Ken Bates' puppies...... don't say that to PD!
BO Now,
Do you not think that if income decreases the club would decrease expenditure accordingly?
Bates wont lose out financially as he still has some players he can sell, so as long as he has those he will keep making his money whilst the quality of the team will get worse.
Sol - if it was that easy, we would never have gone down the tubes under PR. Get your head out of the sand.
ADRITK - which player is that then? They all seem to have understood that they do better if they sit out their contract and move for nowt.
And once the few who may command a fee have gone, their loanee and freebie second-class cheap replacements will neither go nor be of benefit financially. Billy P anyone?
Bates Out, if we go massively in the red, it will be administration again without doubt. KB wouldn't care, he is 80 now, he has no doubt been filling his bank in Monaco with money from the club. He will no doubt continue to do so under the company name of Teak Trading.
But surely he wouldn't tell his loyal supporters we are financially stable, unlike our competitors, not owing anyone any money (HMRC or Astor for example), when in fact the opposite is true? I can't believe he would ever do anything like that.
KB would care. It's his legacy. His last chance to be a success and lay a foundation - either for his Wikipedia entry or for is family.
He would also care because he would lose a lot of money by going into admin. He would have had to try and bail out. He may have sold part of the enterprise to someone else. Or maybe he would let the club go into admin for a trifling amount because, as you say, he would not care.
The rest of them - Harvey, his insignificant lawyer, his family, Lorimer - would all be booted from football forever though. They would care. I seriously think we would see a murder. We'd need Poirot to work out who did it.
Bates Out you really have no concept of anything do you. This last year 2010/11 the club are going to report a profit so there is some way to go to drive the club under.
Risdale on the other hand borrowed Millions on future revenue and spent it on inflated players wages. Mmmm think Bates won't fall for this one.#
Try supporting the team and the club instead of being narrow minded. Just because you don't like the man doesn't mean he isn't doing what he feels is best. Yes we don't all agree with everything. But unless you've found a billionaire to pump millions into the club which is the only way you'll be happy.
CasWhite - I don't know where you are coming from. Please show me where I demanded a billionaire to pump in millions.
I support the team to the hilt. I do not support the leech that is the regime in this club.
If I can give you an analogy, you remind me of the pro-Gaddafi population whereas I am part fo the anti-Gaddafi pro-revolution Arab Spring.
As all Libyans love their country, I know all Leeds fans love their club and their team.
Your attempt to "divide and rule" is naive and preposterous.
LUFC is, historically, a bland mediocre second tier team and club that has occasionally hit heady heights for small periods of time. A sensible way forward is slow and sure.
Unlike the prices Bates is charging and the disappearance of all the money.
No more will I be raped by this man. No morew will I bend over and allow him to give it to me hard.
I have 20 years as a season ticket holder behind me and this year I have taken the hardest decision I could in relation to LUFC. I am foregoing my attendance.
If you can be so arrogant as to tell me that I have no concept of anything, I think you are just a puppet on a string.
And I have 21 years and will continue supporting next year.
What were your views of the Risdale era? The high prices and wages, increasing debt. Not ground improvements for the fans etc etc.
I haven't mentioned Ridsdale once. You have twice. Is there something wrong with you? Why are you trying to shift the argument to Ridsdale. I am not making any such comparison. Your comment is irrelevant. Keep on track - and read my comments -
I am not asking for a billionaire or a huge outlay.
I am not asking for a billionaire or a huge outlay.
I am not asking for a billionaire or a huge outlay.
I am not asking for a billionaire or a huge outlay.
I am not asking for a billionaire or a huge outlay.
I am not asking for a billionaire or a huge outlay.
I am not asking for a billionaire or a huge outlay.
I am not asking for a billionaire or a huge outlay.
So are you are happy with the way he's running the club, ie it's self sufficient. The reason your not happy is the high ticket prices and because you feel he owns ER and TA etc.
