The breaking News thread...

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

This has been going on for 3-4 months now (possibly even longer) with reportedly 3 or 4 consortiums or bidders being talked about, therefore surely by now ED will have been told everything about all of the interested parties, and will have a good idea of who he would prefer to sell to.

Is the club really that amateur that ED would not have already told Birch of his preference or which of the bidders he would be prepared to sell to should they deposit the required funds....

What if the preferred bidders can't pony up?

What if the reason the others aren't preferred bidders is that Eddie thinks they can't pony up?

What if Eddie doesn't want to sell to those who have the best interest of the club at heart?

A doomsday scenario, some would say one you've cooked up in the dark watches of the night.

To answer your question though, there's nothing we can do about that. Eddie owns the club, and is selling it. I don't quite understand what the alternative is. Do people want the club placed in some sort of neutral holding chamber, as if this situation isn't complicated enough?

[BWFC_Insane]

What if there's more than one consortium able to pay?

What if the first consortium to pony up is yon unsavoury asset-stripping jailbird?

If the next owners are crap, there'll be many blaming Eddie for selling to them.

What if Eddie doesn't want to sell to those who have the best interest of the club at heart?

How will we know that, would you think?

There're lots of unknowns. Just being able to stump up £x m is only one such. I'm pretty glad the question got asked though.

We won't. But then a man who has left the club in this position might, just might not be the best judge.....

[Worthy4England]

A doomsday scenario, some would say one you've cooked up in the dark watches of the night.

Look we clearly have to demonise whoever is leaving the Club. In this case ED. So let's get on with it...

[Lost Leopard Spot]

If I've read that Iles article correctly, then there are these four options:
1. ED reinvests
2. Deano's group buy us
3. Some Koreans buy us
4. The Supporter's Trust buys us.

For me option 1 is unlikely to the point of not considering it.
Option 2 on the face of it seems OK but I'm concerned that the money behind the consortium is leveraged cash with a strictly limited window of opportunity not to land us back in a similar mess to which we've grown accustomed.
I have no idea about option 3, but due to my reservations with the other options, why not!
Option 4 would, in my opinion, be a disaster.

Obviously the decision is not mine to be made, but I'd rank them in this order of preference:
3. Koreans
2. Deano
1. ED
4. BWFCST

[Peter Thompson]

Obviously the decision is not mine to be made, but I'd rank them in this order of preference:
3. Koreans
2. Deano
1. ED
4. BWFCST[/quote]

Agree with this....

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Interesting isn't it. My gut reaction is the same. I'm not sure how much of that is lottery fever - "these folks might be RIIIIICCCCHHHH!!!" - and how much is the general feeling that maybe Deano's consortium might be stretching themselves to afford us.

"Grass is always greener" vs "devil you know". Pretty much all we know about the Koreans is that they backed off when we went shit - hardly a ringing endorsement.

It's certainly a fascinating time. I don't know who's the best bidder, but I'm very glad that we seem to have options and that we seem to be carefully examining them all.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Interesting isn't it. My gut reaction is the same. I'm not sure how much of that is lottery fever - "these folks might be RIIIIICCCCHHHH!!!" - and how much is the general feeling that maybe Deano's consortium might be stretching themselves to afford us.

"Grass is always greener" vs "devil you know". Pretty much all we know about the Koreans is that they backed off when we went shit - hardly a ringing endorsement.

It's certainly a fascinating time. I don't know who's the best bidder, but I'm very glad that we seem to have options and that we seem to be carefully examining them all.

I disagree DSB. I think it's a really good endorsement. It shows that they aren't interested in us being shit which kind of implies that if they buy us they'd like it even less if we were shit, which further implies they'd do something about us that would make it so we aren't shit. I hope.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Pretty much all we know about the Koreans is that they backed off when we went shit - hardly a ringing endorsement.

I disagree DSB. I think it's a really good endorsement. It shows that they aren't interested in us being shit which kind of implies that if they buy us they'd like it even less if we were shit, which further implies they'd do something about us that would make it so we aren't shit. I hope.

Well, that's certainly another way of looking at it. I was transferring their attitude toward something they didn't own, which is perhaps unfair of me. We can't know if they would be willing or able to do something to stop us being shit - but interestingly, that probably translates into living beyond our means, which is precisely what got us in this mess...

