http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/leeds-united-set-60million-red-5455134? Red Bull still looking to buy TWS It's cropped up a few times, and each time seems to be slightly more robust. It could have implications on the FA's thinking, and we would be seen as helping clarify the process of any potential name change. Is my enemy's enemy my friend? Leeds United set for £60million Red Bull takeover with talks at an advanced stage Mirror Sport understands there are now only a couple of hurdles left after high-ranking staff visited Elland Road for talks with Massimo Cellino. Red Bull are in advanced talks to buy Leeds United for £60million. Sources claim the energy drinks giant hopes to get a deal over the line in “two to three weeks”. Red Bull has been eyeing the club for over a year. High-ranking staff have visited Elland Road to sample the match-day atmosphere and held talks with currently suspended owner Massimo Cellino. Mirror Sport understands there are now only a couple of hurdles left. Red Bull, who already own clubs in Austria and Germany, want to be clear on how involved they can be with a third without breaching UEFA regulations. They are also keen that there are no complications over any deal with the controversial Cellino. The Italian is currently banned from being “a relevant person” at the club until May 3, the day after the regular Championship season finishes, after the Football League ruled his conviction for tax evasion was a “dishonest act”. Red Bull want a full takeover and have big plans for the West Yorkshire club. Whether that involves any name change is unclear. There are suggestions they could sell one of their other clubs – Red Bull Salzburg or Red Bull Leipzig – in order to buy Leeds.
http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co....-to-buy-leeds-united-cellino-claims-1-7193337 Leeds United: Red Bull bidding to buy Leeds United, Cellino claims The soft drinks giant Red Bull has made a bid to buy Leeds United, the club’s disqualified owner Massimo Cellino claimed last night. Cellino said Eleonora Sport, the majority shareholder at Elland Road, was considering a formal offer from Red Bull amid reports that the firm is ready to pay around £60m for control of Leeds. Red Bull, which already owns three clubs in Germany, Austria and the USA, has been heavily linked with a takeover of United for the past six months and is understood to have studied the club closely before Christmas. Rumours of a buy-out at Elland Road are being fuelled by the doubts over Cellino’s ownership of Leeds. The Italian is currently banned from running the club due to a conviction for tax evasion imposed on him in Cagliari last year. Cellino, 58, is two months into a Football League disqualification and will not be allowed to retake control of United until his ban ends on May 4. He is currently in Miami but plans to return to England later this month. Asked by the YEP about reports of an impending Red Bull buy-out, Cellino initially said that they were “not true, it’s just another story.” But in a later conversation, Cellino said: “There is an offer. I didn’t know about it but I spoke just now with Giampaolo Caboni, one of the directors of Eleonora Sport. “He said Red Bell has made an offer for the club. The shareholder will have to think about it. I don’t know what they will do.” The YEP has been unable to corroborate Cellino’s claim. Red Bull and United chairman Andrew Umbers have been asked to comment. A report in the Daily Mirror last night said sources close to Red Bull were hopeful of securing ownership of Leeds in the next three weeks. The company has a history of football club ownership and runs RB Leipzig in Germany, Red Bull Salzburg in Austria and New York Red Bulls in America’s MLS. Red Bull’s style of ownership has been the source of controversy, however. It’s buy-out of Salzburg in 2005 led to a change of the club’s name and strip and led to the creation of a new team by angry supporters, SV Austria Salzburg. Back in November, the company denied that it was planning to by Leeds, saying: “Red Bull has no plans to take over Leeds Utd nor take a stake in the club.” Shares at Leeds are split between Eleonora Sport and Gulf Finance House, the Bahraini bank which owned United before Cellino bought them out in an £11m deal last April. The Italian inherited large amount of debt from GFH and has been plagued by problems throughout his short time at Elland Road. The Football League banned him as owner on December 1 - a decision which was upheld in January after a failed appeal by Cellino - and he faces other court cases in Italy which could incur fresh disqualifications from the governing body. Allegations that Cellino avoided paying VAT on a Range Rover are due to be heard by a court in Cagliari in 10 days’ time. The former Cagliari owner has been absent from Leeds ever since his ban came into force, leaving the club in the hands of Umbers, but the volatility seen at stages of Cellino’s reign resurfaced this week with the unexplained suspension of assistant head coach Steve Thompson and boardroom pressure on head coach Neil Redfearn not to use Mirco Antenucci due a clause in the striker contract. Cellino, who is strictly barred by the Football League from influencing decisions at Leeds, said he “knew nothing” of Thompson’s suspension and claimed he was still intending to renew his involvement with United when his disqualification ends. “I will come back to Leeds,” he said. “From May (4), I’m allowed to come back.”
Just think, we could still get to be leaders in this, and they'd be following in our footsteps Long as the FA doesn't put the idea to the sword of course.
You bastard. I was saving that to drop in as a suggestion they're sponsoring a Paul McCartney come back.
If Red Bull should buy Leeds and apply for the customary name change that accompanies their footballing acquisitions, Red Bull, it should be borne in mind, are a much larger organisation than the Allems and have a powerful PR department plus red hot legal teams working for them. If 27 FA members supported the Hull Tigers name change application, how many more would be swayed by the multinational clout of Red Bull? Thus, if Red Bull Leeds came into being, the Allems would see that as a precedent and ... who knows? Just me thinking out loud ...
The FA name change rules were specifically created to prevent a club from ever having a sponsor in their playing name, they'll have a far more difficult job than the Allam's and I'd hope that both with be equally unsuccessful.
The tide is going that way though. What if Red Bull say they want to call it Leeds sponsored by Red Bull as the name as the FA do with the Cup. I'm sure the legal bods will be able to make a case.
They'll get some minority support from lower league club owners who'd sell their grandmothers to get some extra cash in, same as last time.
Well they already have the New York Red Bulls so that names has gotten awfully common as of late. The best name of all time in sports was the Mighty Ducks of Anaheim named after the movie (they changed it later to the Anaheim Ducks). How about The Godfather of Hull? Might strike some fear in the opponents.
The FA policy on clubs changing their name. The policy sets out a number of "Matters to be considered in relation to the application of FA Rule A 3(1)" There are three prohibitions: the playing name is not to include a sponsorship reference; is not to be "improper, offensive or bring the game into disrepute"; or "be similar or the same as the playing name of any other Club such that it may result in confusion" This rules out Red Bull Leeds, Leeds Red Bull, Leeds sponsored by Red Bull or any other trashy ****ty name with Red Bull. It also cuts out a lot of the **** suggestions for potential sponsors of "Hull Tigers.
That rule did actually confuse me with regards to Allam's name change plan. Would the club have faced sanctions had they changed the name to Hull Tigers, and subsequently sign up a sponsorship deal with Tiger Beer? In that case would Red Bull's situation count as sponsorship, since it's actually ownership? If Red Bull agreed for the season after the take-over to allow "Red Bull Leeds" to be sponsored by another company, would that not count as avoiding the sponsorship rule?
I think Red Bull would have difficulty not offering sponsorship, especially as I believe (may be wrong) FFP restricts owners from subsidising their clubs.
Based on the way we've been marketed despite the ruling, and assuming there's any truth in the rumour, I suspect Red Bull could give Leeds the nickname 'the Red Bull's and use that in everything except the Official blurb. Could they also change the kit? please log in to view this image
A club can be sponsored by anyone they like, it's only the registered playing name that is protected, so they can't have Red Bull in their name, but putting it on their shirts or re-naming the stadium are not a problem.