Do you not think I want lower ticket prices? Yes
I want to know who owns these assets, but I don't think at present it's Bates.
Do I think a yatch set's sail each month to Monaco with loot stashed in the hold? No
The problem is we all want a better team and promotion. But is any of this Bates Out actually going to work unless there's someone to take up the baton?
No. I am not happy with the financial way he is runnign the club.
His business plan required breakeven on 22000 attendances and no run in the cups. But we have only been able to stave off losses by selling our best players. You happy with that?
Does he own TA and ER? I know he told us |TA was a priority, got paid off for Delph, and then did not buy it. You happy with that?
There are many other parts to this. There are a huge number of clubs that are run on a fraction of what LUFC is run on, and they are doing just as well. Why is it that we can only make a profit by selling our best players?
If I pay top dollar, I expect to see top dollar players. I am not seeing that. I see our best (and they are still not top dollar) players leaving and being replaced by unknowns, kids, loanees, and over-the-hill ex-players after a last pay check.
We pay top dollar. Bates pays out naff all to a huge quantity of naff players. And is pocketing the profits from the business plan.
Can it be run better? You bet!
Are we being taken for a ride? Me, no longer. You - yes.You are the type of person that Bates is relying on - oooh, don't overturn that rock, you don't know what's underneath it!
If risk was defined by you, it would be a number between 0 and 0.000001
I don't ask for PR risk. But, to give another analogy, you remond me of a not very good accountant who just does people's books. Not very interesting.
At the end of the day though BON BON, you must be happy with the way KB is gluing the fans together!
He has brought harmony hasn't he?
Risdale on the other hand borrowed Millions on future revenue and spent it on inflated players wages. Mmmm think Bates won't fall for this one.#
....
Did he not do it at chelsea then? 80m in debt?
If chelsea had gone out top 4 would gone same way we did?
He did more or less the same as Risdale? Only over a longer time base.
Only difference was he got lucky and found a money man to buy it.
Risdale did not.
So how can he bang on and blame Risdale when he did same at chelsea?
BON you talk with fork tongue.
His breakeven is 24k at present with no cup runs and the minimum from tv/central pot. So what? So he gets more in a spends this on the ground and has increased the wages on players year on year since administration. Think what it would be as well if it wasn't for him increasing off field income.
He staves off losses by selling players. Well yes this was the case in league 1 as you receive £500k against £2.2 from the league. That makes a difference. Lets wait until last years figures when was no major transfer out as heard £3m profit.
TA was a priority if he could raise the funds. It would save money in rent, but do you beleive we got £6m for Delph up front to pay for TA??? I don't. Bradford were entitled to % of the transfer also.
You are right, Barnsley beat us twice with a wage bill around half ours. But they also have fraction of our expenses on other things.
As for the transfers, do you not think the number of loanees is down to the manager not the chairman. Do you think he said "SG go out there and borrow players?".
Can it be run better? Yes, it possibly can. But it could be run a lot worse.
As for your comments about me. Don't go there as you don't know me. You though remind me of someone who will never be happy!
Meme, actually look at the debt. Risdale borrowed money against future ticket sales to buy players. Bates at Chelsea borrowed money to pay for ground improvements and Chelsea Village. Big difference. One could be mortgaged the other fell away when the results did and the players value decreased.
"Just because you don't like the man doesn't mean he isn't doing what he feels is best."
Of course he is doing what is best - for himself, not Leeds United.
"As for the transfers, do you not think the number of loanees is down to the manager not the chairman. Do you think he said "SG go out there and borrow players?"
Very naive. If SG had no funds for transfers then his only option was to get freebies and loanees. Yes, I know he said otherwise but do you think it is possible he said what He-Whose-Name-I-No-Longer-Type told SG to say?
"Risdale borrowed money against future ticket sales to buy players. Bates at Chelsea borrowed money to pay for ground improvements and Chelsea Village. Big difference."
