Window Cleaner

I note that all yesterdays kerfuffle has knocked a further 2p off of the share price.I fear for Forester actually, he may get hit by a law suit from some ****ed off shareholder or other.

Here is the full bx on Leeds Utd,administration and Ken Bates; It dispel a lot of urban myths about who owed what and to whom. http://www.mightyleeds.co.uk/seasons/200405part2.htm

A hermaphrodite ?

Wrong. When Luton went into admin their ST holders were considered as creditors for the unexpired portion of their ST, they each got all the admin bumf from the administrators with all the whys, wherefores and debts on it;

And we can't sell it to anyone other Bovis for another 3 months (or so)

Well not really. Einstein deals with a concept that he terms energy of mass. It mean that mass is transformed into energy,but not energy that you can extract independently. .

Doubt it, some would say definitely not http://www.zeenews.com/lifestyle/out-of-line/2009-01-08/497133news.html Einstein suffered from "Einstein Syndrome", he was a late talker, probably because he was such a f*cking genius that all the baby talk "intelligent adults" were spouting at him made no f*cking sense.

Doubt it, 1 or 2K at the most.

Fans" boycotting" games doesn't really help anyone. But it makes them feel good and they don't have to own up that they've stopped going because we're crap or that they're skint or just not interested . In the good old days lots of people did that, it was no big deal, you didn't have to go to every game to be considered a good fan.People went to whatever games they wanted, there was no perpetual d*ck measuring contest to see who was a better fan.

he did, but the handful of coppers weren't considered enough.

Then friend Forester is probably in for a wee bit of trouble; Unidentified Source=the same as saying it yourself.

I doubt if he has the money, 2 million (or whatever it is he's always bandying about) won't be anywhere near. Needs to be somewhere near 12/15 million.

The timing of it probably means that some-one has given us until Xth February to pay a debt we can't afford to pay.To protect the company from legal action to obtain reparation of only that debt we ask to go into administration. Everything goes on hold and the debtor who has started proceedings has to wait like everybody else. Otherwise we might not be able to pay our staff becuase the court has ordered us to sell Jacksons Farm (for example) to pay the 15p we owe the printer.

If only we hadn't yet signed Rudi Skacel.

Going into administration doesn't necessarily mean that someone will take us over.Administrators run the PLC and all of it's subsidaries. Normally football clubs get taken out of admin by consortiums of "local businessmen".However if no-one can come up with a plan that suits all creditors then the company just gets wound up and liquidated.

But if administration became necessary after they were recruited?? ie because we can't move players on.

Forester actually goes to away matches you know.

But Lancashire is a liability. He keeps getting red carded and giving away penalties. Just because your very poor is doesn't mean you have to accept rubbish. No doubt we tried to move players on to compensate. Something has gone wrong and we've tipped over the edge. Still nothing official but .....

5000 less on home gates for whatever reason plus three big millstones round our necks that we haven't been able to shift for love nor money. One came back and tipped the scales.

Do not all contracts become null and void IF a player has a chance of moving on?

Saejis is on loan. Molyneux?? probably on next to nothing. Our better players will go,even after the transfer window closes perhaps.Can the administrator cancel their contracts to enable them to move on??

Administration and winding up aren't the same thing though.

Because if we want to carry on we have to have players,now I'm no expert on this but if we go into administration we wouldn't be able to sign anyone, there's only 1 door and it's for going out of.Preemption of the situation perhaps. I suppose the board have tried to shift players for money but there's nothing doing so this is the only way.

Probably explains the woeful performance last Saturday then. The players would know about it for sure.

I was skimming through a resume of Leeds demise and take-over yesterday. Bates put in quite a lot of money really.Krasner had already pumped in quite a lot as well.However when Bates wanted to buy them all out completely there was a problem because Krasner had agreed with "bond holders" that no buyer could obtain a stake greater than 50% within 3 years or something like that. You see Bates,even buying the club out of administration, was bound by earlier covenants. You'd have to read through the entire article yourselves to get the real facts but it was no cake-walk and cost Bates 12 to 15 million.Krasner had already reduced the debts to 40 million (from 103 million) at that time.