or to join or start a new Discussion

14 Comments
Article Rating 5 Stars

Elland Road

Does not look like 49ers have full ownership.

AR still a director.

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/13073395/filing-history

Also still a director of Leeds United conference, media and the football club

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/officers/7rRUlfXOO7JQZjMquS6JZdqLozo/appointments

Maybe one day the 49ers will tell us what is actually going on.

comment by Jonty (U4614)

posted on 7/9/23

Looks like the Beeb have been asking them about Leeds ownership for a while, but they've not responded.

posted on 7/9/23

I hinted at this close season when there were no pre-season friendlies played at Elland Road. My guess was at that time the 49ers did not have control of the stadium to hold an home pre-season game. Looks like I was pretty much spot on there sadly.

posted on 7/9/23

comment by AndDonRevieistheKing (U7852)
posted 9 hours, 27 minutes ago
posted 2 weeks, 3 days ago

Sadly as usual theres a reason things aren't moving as quickly as we would like and its not the 49ers fault, cant say too much except the clubs we have done business with aren't exactly on the bones of their backsides, its frustrating and typical Leeds United,

This is what i was implying when i posted this the other week, The sale hadnt fully gone through and it meant we were having to look at buy now and pay in 3 months in some cases.
-----
so, reading between the lines, is it something like or similar to …
when a company changes hands, all the contracts the original company had with all its ‘clients’ need to be reaffirmed, ie for instance that where monies are due or owed, the 3rd party has to agree the appropriate documentation reflecting that change in liability, and some of those companies who 49ers have engaged with have simply not taken the actions required?

Might not be exactly this, but if similar then that’s just what happens in business . Not sure its anything anyone need to get flustered about.

posted on 8/9/23

This is absolutely shocking. It calls for another call of “Radz, Marathe, Kinnear et al are bunch of incompetent chancers”.

comment by Jonty (U4614)

posted on 8/9/23

comment by salonika73 (U4688)
posted 15 hours, 51 minutes ago
comment by AndDonRevieistheKing (U7852)
posted 9 hours, 27 minutes ago
posted 2 weeks, 3 days ago

Sadly as usual theres a reason things aren't moving as quickly as we would like and its not the 49ers fault, cant say too much except the clubs we have done business with aren't exactly on the bones of their backsides, its frustrating and typical Leeds United,

This is what i was implying when i posted this the other week, The sale hadnt fully gone through and it meant we were having to look at buy now and pay in 3 months in some cases.
-----
so, reading between the lines, is it something like or similar to …
when a company changes hands, all the contracts the original company had with all its ‘clients’ need to be reaffirmed, ie for instance that where monies are due or owed, the 3rd party has to agree the appropriate documentation reflecting that change in liability, and some of those companies who 49ers have engaged with have simply not taken the actions required?

Might not be exactly this, but if similar then that’s just what happens in business . Not sure its anything anyone need to get flustered about.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
No it’s nothing to do with contracts with its customers (fans) it’s to do with ownership.

From companies house it’s clear AR still an owner at ER and when club are asked by press about it they refuse to answer.

posted on 8/9/23

comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by salonika73 (U4688)
posted 15 hours, 51 minutes ago
comment by AndDonRevieistheKing (U7852)
posted 9 hours, 27 minutes ago
posted 2 weeks, 3 days ago

Sadly as usual theres a reason things aren't moving as quickly as we would like and its not the 49ers fault, cant say too much except the clubs we have done business with aren't exactly on the bones of their backsides, its frustrating and typical Leeds United,

This is what i was implying when i posted this the other week, The sale hadnt fully gone through and it meant we were having to look at buy now and pay in 3 months in some cases.
-----
so, reading between the lines, is it something like or similar to …
when a company changes hands, all the contracts the original company had with all its ‘clients’ need to be reaffirmed, ie for instance that where monies are due or owed, the 3rd party has to agree the appropriate documentation reflecting that change in liability, and some of those companies who 49ers have engaged with have simply not taken the actions required?

Might not be exactly this, but if similar then that’s just what happens in business . Not sure its anything anyone need to get flustered about.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
No it’s nothing to do with contracts with its customers (fans) it’s to do with ownership.

From companies house it’s clear AR still an owner at ER and when club are asked by press about it they refuse to answer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ADRITK says it’s because “ the clubs we have done business with aren't exactly on the bones of their backsides”.
You say it’s due to the ownership.

You know more than ADRITK?