Perhaps difference in form, but same in substance. In both cases the clubs were heading for doom. As blue stated above, Chelsea just got a little luckier than we did. Did I just write "a little?"
You are not going to get 80m remortgaging that tho are you?
What good is it remortgaging it?
And how long do you think it would taken to pay that debt back? When it gets bigger every year.
He-Whose-Name-I-No-Longer-Type
?
Why, does it scare you JLA?
BON your negativity is depressing, don't you see yet that most fans don't agree with you?
Bates saved Leeds, and he cares about Leeds - he is desperate to get us promoted. Yes, he is very tight wadded but I much much much prefer that to the previous pfofligacy. In fact I would much rather we stayed in division 2 than went up and nearly bankrupt ourself again. I have enjoyed the last two seasons ' here, the only thing that spoiled it is cavemen like you singing moronic and monotone chants aimed at the saviour of our club. BATES HATERS OUT!
Jonny has me on ignore now, I think.
Perhaps one of you can copy this for him.
Ken Bates has been at the club for 7 years.
Simon Grayson was at the club for 3 years.
Over half the loans in Ken Bates' time at the club came under Grayson.
Grayson also used a lot of loans as manager of Blackpool.
Loans are a short-term fix that can help you look good and keep you in a job, but they don't help build the club.
Grayson is all about trying to make himself look good rather than doing what's best for the club and allowing the credit to come for that down the line.
GIO
Well said. Others though aren't bothered with facts just what they beleive.
Meme, thoughs over the other side seem to remortgage the debt enough times without paying massive amounts off.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Jonny has me on ignore now, I think.
All well and good except the bit after the comma!
Sign in if you want to comment
Howson happy to be out - Bates killing club
Page 2 of 3
posted on 5/2/12
Ken Bates' puppies...... don't say that to PD!
posted on 5/2/12
BO Now,
Do you not think that if income decreases the club would decrease expenditure accordingly?
posted on 5/2/12
Bates wont lose out financially as he still has some players he can sell, so as long as he has those he will keep making his money whilst the quality of the team will get worse.
posted on 5/2/12
Sol - if it was that easy, we would never have gone down the tubes under PR. Get your head out of the sand.
ADRITK - which player is that then? They all seem to have understood that they do better if they sit out their contract and move for nowt.
And once the few who may command a fee have gone, their loanee and freebie second-class cheap replacements will neither go nor be of benefit financially. Billy P anyone?
posted on 5/2/12
Bates Out, if we go massively in the red, it will be administration again without doubt. KB wouldn't care, he is 80 now, he has no doubt been filling his bank in Monaco with money from the club. He will no doubt continue to do so under the company name of Teak Trading.
But surely he wouldn't tell his loyal supporters we are financially stable, unlike our competitors, not owing anyone any money (HMRC or Astor for example), when in fact the opposite is true? I can't believe he would ever do anything like that.
posted on 5/2/12
KB would care. It's his legacy. His last chance to be a success and lay a foundation - either for his Wikipedia entry or for is family.
He would also care because he would lose a lot of money by going into admin. He would have had to try and bail out. He may have sold part of the enterprise to someone else. Or maybe he would let the club go into admin for a trifling amount because, as you say, he would not care.
The rest of them - Harvey, his insignificant lawyer, his family, Lorimer - would all be booted from football forever though. They would care. I seriously think we would see a murder. We'd need Poirot to work out who did it.
posted on 5/2/12
Bates Out you really have no concept of anything do you. This last year 2010/11 the club are going to report a profit so there is some way to go to drive the club under.
Risdale on the other hand borrowed Millions on future revenue and spent it on inflated players wages. Mmmm think Bates won't fall for this one.#
Try supporting the team and the club instead of being narrow minded. Just because you don't like the man doesn't mean he isn't doing what he feels is best. Yes we don't all agree with everything. But unless you've found a billionaire to pump millions into the club which is the only way you'll be happy.
posted on 5/2/12
CasWhite - I don't know where you are coming from. Please show me where I demanded a billionaire to pump in millions.