(Or maybe they'd sack an underperforming manager)

[thebish]

According to Iles it is now up to Eddie Davies whether to accept any of the proposas on the table. This means parties have put cash down.

Not really sure if I trust Eddie Davies to make this decision not on what basis he can make it.

Not sure you can deduce sentence 2, from the information in sentence 1? What's in a best and final offer is up to the party submitting it...They may or may not have adapted their previous standpoint on "cash down" or not (or in part)...

True. I think there was a report in a Sunday paper that some cash had been put down.

I entirely agree it is the owners decision but if someone has met the asking price I'm not sure what say Eddie should be having. I'm not sure that future plans for buyers are his business and given where we are should he be the judge of who will look after the club best?

he owns it - he's selling it - his choice. you don't trust him, birch, gartside/anyone at the club - fair enough - but your mistrust is just myopic speculation. my guess is that who-the-feck-ever he sells it to will be the wrong choice in your eyes and you'll piss and moan about it for the next 20yrs...

(I may be wrong, though!)

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Pretty much all we know about the Koreans is that they backed off when we went shit - hardly a ringing endorsement.

I disagree DSB. I think it's a really good endorsement. It shows that they aren't interested in us being shit which kind of implies that if they buy us they'd like it even less if we were shit, which further implies they'd do something about us that would make it so we aren't shit. I hope.

Well, that's certainly another way of looking at it. I was transferring their attitude toward something they didn't own, which is perhaps unfair of me. We can't know if they would be willing or able to do something to stop us being shit - but interestingly, that probably translates into living beyond our means, which is precisely what got us in this mess...

(Or maybe they'd sack an underperforming manager)

Yes, whoever buys us (if somebody does, but let's not go there), we have no way of knowing what plans, either short term or long term they may have. Which makes it interesting that no matter what ED does now, once he's signed on the dotted line I doubt there will be any way of influencing those plans. It also makes a bit of a nonsense about having ten million up front in running costs, which assumes the new owners will be operating in exactly the same way as ED has, i.e. having the same model with the same amount of debt building up each month with the same staffing levels and the same academy and the same infrastucture and assets. Everybody assumes the new owners'll appoint their own manager (if that is only eventually) and turnover of footballers is 'normal'. But I can't see any legal way that ED can assure that the club is run 'his way' once he sells, and I think a lot of the 300 jobs will go (including perhaps the only full time pastor in English football, and other lifestyle jobs at the club)

[StaffsTrotter]

Pretty much all we know about the Koreans is that they backed off when we went shit - hardly a ringing endorsement.

I disagree DSB. I think it's a really good endorsement. It shows that they aren't interested in us being shit which kind of implies that if they buy us they'd like it even less if we were shit, which further implies they'd do something about us that would make it so we aren't shit. I hope.

Well, that's certainly another way of looking at it. I was transferring their attitude toward something they didn't own, which is perhaps unfair of me. We can't know if they would be willing or able to do something to stop us being shit - but interestingly, that probably translates into living beyond our means, which is precisely what got us in this mess...

(Or maybe they'd sack an underperforming manager)

Yes, whoever buys us (if somebody does, but let's not go there), we have no way of knowing what plans, either short term or long term they may have. Which makes it interesting that no matter what ED does now, once he's signed on the dotted line I doubt there will be any way of influencing those plans. It also makes a bit of a nonsense about having ten million up front in running costs, which assumes the new owners will be operating in exactly the same way as ED has, i.e. having the same model with the same amount of debt building up each month with the same staffing levels and the same academy and the same infrastucture and assets. Everybody assumes the new owners'll appoint their own manager (if that is only eventually) and turnover of footballers is 'normal'. But I can't see any legal way that ED can assure that the club is run 'his way' once he sells, and I think a lot of the 300 jobs will go (including perhaps the only full time pastor in English football, and other lifestyle jobs at the club)

whatever the new model it will take time, so those costs are fixed in the short term.