Just asking to clarify whether both comments are made based on any actual facts, or suppositions 🤷‍♂️

comment by Jonty (U4614)

posted on 8/9/23

comment by salonika73 (U4688)
posted 2 hours, 46 minutes ago
comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by salonika73 (U4688)
posted 15 hours, 51 minutes ago
comment by AndDonRevieistheKing (U7852)
posted 9 hours, 27 minutes ago
posted 2 weeks, 3 days ago

Sadly as usual theres a reason things aren't moving as quickly as we would like and its not the 49ers fault, cant say too much except the clubs we have done business with aren't exactly on the bones of their backsides, its frustrating and typical Leeds United,

This is what i was implying when i posted this the other week, The sale hadnt fully gone through and it meant we were having to look at buy now and pay in 3 months in some cases.
-----
so, reading between the lines, is it something like or similar to …
when a company changes hands, all the contracts the original company had with all its ‘clients’ need to be reaffirmed, ie for instance that where monies are due or owed, the 3rd party has to agree the appropriate documentation reflecting that change in liability, and some of those companies who 49ers have engaged with have simply not taken the actions required?

Might not be exactly this, but if similar then that’s just what happens in business . Not sure its anything anyone need to get flustered about.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
No it’s nothing to do with contracts with its customers (fans) it’s to do with ownership.

From companies house it’s clear AR still an owner at ER and when club are asked by press about it they refuse to answer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ADRITK says it’s because “ the clubs we have done business with aren't exactly on the bones of their backsides”.
You say it’s due to the ownership.

You know more than ADRITK?

Just asking to clarify whether both comments are made based on any actual facts, or suppositions 🤷‍♂️


----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can’t get much more factual than these companies house filings.

posted on 8/9/23

comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 5 hours, 43 minutes ago
comment by salonika73 (U4688)
posted 2 hours, 46 minutes ago
comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by salonika73 (U4688)
posted 15 hours, 51 minutes ago
comment by AndDonRevieistheKing (U7852)
posted 9 hours, 27 minutes ago
posted 2 weeks, 3 days ago

Sadly as usual theres a reason things aren't moving as quickly as we would like and its not the 49ers fault, cant say too much except the clubs we have done business with aren't exactly on the bones of their backsides, its frustrating and typical Leeds United,

This is what i was implying when i posted this the other week, The sale hadnt fully gone through and it meant we were having to look at buy now and pay in 3 months in some cases.
-----
so, reading between the lines, is it something like or similar to …
when a company changes hands, all the contracts the original company had with all its ‘clients’ need to be reaffirmed, ie for instance that where monies are due or owed, the 3rd party has to agree the appropriate documentation reflecting that change in liability, and some of those companies who 49ers have engaged with have simply not taken the actions required?

Might not be exactly this, but if similar then that’s just what happens in business . Not sure its anything anyone need to get flustered about.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
No it’s nothing to do with contracts with its customers (fans) it’s to do with ownership.

From companies house it’s clear AR still an owner at ER and when club are asked by press about it they refuse to answer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ADRITK says it’s because “ the clubs we have done business with aren't exactly on the bones of their backsides”.
You say it’s due to the ownership.

You know more than ADRITK?

Just asking to clarify whether both comments are made based on any actual facts, or suppositions 🤷‍♂️


----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can’t get much more factual than these companies house filings.
----------------------------------------------------------------------you were talking about the reasons, not the filings…you said “it’s nothing to do with contacts”. Hence why I asked you the question…. is your statement that it’s nothing to do with contracts based on facts or supposition?
I don’t know whether certain contractual issues need to be resolved before all parties are happy to make the appropriate companies house filings..do you?

comment by Jonty (U4614)

posted on 8/9/23

comment by salonika73 (U4688)
posted 2 hours, 6 minutes ago
comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 5 hours, 43 minutes ago
comment by salonika73 (U4688)
posted 2 hours, 46 minutes ago
comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by salonika73 (U4688)
posted 15 hours, 51 minutes ago
comment by AndDonRevieistheKing (U7852)
posted 9 hours, 27 minutes ago
posted 2 weeks, 3 days ago

Sadly as usual theres a reason things aren't moving as quickly as we would like and its not the 49ers fault, cant say too much except the clubs we have done business with aren't exactly on the bones of their backsides, its frustrating and typical Leeds United,

This is what i was implying when i posted this the other week, The sale hadnt fully gone through and it meant we were having to look at buy now and pay in 3 months in some cases.
-----
so, reading between the lines, is it something like or similar to …
when a company changes hands, all the contracts the original company had with all its ‘clients’ need to be reaffirmed, ie for instance that where monies are due or owed, the 3rd party has to agree the appropriate documentation reflecting that change in liability, and some of those companies who 49ers have engaged with have simply not taken the actions required?