I support the team to the hilt. I do not support the leech that is the regime in this club.
If I can give you an analogy, you remind me of the pro-Gaddafi population whereas I am part fo the anti-Gaddafi pro-revolution Arab Spring.
As all Libyans love their country, I know all Leeds fans love their club and their team.
Your attempt to "divide and rule" is naive and preposterous.
LUFC is, historically, a bland mediocre second tier team and club that has occasionally hit heady heights for small periods of time. A sensible way forward is slow and sure.
Unlike the prices Bates is charging and the disappearance of all the money.
No more will I be raped by this man. No morew will I bend over and allow him to give it to me hard.
I have 20 years as a season ticket holder behind me and this year I have taken the hardest decision I could in relation to LUFC. I am foregoing my attendance.
If you can be so arrogant as to tell me that I have no concept of anything, I think you are just a puppet on a string.
posted on 5/2/12
And I have 21 years and will continue supporting next year.
What were your views of the Risdale era? The high prices and wages, increasing debt. Not ground improvements for the fans etc etc.
posted on 5/2/12
I haven't mentioned Ridsdale once. You have twice. Is there something wrong with you? Why are you trying to shift the argument to Ridsdale. I am not making any such comparison. Your comment is irrelevant. Keep on track - and read my comments -
I am not asking for a billionaire or a huge outlay.
I am not asking for a billionaire or a huge outlay.
I am not asking for a billionaire or a huge outlay.
I am not asking for a billionaire or a huge outlay.
I am not asking for a billionaire or a huge outlay.
I am not asking for a billionaire or a huge outlay.
I am not asking for a billionaire or a huge outlay.
I am not asking for a billionaire or a huge outlay.
posted on 5/2/12
So are you are happy with the way he's running the club, ie it's self sufficient. The reason your not happy is the high ticket prices and because you feel he owns ER and TA etc.
Do you not think I want lower ticket prices? Yes
I want to know who owns these assets, but I don't think at present it's Bates.
Do I think a yatch set's sail each month to Monaco with loot stashed in the hold? No
The problem is we all want a better team and promotion. But is any of this Bates Out actually going to work unless there's someone to take up the baton?
posted on 5/2/12
No. I am not happy with the financial way he is runnign the club.
His business plan required breakeven on 22000 attendances and no run in the cups. But we have only been able to stave off losses by selling our best players. You happy with that?
Does he own TA and ER? I know he told us |TA was a priority, got paid off for Delph, and then did not buy it. You happy with that?
There are many other parts to this. There are a huge number of clubs that are run on a fraction of what LUFC is run on, and they are doing just as well. Why is it that we can only make a profit by selling our best players?
If I pay top dollar, I expect to see top dollar players. I am not seeing that. I see our best (and they are still not top dollar) players leaving and being replaced by unknowns, kids, loanees, and over-the-hill ex-players after a last pay check.
We pay top dollar. Bates pays out naff all to a huge quantity of naff players. And is pocketing the profits from the business plan.
Can it be run better? You bet!
Are we being taken for a ride? Me, no longer. You - yes.You are the type of person that Bates is relying on - oooh, don't overturn that rock, you don't know what's underneath it!
If risk was defined by you, it would be a number between 0 and 0.000001
I don't ask for PR risk. But, to give another analogy, you remond me of a not very good accountant who just does people's books. Not very interesting.
posted on 5/2/12
At the end of the day though BON BON, you must be happy with the way KB is gluing the fans together!
He has brought harmony hasn't he?
posted on 5/2/12
yep EO EO
posted on 5/2/12
Risdale on the other hand borrowed Millions on future revenue and spent it on inflated players wages. Mmmm think Bates won't fall for this one.#
....
Did he not do it at chelsea then? 80m in debt?
If chelsea had gone out top 4 would gone same way we did?
He did more or less the same as Risdale? Only over a longer time base.
