I ask this because paying £52m for a club that doesn't own its ground or training centre and is struggling to make any impression in the Championship does seem very steep indeed. Paying so much for "potential" is rolling the dice a bit - if you don't back it up by investing at least £5m to £20m in the team and getting promotion to the £60m pot of gold. GAMBLERS GFH buy Leeds with no cash in reserve to really put together a title winning team (yes, top spot must be the goal of a club like Leeds, after all we consider ourselves superior to anyone else in this division) and hope Colin can get us up by giving him £1m tops to "strengthen" for the big push. The plan is to get Leeds to the Prem with minimal investment, and then sell the club for £100m and walk away with a tidy profit - the modus operandi of operators such as GFH. That's their business, short term investment for big financial gains. No promotion? Well, we could be stuck with another Bates-like era. INVESTORS GFH buy Leeds, give Colin at least £5m in January to get quality in, and also put in some extra on top to pay off the dead wood like Bromby, Nunez, Kisnorbo etc. This freshens up the dressing room and encourages a promotion focus, allowing Warnock to push on and do his job. Promotion brings another £80m of investment and helps Leeds to stabilise the club in the Prem, and the wheels are set in motion for annual investment for the development of the team into regular top four challengers. January will tell us a lot about GFH and their intentions/funds. My instinct says gamblers, but my Leeds heart prays its not.
One thing I don't understand is, why would an injured player allow themselves to be paid off? While at the club, they getfree treatment, physio and training to keep in shape with an intention of returning to the game. Why take a pay-off, lose all your training mates, your medical stuff? I can't see our injured players being paid off
Do you have a credible link that shows what the selling price was and what it includes? I've read a few reports that suggest the £50+mill is a potential total spend with the actual value being well below that, but I've not seen any figures either way that seem genuine. I have read comments attributed to GFH which clearly show that they've bought to sell ASAP.
I mentioned in another thread a while ago how **** the Sky interview and news conference was, nobody actually asked them what they had actually purchased for their £52 million.
But have they spent £50+mill or is that a projected spend? If it's projected rather than actual, that to me would suggest it's just to bump up the value of a rapid resale. Just to be clear, I haven't a clue about the values, that's why I'm asking. From my limited reading, am I close if I say GFH were agents acting on behalf of someone that pulled out. GFH have since found money they previously never had?
Good question Dutch, there is the possibility GFH are fronting for investors so not using their own money. There have been plenty of reports that £52m was the price and its never been refuted by GFH or Bates, so that's the number. Also, the figure has been said to have been for complete purchase of club, minus ER and TA of course.
The last I heard was £17 million with another £17 million add on on promotion, and with the £16 million buy-back clause of Elland Road that comes in at a £50 million potential spend, so you may be right.
It is my opinion that GFH Capital do not have the financial resources to run a successful football club, so someone or a group of investors are funding things at Leeds United. I have no idea who they are or why they are acting as they are, however, I'm sure the truth will come out sooner rather than later.
Speculation, by the sounds of it. They had a confidentiality clause in place and kept everything pretty close to the vest. I doubt too many people outside of those closest to the deal really have any idea of what the price was. One item that should not be forgotten is the Preferred Shares which as I recall had a buy back trigger at a set premium if the club got sold.
Boab, I'm inclined to agree. The fact that Leeds didn't even bother to compete for Chris Wood shows lack of funds or serious intent to challenge for top spot.
BTW Exodus, I am claiming nothing about bring "ITK" on this, just asking for your opinion on GFH and their intentions with buying Leeds. Are they saviours or yet another threat?
Abramovich bought Chelsea for £53m, admittedly 10 years ago, but a team that owned its own ground and had just qualified for the Champions League. So on that basis I would be surprised if GFH had arted with a similar amount for a Championship club that doesn't own its own ground. It's pretty clear that they are investors. They are in a private equity market which generally seeks to take over struggling businesses and sell them on for a profit. Whether they do this without threatening our long-term future is a moot point. However, I suspect they understand the need that a) investment is required in the team to ensure promotion and to stay in the PL and b) businesses do well when they offer customers (fans) a good product and where customers are treated with respect. So there will be no more calling fans morons and hopefully making watching Leeds a better experience.
