but we have a letter that went to every chairman in league one about how much the league would lose if we didn't play. on away tickets alone because obviously we don't what the home attendance would be (but we have already sold out our first six games assuming we are allowed to play but the applications more than cover all six) it's just about £1m less money in away ticket sales alone.
as for the ground and training ground - that's the million dollar question.
hopefully we'll have some sort of resolution today. we have a home friendly tomorrow against wigan and it'd be nice to be able to go and worry about the football rather than will this be the last time we'll play at elland road.
What a massive f***ing bag of shit this has all become.
I cannot even think of a word that describes what I think of Bates. Businessmen screw companies all the time, but rareley so spectacularly as this, and rarely to a 'company' with such loyal customers.
Basically his standpoint is "If a way cannot be found for ME to make money on this, then I would rather bring the club down, than see anyone else do well out of it". There's a lot of Leeds fans out there. Some of them are quite tough lads. If I were Bates, then in the event of it coming to the worst scenario, I'd be beefing up my security.
I cannot even think of a word that describes what I think of Bates. Businessmen screw companies all the time, but rareley so spectacularly as this, and rarely to a 'company' with such loyal customers.
Basically his standpoint is "If a way cannot be found for ME to make money on this, then I would rather bring the club down, than see anyone else do well out of it". There's a lot of Leeds fans out there. Some of them are quite tough lads. If I were Bates, then in the event of it coming to the worst scenario, I'd be beefing up my security.
he'd be best going back to monaco and never setting foot anywhere near leeds ever again. and he take his little poodles with him - mark taylor, yvonne thomspon, the schmucks at kpmg, the lot of them.
hmrc are going to be key in this. i believe they have now seen full accounts of money going into leeds and out of leeds and are more than baffled as to why, when bates 'borrowed' £12m from astor he, at the same time, defaulted on a £200k payment to the tax man.
hmrc are now asking for full details on astor and want to know who the owner(s) are and find out why they are happy to lose £17m and sell to bates. but not happy to accept some money in selling the club to someone else.
i don't see how kpmg can get a workable cva in place that is going to please bates, satisfy the hmrc and at the same time give 100% back to football creditors. nigh on impossible if you ask me.
interesting piece in today's telegraph.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?xml=/sport/2007/08/03/sfnlee103.xml
and from the grauniad
http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,,2140750,00.html
hmrc are going to be key in this. i believe they have now seen full accounts of money going into leeds and out of leeds and are more than baffled as to why, when bates 'borrowed' £12m from astor he, at the same time, defaulted on a £200k payment to the tax man.
hmrc are now asking for full details on astor and want to know who the owner(s) are and find out why they are happy to lose £17m and sell to bates. but not happy to accept some money in selling the club to someone else.
i don't see how kpmg can get a workable cva in place that is going to please bates, satisfy the hmrc and at the same time give 100% back to football creditors. nigh on impossible if you ask me.
interesting piece in today's telegraph.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?xml=/sport/2007/08/03/sfnlee103.xml
and from the grauniad
http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,,2140750,00.html
Lord Bracknell
On fire
Since the Albion lose money every time a game is played at Withdean, we'd be better off playing one game less.
Do the RIGHT thing, Uncle Dick. Think of your own pocket. Nothing else matters. Say NO to playing Leeds.
cjd
Well-known member
BensGrandad
New member
If every other chairman did the same perhaps, only perhaps, Mister Bates would see sense and realise that his days are up at Leeds.
severnside gull
Well-known member
If Bates has managed to hi-jack rights to buy back the ground and training ground (prime real estate for housing development) when no-one else knew they were part of the deal how can the administrators (KPMG) say that everything has been done properly?
Presumably Bates can now let the club go to the wall - exercise his right to buy - and make an absolute killing by selling on the land.
Am I being too cynical that this might have been the plan all along
Presumably Bates can now let the club go to the wall - exercise his right to buy - and make an absolute killing by selling on the land.
Am I being too cynical that this might have been the plan all along
cjd
Well-known member
I see what you are saying, but I don,t think that Mr.bates will lose any money if Leeds fold. Quite the contrary.
- Thread starter
- #31
FL have told Leeds 07 that they will not be allowed in the league unless they have a CVA in place.
KPMG have just informed the league that the old CVA cant be resurrected and a new one cant be put in place either.
So its looking grimmer and grimmer for Leeds
KPMG have just informed the league that the old CVA cant be resurrected and a new one cant be put in place either.
So its looking grimmer and grimmer for Leeds
FL will still back down. They always do.
Da Man Clay
T'Blades
- Dec 16, 2004
- 16,286
Is the correct answer. Leeds will start on the first day of the season with or without a CVA.
- Thread starter
- #34
Dont be so sure on that. The FL have made some very public statements on this. If they do let Leeds play (say in exceptional circumstances), they will almost certainly invoke another harsh punishment. And I'm not talking about 10 points deduction, but to ensure no matter how many wins Leeds might get this season, they will still be relegated to league 2.
Lord Bracknell
On fire
At the very least, if they do start, it should be with a 10 points deduction.
The solution is simple. According to my understanding Leeds CANNOT and SHOULD NOT play next season unless the CVA is in place. It will be a great shame if Leeds fold but a great victory for football as a whole. It would make the Football League a much stronger organisation and a serious regulator of football in my opinion. The FA screwed up and lost power when they started changing the rules (allowing Spurs to float) and bowed down to the Premiership. I hope the FL dont do the same.
For the sake of football Bates cannot get his way.
For the sake of football Bates cannot get his way.
balloonboy
aka Jim in the West
It would be slightly ironic if the club that saved us (via the purchase of Beeney when we were on the verge of subsiding under the weight of Inland Revenue debt) ended up effectively going the same way - at the very time when our renaissance (ie, Falmer) is just around the corner.
Gritt23
New member
Presumably then, this is what Bates is pinning his hopes on. Whereas the FL are currently between a rock and a hard place with Leeds needing them to bend the rules to survive, while bending the rules will incur the wrath of the other Chairmen.
However, talk "loss of revenue" and perhaps the other chairmen will relent.
Bates cannot be allowed to get away with it. Rules are in place, and Bates was happy to play along with them when they looked to be working on his side - namely going into admin at the arse end of last season so that the 10 deduction had no effect - but now they work against him he's all "oh poor me, this isn't right."
Bollocks to you Bates, clubs and chairmen can't be allowed to run roughshod over the rulemakers. This isn't the Premiership y'know.
cjd
Well-known member
They are saying on Leeds board that they have their share back, but with a 15 point deduction