>>There's a huge difference between keeping our best players  and what you 
describe as the Ridsdale model. Perpetually inferring that you  can only 
have Batesism or Ridsdaleism is conveniently ignoring the possibility  of 
middle ground.<<
 
Just like the "Bates haters" dismiss everyone who expresses a different  
opinion as a "Bates lover"?  Of course Ridsdale is an extreme - no club has  
fallen from grace so badly as ours. Yet there are countless others that are  
struggling with a burden of debt, caused by their own version of "living the 
 dream". I don't want us to go back down that route - do you?
 
 

>>  It is known through Bates' own statements that he budgets to spend less 
than  30% of turnover on players (wages and fees),<<
 
I thought we'd established it was 38% last year. The recommended level is  
NO MORE THAN 55%. Without seeing the books in detail, I don't know how much 
more  could be committed to players' wages. But £11.5m a year seems fairly 
sensible  for our league, given we have no parachute payments.
 

>>whilst frittering money away on ill run bars and corporate  facilities. 
He can spend millions on corporate boxes to earn a few grand a  week, yet 
wouldn't buy Thorpe Arch or the Stadium to save a few million a  year.<<
 
So on the one hand you don't want him spending a small amount of  money on 
facilities, while on the other you want him to spend a lot of  money on 
facilities? 
 
Where's the money coming from for the ER development? I'd guess a bank loan 
 - borrowing is cheap at the moment, and adding hotel/banqueting etc will 
show an  immediate return. Your "few grand a week" will probably pay the 
investment back  in a couple of years.
 
Could you borrow money at that rate for players' wages? No. Where's the  
return? It's not a case of either/or. Bates would have to dip into his own  
pockets to pay for players, and he won't do that. You might disagree with that 
 but it's his prerogative as the owner.
 
 
>>Defend Bates if you want but don't kid yourself that he is or  has ever 
been the only alternative.<<
 
 
Go on, smart arse, name me a viable alternative right now. Simon  Morris? 
Geoffrey Richmond? Sure there are a lot of names that float around  (can't be 
arsed to check old postings for them) but until they make a bid,  they're 
just ghosts. Show. Me. The. Money!


>>"We've been down this road before, haven't we. Without  parachute 
payments or a sugardaddy we can't compete on player wages. Nor should  we."
That's bull and you know it, we're not talking Seth Johnson here, we're  
talking Johnny Howson.<<
 
 
Once again, Howson wanted to go and play in the prem. And I expect his  
wages were trebled by Norwich. How do you propose we made him stay?
 
 
>> We're talking a failure to use the proceeds of an offer 'too  good to 
turn down' to provide a replacement - despite quotes at the time saying  they 
would be used for exactly that purpose! Stop swallowing Bates' rhetoric and  
look at the facts. Read what he actually says not what he wants you to 
think he  says.<<



We signed one midfielder and brought in two on loan, didn't we? I'm  
guessing Bates was looking to get rid of SG at some point so he wouldn't back 
an  
expensive Grayson purchase, who might not fit the bill for the next  
manager. And he might have been proposing someone crap for all we know. SG  
signed 
Michael Brown, after all.
 

>>For example: I saved Leeds twice - what did he save Leeds from?  First 
time was supposed to be administration but we went bust anyway and 2nd  time 
he saved us from the white knights when his cronies tipped the scale in his  
favour. I'd rather he hadn't bothered as we are no better off today than 
when  Adulant Force fell for his lies and half-truths 7 years ago. <<
 
 
Don't doubt the man is full of bullshit. never said he wasn't. And those  
deals were clearly designed to get shot of historical debts. Morally dubious 
for  sure, but commonplace in business. I expect the financial position is a 
lot  better than under Adulant Force.


>>"Bates out, but only if a significantly more wealthy  replacement is 
prepared to take over."

Ethics and morals don't come into  your reckoning then? Just as long as 
he's rich?
Tell your kids that do  you?
There's no such thing as right and wrong just 'has money' and 'hasn't  
money'?
What a wonderfully socially responsible person you are!<<
 
 
Oh stop spouting sanctimonious horseshit Paul. We're talking about  sport 
and business. Do you want Leeds United to be a competitive premiership  team 
again, or not? If you do, we will have to be taken over by a wealthy  
individual, just like everyone else at the top of the premiership. Ridsdale  
tried 
the alternative business model - PLC. He failed.
 

_______________________________________________
Leedslist mailing list
Info and options: http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist
To unsubscribe, email [email protected]

PETE CASS (1962 - 2011) Rest In Peace Mate

Reply via email to