I dont get the whole how much gfh paid. Who cares, its not as if any of the money sees its way back on the playing pitch. Bates trousered it all so I dont give a ****. I say judge them firstly on Feb 1st when well have an idea of what they can afford to spend on players or are willing to. If nothing worthwhile is available for transfers, the summer is the next big watershed. Failure there and they will be regarded as flops. I think they deserve a few weeks though to show what they are capable of
Long term future - Make no doubt about it, GFH are not here long term, they are going to try and win promotion then flog us off for a quick profit. As Sheldon and a few others have already mentioned somewhere we don't want another Portsmouth situation. I would have hoped that GFH had brought the ground and training ground, that for starters would mean no rental payment so more income available for team spending. If a miracle happened and Warnock got us promoted and along the way we signed the likes of Derry and Hill and GFH thought great we are in the Premier League quick sale and big profit could you imagine us in the Premier League, not owning are own ground, club put up for sale, players on the books like Brown, Derry, Hill, Diouf, Kisnorbo, Drury, Varney, Green, Bromby, Rogers, etc... Does it not concern anyone else in the slightest that we haven't secured any new players already? Yes it is only day two but we had Tonge here, why hasn't that been done and dusted if Warnock wanted him? Why did we lose out on the striker who went to Leicester?? Why have we taken Tate until the 26th is that how long NW feels it might take to strengthen the defence??? Has Haigh not already got his shopping list, it wasn't like we didn't know the T/O was happening. No deals done and dusted lined up and ready to put pen to paper on Jan 1st? - Again I know it is early days but we are a poor team at present lacking quality, we could have lost yesterday and been another 3 points adrift, I hope it is me being OTT but I sense all is not what it seems with GFH and I hope I am wrong. Yes time will tell, if we exit this transfer window with more journeymen like Derry and Hill then GFH can kiss my ass with their false talking.
In a way I am drawn to my comments when we got NW back in February last year. Forget this season, it's all about next. NW rebuilt the squad completely in the Summer. I thought with the calibre of players we were in with a shout if we got one or two quality ones in to counter the solidity. I also thought we needed to give a bit of time to allow the team to gel. Yes, I know we are 8th and only 2 points off the play-offs, but SG got sacked being 3 points off the play-offs at the end of January last year. We are not playing well, we are not gelling, we brought in some alleged quality - Tate, Tonge, Thomas, Austin - but only Tonge shone and that was only since Austin was injured, and he has gone back and not been seen since. We have a quality keeper, 2 in fact, and Byram has hit the stage, and alongside Becchio and McCormack we should be buzzing up front. But we're not. Why? Because the midfield doesn't work. It has holes all over the place, it has little zip, we do not get close enough to fast opposition, we can't pass properly and we just hoof it, which does not play to the strengths of the front two. We have Diouf and Green and Norris and Austin and Brown who are all good players, but they are not ball players. We only need one of them. And with the holes in the middle, the defense comes under a lot of pressure, with players not in their best positions. Lees is still weak for me, and always has been, but he has shown some marked improvements. All in all, what we need is someone who understands how to build a team, and how to lok at those players and determine exactly where it needs an upgrade. Midfield. But Derry isn't the answer. Christ, if West Ham can get promoted with McCarthy, Reading with Harte, Swansea with Bessone, and Blackpool with Crainey, that shows we have a major problem in our midfield in giving the right protection to our defence. Defence is not our problem - midfield is. Just like under Grayson. Any defence would buckle with a leaky midfield like ours. So all in all, I am underwhelmed in the extreme by NW. But I'm going to commit to the same mistake, allow GFH to forego a big January transfer window, give them the summer to bring in a new manager who will bring in just those few quality midfielders we need and build a team, and give them time to allow them to gel. This season appears over to me.
Agree sheldon season is over. However gfh are going to have to put some gloss on it with a couple of ðecent signings. They seem anxious to increase attendances and must realise that by writing season off in January with no signings would be a large step in the wrong direction