Might not be exactly this, but if similar then that’s just what happens in business . Not sure its anything anyone need to get flustered about.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
No it’s nothing to do with contracts with its customers (fans) it’s to do with ownership.

From companies house it’s clear AR still an owner at ER and when club are asked by press about it they refuse to answer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ADRITK says it’s because “ the clubs we have done business with aren't exactly on the bones of their backsides”.
You say it’s due to the ownership.

You know more than ADRITK?

Just asking to clarify whether both comments are made based on any actual facts, or suppositions 🤷‍♂️


----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can’t get much more factual than these companies house filings.
----------------------------------------------------------------------you were talking about the reasons, not the filings…you said “it’s nothing to do with contacts”. Hence why I asked you the question…. is your statement that it’s nothing to do with contracts based on facts or supposition?
I don’t know whether certain contractual issues need to be resolved before all parties are happy to make the appropriate companies house filings..do you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
but that's the whole point, ie either its a done deal or not and if AR still a director and if AR is still a part owner of ER, then its not a done deal...is it.

posted on 8/9/23

comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 1 hour, 7 minutes ago
comment by salonika73 (U4688)
posted 2 hours, 6 minutes ago
comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 5 hours, 43 minutes ago
comment by salonika73 (U4688)
posted 2 hours, 46 minutes ago
comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by salonika73 (U4688)
posted 15 hours, 51 minutes ago
comment by AndDonRevieistheKing (U7852)
posted 9 hours, 27 minutes ago
posted 2 weeks, 3 days ago

Sadly as usual theres a reason things aren't moving as quickly as we would like and its not the 49ers fault, cant say too much except the clubs we have done business with aren't exactly on the bones of their backsides, its frustrating and typical Leeds United,

This is what i was implying when i posted this the other week, The sale hadnt fully gone through and it meant we were having to look at buy now and pay in 3 months in some cases.
-----
so, reading between the lines, is it something like or similar to …
when a company changes hands, all the contracts the original company had with all its ‘clients’ need to be reaffirmed, ie for instance that where monies are due or owed, the 3rd party has to agree the appropriate documentation reflecting that change in liability, and some of those companies who 49ers have engaged with have simply not taken the actions required?

Might not be exactly this, but if similar then that’s just what happens in business . Not sure its anything anyone need to get flustered about.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
No it’s nothing to do with contracts with its customers (fans) it’s to do with ownership.

From companies house it’s clear AR still an owner at ER and when club are asked by press about it they refuse to answer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ADRITK says it’s because “ the clubs we have done business with aren't exactly on the bones of their backsides”.
You say it’s due to the ownership.

You know more than ADRITK?

Just asking to clarify whether both comments are made based on any actual facts, or suppositions 🤷‍♂️


----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can’t get much more factual than these companies house filings.
----------------------------------------------------------------------you were talking about the reasons, not the filings…you said “it’s nothing to do with contacts”. Hence why I asked you the question…. is your statement that it’s nothing to do with contracts based on facts or supposition?
I don’t know whether certain contractual issues need to be resolved before all parties are happy to make the appropriate companies house filings..do you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
but that's the whole point, ie either its a done deal or not and if AR still a director and if AR is still a part owner of ER, then its not a done deal...is it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s obviously not a done deal, otherwise companies house would say otherwise!
You said it’s not to do with contracts, so what is it? You must know, or otherwise you can’t say it’s nothing to do with the contracts!
Sorry to be pedantic… but otherwise you’re just making glib statements of no substance which you’re asking readers to just believe.

Sign in if you want to comment
RATE THIS ARTICLE
Rate Breakdown
5
1 Vote
4
0 Votes
3
0 Votes
2
0 Votes
1
0 Votes

Average Rating: 5 from 1 vote

ARTICLE STATS
Day
Article RankingNot Ranked
Article ViewsNot Available
Average Time(mins)Not Available
Total Time(mins)Not Available
Month
Article RankingNot Ranked
Article ViewsNot Available
Average Time(mins)Not Available
Total Time(mins)Not Available