But whilst thats an option there is a huge danger that someone less benevolent as the LUST or any supporter group will be able to offer vastly more than you would.
In which case you are relying on the goodwill of the current owner to do the right thing for football. I would suggest that is more likely to be the case with a football person in charge, as opposed to a pure speculator. So, in other words, if LUST does have any designs on one day owning LUFC, I think they have a better chance doing a deal with Bates than one of the other bidders who were in it for the money only. Could be wrong of course. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RickD Sent: 04 June 2007 16:31 To: leedslist Subject: Re: [LU] From Sq Ball re Voting ----- Original Message ----- > Isn't that the country that favours the 'pelatazo' method for clearing > debt? > Ie the reclassification of land (like a training ground) to allow the land > owner (football club) to sell the land for development purposes and > thereby > make a fortune? I'm sure you are thinking of what will soon become known as the Thorp Arch manoeuvre. In any event just to be like Barcelona we don't have to change our name to Bleeds United. We can take the good parts and leave the bad. _______________________________________________ the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list administrators accept no liability for the personal views and opinions of contributors. Leedslist mailing list [email protected] http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist Join The Leeds United Supporters Trust at www.lufctrust.org _______________________________________________ the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list administrators accept no liability for the personal views and opinions of contributors. Leedslist mailing list [email protected] http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist Join The Leeds United Supporters Trust at www.lufctrust.org
