MON Posted 17 February 2005 Posted 17 February 2005 Leeds I hear everyone saying what a good job he has done. Blackwell has been given the funds to sign 27 new players. And spend quite a lot of money in transfer fees. How can leeds spend this much money and sign so many players, with so many debts. when we had debts so big we were not allowed to sign anyone. How have leeds been able to "get away with this"-neil warnocks words.
Solihullfox Posted 17 February 2005 Posted 17 February 2005 The simple answer to why we couldn't sign anyone when we had big debts is that we were in "administration". Our ability to sign players was governed by the Football League who have a rule in place which prohibits any club in administration from having any dealings in the transfer or loan market. Even after a club comes out of administration the league can allow or bar a club from making signings or even arranging loan deals (Leicester were not allowed to do deals for quite a while after the financial rescue package was accepted by the administrator). We were not looked upon very favourably by the league for whatever reason. Ipswich went into "temporary administration" ?????? - but seemed to come out of it smelling of roses which is a bit odd really. Although Leeds have gradually reduced their debt over the last 12 months it is somewhat amazing that they managed to avoid administration and all it's constraints - but they have avoided it and found money to buy and pay players. I can only assume that they have enjoyed the benefit of some private investment or have some very "good" lines of credit. So, the real answer as to why Leeds have done what they've done is BECAUSE THE FECKERS CAN.
Nationwider Posted 17 February 2005 Posted 17 February 2005 LeedsHow can leeds spend this much money and sign so many players, with so many debts. when we had debts so big we were not allowed to sign anyone. How have leeds been able to "get away with this"-neil warnocks words. 67989[/snapback] City couldn't sign anyone (I think?) as they were in administration, although they could pick up non-contract players like McKinley. Leeds have avoided going into admin (by getting rid of all their other tangible assets) and as a ltd company, can stay in debt for some considerable amount of time and continue to trade. In the real world, both Leeds and City would have gone bust a long time ago. Leeds have got BF Ken now to stop them going under. As for Warnock, he should keep his nose out of other people's affairs. I hate the man and I hate his bloody column on the beeb site.
Nationwider Posted 17 February 2005 Posted 17 February 2005 So, the real answer as to why Leeds have done what they've done isBECAUSE THE FECKERS CAN. 68012[/snapback] Exactly! We can't really take the moral high ground here either. We are genuinely lucky to still have a football club to support, IMO.
Benji Posted 17 February 2005 Posted 17 February 2005 LeedsHow can leeds spend this much money and sign so many players, with so many debts. when we had debts so big we were not allowed to sign anyone. How have leeds been able to "get away with this"-neil warnocks words. 67989[/snapback] City couldn't sign anyone (I think?) as they were in administration, although they could pick up non-contract players like McKinley. Leeds have avoided going into admin (by getting rid of all their other tangible assets) and as a ltd company, can stay in debt for some considerable amount of time and continue to trade. In the real world, both Leeds and City would have gone bust a long time ago. Leeds have got BF Ken now to stop them going under. As for Warnock, he should keep his nose out of other people's affairs. I hate the man and I hate his bloody column on the beeb site. 68018[/snapback] we couldn't even do that remember that hughes lad that wanted to play for us for free? he wasn't allowed to come here
Scow Posted 17 February 2005 Posted 17 February 2005 LeedsHow can leeds spend this much money and sign so many players, with so many debts. when we had debts so big we were not allowed to sign anyone. How have leeds been able to "get away with this"-neil warnocks words. 67989[/snapback] City couldn't sign anyone (I think?) as they were in administration, although they could pick up non-contract players like McKinley. Leeds have avoided going into admin (by getting rid of all their other tangible assets) and as a ltd company, can stay in debt for some considerable amount of time and continue to trade. In the real world, both Leeds and City would have gone bust a long time ago. Leeds have got BF Ken now to stop them going under. As for Warnock, he should keep his nose out of other people's affairs. I hate the man and I hate his bloody column on the beeb site. 68018[/snapback] we couldn't even do that remember that hughes lad that wanted to play for us for free? he wasn't allowed to come here 68061[/snapback] I think that was Jeff Whitley. We wanted Hughes on loan from Birmingham, but the Football League blocked that. Tossers.
breadandcheese Posted 17 February 2005 Posted 17 February 2005 Don't worry. Good old Ken Bates will work his magic. Everyone remembers him buying Chelsea for £1, rescuing them and turning them into a force. People forget that Chelsea were a few days from going out of business with debts of £80 million. These are debts that dwarf the one's we faced. Chelsea got lucky with a Russian Oligarch desperate to get his money out of Russia and raise his profile. I hope Ken hasn't learnt his lesson. Spend Leeds spend.
Chandler Posted 18 February 2005 Posted 18 February 2005 I hate Leeds, I hate Ken Bates. I sincerely hope their current position is a false one (they've played between 2-3 games more than any one else). Problem is Bates knows how to bring success. He is a very canny operator. And he's as tough as old boots. Nobody can mess with him. He is utterly ruthless and unscrupulous (he was behind the whole business to hoof Sven out). I hope I'm wrong - at least in the short term. But in two to three seasons the scumbags will be back in business.
Fox 4 Life Posted 18 February 2005 Posted 18 February 2005 I agree with what Chandler is saying, i also hate Leeds but i feel they will be back in the premiership beofre long, they have made som good signings and however much of a willy puller Bates is he is exactly what they need, it annoys me though all the hesitation with them, they had so many "extended" deadlines before they went in to admin it took the piss, i would have loved to see them drop 10 points!!!
kenny Posted 18 February 2005 Posted 18 February 2005 They have just signed shaun derry from palace for an undisclosed fee now as well, so they are still signing players for transfer fees, im completely bemused as to how they are getting away with it!
Fox 4 Life Posted 18 February 2005 Posted 18 February 2005 yeh i saw that, its only going to backfire in the long run, they have signed 28 players now and that is shocking, the turnover is unbelivable and although alot are on frees the wages etc will hurt them in the long run, they havent taken any steps to prevent this happening again jus arrogantly waited for someone to buy them out as they are such a "big club" we scarificed alot to secure our future and got slated and called cheaters it really pisses me off seeing them signing all these players when their debt was larger than ours!! rant over!!
Muz Posted 18 February 2005 Posted 18 February 2005 I really do hate Leeds and the way they go about there financial dealings , it is shocking. And yet they keep bringing in the players.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.