The only thing that is clear from this thread is that we are all pretty desperate to see Ken sell up and leave. The LUST statement is pants and simply them clearing their throats to ensure they are not forgotten. LUST know nothing about the deal, and they did NOT put the parties together. Please always remember that Bates will have nothing to do with LUST nevermind actually have them bring investors to meet him. Crikey!! As fir the nonsense about £4m paid and so on...come on people, get real. That is the most laughable comment in a while. The issue holding up the deal is, exactly as YEP have stated, a clause around FUTURE liabilities that may arise which are not clear to the new owners right now. So, if someone rocks up a month after the deal us done claiming £500k for something Bates signed off a year ago then Bates is the one to pay, not Leeds. This is perfectly within the buyers' rights to do. When Mike Ashley bought Newcastle this happened to him, and only after he had control of the club did he uncover millions of pounds worth of debts he did not know about. Bates is arguing the clause as you'd expect, but will he compromise and agree to settle say 50% of any unknown liabilities that may arise in the next 12 months. It's going down to the wire, but LUST really need to be quiet and ride this one out for now, they are damaging their brand and not helping anyone with their banal statements.
oh man are you gonna eat some humble, the YEP broke some news and thats ok, so ironic great debate fella's, keep it up. and for the record i have never named or confirmed anyone as a new owner.
BIG keep up the good work pal BillysStatue, I understand you cant name your source or who your getting fed this information from but if you PM BIG on here hopefully BIG can clarify if the fella is actually ITK or not. And for the record I thought the LUST statement was spot on. Can you expand on why you think this was Pants?
Well I have - and that was bollox too - and it had the WACCOE morons pizzing their pants almost as much as you do
OFF TOPIC TC, I need a background check on someone thats possibly in Millwalls Bushwackers. I havent had contact with that lot since Crookys funeral so anyone you know who could ask it would be appricated. I will PM you his name and details if you think you can help
Jonny you crack me up!! Look, LUST have not come out with anything ORIGINAL ever!! When I said TO was stalling because Bates was hanging on after LUST said it was a done deal people laughed....and now? I said Bates wanted investment but investors wanted more...it happened. I said Bates had issues with clauses, although I didn't know exactly what clauses he wanted, I speculated it may be payments after promotion...now it seems it is about future liabilties which makes complete sense. Well, seeing as I know nothing, I shall post nothing about the TO anymore as LUST know everything and they will guide the TO talks to a successful conclusion. I don't support LUST because I think they are self-serving and hopped onto the TO bandwagon to boost their image and support. They have behaved poorly with their unprofessional dropping of comments from invisible players which I believe did damage in the dressing room. You never do anything to harm your club, even if the info is true. More professional to keep it to yourself and when the time is right, reveal it if it serves the club to do so. No, they have acted in their own interests and I'm sure there are thousands of Leeds fans who agree and therefore will never join LUST. That said, they always have the chance to repair their image and earn trust again....but will they?
Hi Billy, happy to help us all smile. Sometimes we all get a little carried away with this stuff. Not perfect by any means, but my impression is that on balance LUST have been good for Leeds United and us fans as a whole. No one else was doing or saying anything on a group basis about what Bates and Mates have done to us. WJ reported they have over 7,500 members. Are there any other organized groups of Leeds United fans to speak for us on this scale? If I was an investor/acquiror, there is no way I would move forward without the rumoured indemnity agreement that Bates apparently won't sign, with any seller, never mind Kenneth William Bates (given his business history). Would you?
Excellent points you make Jonny. I agree LUST started off well and with good intentions, and I joined, but their behaviour once the TO became apparent has been a bit dismal. As I said, I will give them a chance to fix things, and if they are genuine and worthy I will sign up again. As for Bates, can only think something has alerted the investors to potential claims and so they want Ken to put his money where his mouth is....but that is almost impossible. Then again, would it be good business practice not to have such a clause? The key is this...are Leeds seriously struggling financially and does Bates need to sell to walk away now with some profit? If so, then the deal will definitely happen and Bates will compromise to some extent eventually to push the deal through. If Leeds aren't bankrupt and the club can continue without losses Bates can be a tough nut to ensure he gets what he wants. Man, I just want this done yesterday!
I see no difference between what BS says about the takeover and what LUST Say. Both claim knowledge of the takeover but I happen to have more confidence in the latter given the history of stories BS was telling more yarns than anywhere and can't make his anti LUST claims without appearing completely hypocritical and just making more stuff up
Guys, there is a forum called JA606 where Leeds fans seem to delight at having a go at each other. This forum has been really good at debating the issues themselves. Let's try to keep it that way here and go over to JA606 to denigrate each other if we must. How about it?
JLA absolutely agree with you. I don't post to sound clever, just sharing what I hear and people can do with it what they want. Funny though, if what I say is then the same as what LUST says......
nothing wrong with vehemently and passionately debating the topics, just leave out the personal stuff, whatever one thinks of the person with the opposite view. As a famous Los Angeleno once said "Can't we all just get along?" Go South Africa in the one day test in Southampton (not that anyone cares about cricket, eh!)!
I think you'll find you claimed there was never actually a takeover, just investment, right up to the point where it became completely apparent it was a takeover then you suddenly changed your tune. LUST are the ONLY people to come out with things that are original, you do know where the YEP, SSN etc. get all there TO news from, yes? It's getting really annoying with people like you claiming all LUST are doing is speculating while you make up your own "ITK" BS and then talk about how you "believe" LUST are damaging the TO because you have your own agenda. LUST are the largest Leeds United fans group and one of the largest in the country, until that changes they're going to be playing a very prominent role as a voice for the supporter's, you're just going to have to deal with it. And as for: "I don't support LUST because I think they are self-serving and hopped onto the TO bandwagon to boost their image and support", you might want to check who the first people to reveal news of the takeover were. Hard to hop on a bandwagon that doesn't exist.
