>> 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?<<
Again you ignore the possibility of a middle ground. Is it not possible to borrow sensibly or to spend your income sensibly? According to you, you either live within your means or you are crippled with debt. Stop using Bates scaremongering tactics, it won't wash. >>I thought we'd established it was 38% last year. The recommended level is NO MORE THAN 55%. << I thought your maths was better than that - Bates budgets £9m for player costs not wages. Player costs are wages, fees and agent commissions, do you see the subtle difference? Bates expects this year's turnover to top £30m. Bates therefore budgets for 30% expenditure. >>Without seeing the books in detail, I don't know how much more could be committed to players' wages.<< Yet you seem happy to defend Bates' position. >> But £11.5m a year seems fairly sensible for our league, given we have no parachute payments.<< Why? What does anyone else pay? >> 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.<< Hmm - so you can borrow money to invest in a development that may or may not work but you can't borrow money to buy the property you occupy and save the rent? Odd banks you use. >> Could you borrow money at that rate for players' wages? No. Where's the return? It's not a case of either/or.<< You obviously misunderstood my words. I said borrow to buy the ground and Thorp Arch, which you admit ought to be cheap. We must also be 'credit worthy' as we have obviously borrowed to build the corporate boxes. >> 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. << Which is why we want him out, what part of that is so hard to understand? >>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. << LMFAO! You really haven't been paying attention have you? Richmond and Morris sold the club to Bates, DOH! >>Show. Me. The. Money!<< Go on then smart arse SHOW. ME. BATES. MONEY! >>Once again, Howson wanted to go and play in the prem. And I expect his wages were trebled by Norwich.<< You can't possibly know what terms he was offered at Leeds nor what he accepted at Norwich, so why pretend you do? >>How do you propose we made him stay?<< Signed him to a 5 year contract when we got promoted? >> 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? << What has that got to do with it? Bates sold Howson and we were told the proceeds would be put into Simon's war chest. They weren't. And for the record and before you rewrite history to fit your argument. Howson was sold to Norwich on January 24th Parker went on loan to Carlisle on January 26th Smith was signed on loan on January 31st. >>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.<< You're guessing again but that's not what Ken said. He said he sacked Simon because he wanted to sign a midfielder who would cost £1.5m over the course of the contract. If Bates wanted to sack Grayson why didn't he just say, we stopped pulling in the same direction so I sacked him. As you say that's his prerogative. >> And he might have been proposing someone crap for all we know. SG signed Michael Brown, after all.<< And he may have been proposing someone fantastic, he signed Adam Clayton, after all. >>Oh stop spouting sanctimonious horseshit Paul. We're talking about sport and business. << The two are neither mutually inclusive or exclusive. What about the community and societal aspects? Fans, players, clubs don't HAVE to get ripped off by unscrupulous owners. It isn't written in stone. >> 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. << Really? That's the ONLY way? Or the ONLY way you can think of? >> Ridsdale tried the alternative business model - PLC. He failed.<< And the Bates model is the ONLY alternative? You really are a very blinkered individual. _______________________________________________ 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