Only difference was he got lucky and found a money man to buy it.
Risdale did not.
So how can he bang on and blame Risdale when he did same at chelsea?
posted on 5/2/12
BON you talk with fork tongue.
His breakeven is 24k at present with no cup runs and the minimum from tv/central pot. So what? So he gets more in a spends this on the ground and has increased the wages on players year on year since administration. Think what it would be as well if it wasn't for him increasing off field income.
He staves off losses by selling players. Well yes this was the case in league 1 as you receive £500k against £2.2 from the league. That makes a difference. Lets wait until last years figures when was no major transfer out as heard £3m profit.
TA was a priority if he could raise the funds. It would save money in rent, but do you beleive we got £6m for Delph up front to pay for TA??? I don't. Bradford were entitled to % of the transfer also.
You are right, Barnsley beat us twice with a wage bill around half ours. But they also have fraction of our expenses on other things.
As for the transfers, do you not think the number of loanees is down to the manager not the chairman. Do you think he said "SG go out there and borrow players?".
Can it be run better? Yes, it possibly can. But it could be run a lot worse.
As for your comments about me. Don't go there as you don't know me. You though remind me of someone who will never be happy!
posted on 5/2/12
Meme, actually look at the debt. Risdale borrowed money against future ticket sales to buy players. Bates at Chelsea borrowed money to pay for ground improvements and Chelsea Village. Big difference. One could be mortgaged the other fell away when the results did and the players value decreased.
posted on 5/2/12
"Just because you don't like the man doesn't mean he isn't doing what he feels is best."
Of course he is doing what is best - for himself, not Leeds United.
"As for the transfers, do you not think the number of loanees is down to the manager not the chairman. Do you think he said "SG go out there and borrow players?"
Very naive. If SG had no funds for transfers then his only option was to get freebies and loanees. Yes, I know he said otherwise but do you think it is possible he said what He-Whose-Name-I-No-Longer-Type told SG to say?
"Risdale borrowed money against future ticket sales to buy players. Bates at Chelsea borrowed money to pay for ground improvements and Chelsea Village. Big difference."
Perhaps difference in form, but same in substance. In both cases the clubs were heading for doom. As blue stated above, Chelsea just got a little luckier than we did. Did I just write "a little?"
posted on 5/2/12
You are not going to get 80m remortgaging that tho are you?
What good is it remortgaging it?
And how long do you think it would taken to pay that debt back? When it gets bigger every year.
posted on 5/2/12
He-Whose-Name-I-No-Longer-Type
?
Why, does it scare you JLA?
posted on 5/2/12
BON your negativity is depressing, don't you see yet that most fans don't agree with you?
Bates saved Leeds, and he cares about Leeds - he is desperate to get us promoted. Yes, he is very tight wadded but I much much much prefer that to the previous pfofligacy. In fact I would much rather we stayed in division 2 than went up and nearly bankrupt ourself again. I have enjoyed the last two seasons ' here, the only thing that spoiled it is cavemen like you singing moronic and monotone chants aimed at the saviour of our club. BATES HATERS OUT!
posted on 5/2/12
Jonny has me on ignore now, I think.
Perhaps one of you can copy this for him.
Ken Bates has been at the club for 7 years.
Simon Grayson was at the club for 3 years.
Over half the loans in Ken Bates' time at the club came under Grayson.
Grayson also used a lot of loans as manager of Blackpool.
Loans are a short-term fix that can help you look good and keep you in a job, but they don't help build the club.
Grayson is all about trying to make himself look good rather than doing what's best for the club and allowing the credit to come for that down the line.
posted on 6/2/12
GIO
Well said. Others though aren't bothered with facts just what they beleive.
Meme, thoughs over the other side seem to remortgage the debt enough times without paying massive amounts off.
posted on 6/2/12
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 6/2/12
Jonny has me on ignore now, I think.
All well and good except the bit after the comma!
Page 2 of 3