Hulk.
Skal Bates gjennom 8 års styre ende med etter 6 mnds forhandling å selge oss til en gruppe som ikke har midler i det hele tatt???
Som Jonesy (en av få som er nesten like respektert som Boozie på TOMA-tråden) skriver det: (JonesyLeeds @ Oct 11 2012, 04:43 PM) only Leeds United could turn what should be a simple sale of a club worth £53million into a debacle thats played out over Twitter/Internet and the Papers almost day in day out.Its a joke.
Det er mye usikkerhet i hvordan stoda er pr nu. GFHC har kjøpseksklusivitet frem til nyttår, men ifølge det Boozie har postet siden begynnelsen av forrige helg så har de ikke penger lenger. Iallefall tre av gruppene med mye penger er borte. Noen pga Bates, noen pga uprofesjonalitet fra GFHCs side (alt dette ifølge Boozie, hvem som er hvem går han ikke inn på).
Hva med pengene som var (er?) i Escrow (har ikke helt et norsk ord på det), £52mill (eller hva den avtalte summen er) skal ligge der. De gruppene som trakk seg ut, har de mistet disse eller har GFHC måttet erstatte de med nye midler (dette tror Boozie).
For meg er dette vesentlig. HVIS GFHC har kjøpssummen klar allerede, samt et investeringsbudsjett klart (trenger ikke være på stort over £5 for januarvinduet) er det ok to me. Selv om de da blir uten mer å investere for har de kanskje allerede hjulpet oss til å styrke stallen tilstrekkelig (?) til å gjøre oss konkurransedyktig mht opprykkskamp i vår. Og må de selge oss allerede utpå vårparten, så ok to me. Det vil være mye lettere (antar jeg...) å kjøpe klubben av dem eller av Bates ved neste korsvei.
...men er Boozie å stole på (lenger?) eller er han farget av at hans kontakter på kjøpersiden er borte/tilhørte en av gruppene som nå er ute av bildet - en gruppe han gjerne ser kommer tilbake i bildet? Ikke veit jeg, men jeg gjør meg jo tanker...
Her er noen av kveldens spørsmål/svar:QUOTE (viaduct sports @ Oct 11 2012, 03:51 PM)
Boozie, if GFHC complete the purchase of Leeds within the next couple of weeks, they clearly have the funding in place or the deal would not go through - would you then revise your opinion and question some of those voicing the concerns whom you mentioned, or would you still be as worried and assume they had scraped the money together but were still brassic?
If they did it would be a miracle from what I am hearing from some people involved. I would wonder where the hell the money come from and what the terms attached to the cash were. If they managed to produce a miracle I am not convinced they would be able to sustain us, it would have to be a quick flip. QUOTE (boozie @ Oct 11 2012, 03:35 PM)
Well some of the things are the "investors" they had putting into their investment fund have walked. The fact they are emailing (generic emails) individuals begging for money, worries the hell out of me. The fact that more and more contacts in the middle east are voicing concerns, I suspect even more will come out in due course. The fact people involved in the deal do not (privately) believe GFH are capable of doing the deal.
It was thought the investors were still all on board and they had the capital to complete the deal but their scrounging around shows they do not.
As I said, welcome them with open arms if you like but I won't be.
Akkurat dette overrasker det meg at Boozie tror på. Kopi av denne eposten stod først i kommentarfeltet etter en artikkel i YEP og for mitt utrente øye ser den veldig fake ut!!!!! Enten er GFHC skikkelige amatører eller så er denne snekret sammen på gutterommet et sted i Yorkshire (ja jeg tror mest på det siste)This one?
Dear Mr. XXX,
Please find Gulf Finance House new investment opportunity to acquire Leeds united football club you will be having a direct shares in the club as board member. Minimum investment ticket GBP 1M.
If you are interested in the investment please contact me for more information & details.
Best Regards,
xxxxxx xxx xxxxxx
Investment Relationship Management
Gulf Finance House B.S.C.
Bahrain Financial Harbour | Floor 36, East Tower | PO Box 10006 | Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain
Main Tel: +973 17 538538 | web: www.gfh.com
QUOTE (CapricornOne @ Oct 11 2012, 04:10 PM)
Again Boozie, what are the chances of GFH failing at this stage and someone else stepping in?
high and high Det er nettopp dette, skal vi håpe at GFHC ryker og at en annen gruppe slipper til i orhandlingene (allerede før nyttår), sånn sett lurte jeg på om LUFC ville prøve seg på en 'breach of confidenciality' på LUST-saken i går, men det ser jo ikke slik ut...
Og så er det det, det er ikke bare Boozie som sitter på info, Jonesy sier ikke mer, men nevner iallefall:QUOTE
(JonesyLeeds @ Oct 11 2012, 04:43 PM) My information differs from Boozies , I'm done with TOMA now , only Leeds United could turn what should be a simple sale of a club worth £53million into a debacle thats played out over Twitter/Internet and the Papers almost day in day out.
Its a joke.
Ellers, kanskje vi kan si det som Rana White 
TOMA, TOMA,
even longer than an injury to f**kin' Davide Somma.
I'm gonna, go insane,
the thread only gives me pain.
This shit makes me sick,
I'm jerkin off, thinkin' about questions,
is boozie a guy or a chick?
Hands getting numb,
reading replies, oh my are people dumb.
Please Kenneth hear my request,
f**k off to Monaco and give me a rich dude with a treasure chest.
Til slutt, jeg syns vel egentlig at denne Reverend-karen er ganske flink å skissere:Reverend Ike
The basic question at this point is whether a less-than-perfect GFHC is an acceptable replacement for Bates, or the search should continue for somebody better/richer/who doesn't tweet about Pamela Anderson.
The original consortium walked away because of Bates' games and his refusal to agree to an indemnity clause. Boozie has confirmed that Bates was the primary reason they left. Boozie also stated that the consortium doesn't like GFHC much, but there would be a reasonable chance they would consider buying the club from GFHC at a later date.
So, if the current GFHC deal collapses, the original consortium are not going to be one of the entities ready to "swoop" in.
Any other potential bidders who might be "watching and waiting" will need to start from the beginning in January with their due diligence process. That, plus the typical Bates' negotiation process, means that a takeover would probably not happen until March at the earliest. In addition, at this point, we have no idea if the other bidders might be better or worse than GFHC.
In the meantime, we will be lucky if we get maybe 1 or 2 loan players, and we will miss the January transfer window entirely. Bates will be forced to sell more players to satisfy cashflow. An injury or two, or just the law of averages kicking in, and the good fortune we've had so far will reverse and we will slide down the table. Colin will seriously start considering if he wants to continue piloting a boat when the owner won't allow him to patch any holes.
So that's it - do you prefer to get rid of Bates now, and accept GFHC who, warts and all, need us to succeed and move toward promotion and will push us in that direction, or do you prefer to wait an undetermined amount of time until a prettier girl comes along, whilst Bates continues to line his pockets and further cripple the club?
Endless discussion about the joint statement and Gary's response are, in the big picture, pointless. I can understand Boozie's and others' apprehension about GFHC, but any alternatives mean a longer wait and aren't certain to be any better. As I said, at least GFHC's goal is the same as ours. And they are aware that if they play any games (such as leveraging), they will get the same response Bates has now received with boycotts and protests, which they cannot afford.
That's the choice - the current reality with a chance to get rid of Bates now, or the theoretical options which mean extending the 8 years of crap to possibly 9 years or more. It's like if you've been unemployed for a long time - do you take a less-than-perfect job which finally comes along and can improve your life immediately, or do you continue to hold out for your dream job no matter how long that might take?