I'm not convinced he's protecting his model as much as his legacy. He can certainly try to put covenants on the use/ future sale of the physical assets. Why would he virtually give those away to then see the new owner sell them in a couple of months - he might as well sell them now for himself- which is I assume is part of the jiggerpokey thats been going on.

as regards the staff - well we know the constraints and costs related to the players and the support staff will obviously have the 'protection' of employment law and are probably the most vulnerable in all of this

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

The £10m "deposit" might be somewhat finger-in-the-air / line-in-the-sand /balls-on-the-table but we have 20+ first-team squad members, on contracts which may be beyond our monthly means.

In summer, the following 15 contracts expire. By my reckoning we have 16 players under longer contracts, so with half the squad cleared (inc Ameobi) it's as clean a slate as the new owners might expect.

Paul Rachubka
Ross Fitzsimons
Hayden White
David Wheater
Prince-Desir Gouano
Quade Taylor
Jose Manuel Casado
Neil Danns
Jordan Lussey
Liam Feeney
Wellington Silva
Rob Hall
Emile Heskey
Stephen Dobbie
Tom Eaves

[General Mannerheim]

whats this about 7000 leeds fans? are they gonna put them all in one of the big stands?

[Hoboh]

The £10m "deposit" might be somewhat finger-in-the-air / line-in-the-sand /balls-on-the-table but we have 20+ first-team squad members, on contracts which may be beyond our monthly means.

In summer, the following 15 contracts expire. By my reckoning we have 16 players under longer contracts, so with half the squad cleared (inc Ameobi) it's as clean a slate as the new owners might expect.

Paul Rachubka
Ross Fitzsimons
Hayden White
David Wheater
Prince-Desir Gouano
Quade Taylor
Jose Manuel Casado
Neil Danns
Jordan Lussey
Liam Feeney
Wellington Silva
Rob Hall
Emile Heskey
Stephen Dobbie
Tom Eaves

Blackpool mk2 beckons, mind Half of the squad won't be missed had they done their job we'd look a lot more attractive to a new owner!

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

whats this about 7000 leeds fans? are they gonna put them all in one of the big stands?

Think I read somewhere (can't remember where) that it will be the biggest away allocation ever at the Macbok.

Any clues on this, from the official site?

Tickets for Wanderers' upcoming Emirates FA Cup fourth round tie against Leeds United at Macron Stadium are now on open sale.

Taking place on Saturday 30 January 2016 with a 3pm kick off, the match will be an all-ticket fixture with no cash turnstiles open on the day.

Prices for the match will be as follows:

Adults - £20
Over-65s - £5
Under-23s - £5
Under-18s - £5

Supporters are advised that tickets are only available to supporters with a previous booking history, excluding past fixtures against Leeds United.

Fans wishing to purchase tickets on the day of the game are also advised to arrive early to avoid queues and to guarantee getting inside Macron Stadium before kick off.

Please note that home tickets will only be on sale for seats in the North Stand Lower, East Stand Upper, East Stand Lower and Block A in the West Stand Lower.

[jmjhb]

Eaves is 24, time to let him go.

Providing there was money for replacements, wouldn't be sad to see them all leave.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I don't mind Feeney and Danns, if only for their effort, but they're now the wrong side of 30

For the record, Feeney turned 29 this week. But I know what you mean.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

]this, from the official site

Supporters are advised that tickets are only available to supporters with a previous booking history, excluding past fixtures against Leeds United.

Huh?. I don't get this. Does that mean that if if you have a previous booking history including buying a ticket for a fixture against Leeds United that you can't get a ticket for Saturday????

[thebish]

]this, from the official site

Supporters are advised that tickets are only available to supporters with a previous booking history, excluding past fixtures against Leeds United.

Huh?. I don't get this. Does that mean that if if you have a previous booking history including buying a ticket for a fixture against Leeds United that you can't get a ticket for Saturday????

it looks like they are trying to weed out those who have ONLY bought leeds tickets... might be badly worded!

[Lost Leopard Spot]

]this, from the official site

Supporters are advised that tickets are only available to supporters with a previous booking history, excluding past fixtures against Leeds United.

Huh?. I don't get this. Does that mean that if if you have a previous booking history including buying a ticket for a fixture against Leeds United that you can't get a ticket for Saturday????

it looks like they are trying to weed out those who have ONLY bought leeds tickets... might be badly worded!

Ahhh, that makes sense.