When it comes to sensationalism few do it better than Ken Bates. In his programme notes today, he speaks of a £2m overspend on the £9.5m player budget set at the start of this season. In doing so, the Leeds United chairman thought he’d put an end to chants of “where’s all our money gone?” by throwing a huge number out there to distract Leeds United fans.

Interestingly though, Ken Bates fails to offer any point of comparison. As impressive as £11.5m sounds, it’s nothing more than a number without the appropriate context  – in this case, the context should be how that compares to the rest of the Championship.

Before we get into all that, here’s the quote in full from Ken Bates’ programme notes;

January is a month of the transfer window; excitement, rumours, misinformation, double-dealing and shadow boxing. All the fun of the fair. Meanwhile, the club’s management have to cope with all this while still running the club.

In Leeds’ case, we have bought Danny Pugh, obtained the loan of Andros Townsend, extended Maik Taylor’s contract and are in negotiations with a few players that are already at the club.

“Where’s the money gone?” is the latest chant from the vociferous few. Well, I’ll tell them! Simon Grayson’s player budget was £9.5m for the year. As I write, we have so far committed £11.722m, over budget by nearly 23 per cent.

For anyone that doesn’t understand what he means by “player budget”, this is the collective total of all transfer money spent (and allegedly received) alongside the players wages for the year.

Unlike most clubs, Leeds United’s transfer kitty is included in the wage budget.

With £9.5m to spend, Simon Grayson can theoretically afford to pay 25 players (an average Championship squad) £7,300 each, which sounds reasonable enough for a Championship player.

The problem is, that unless Simon Grayson gets all his players for free, he can’t actually afford to offer them that amount because every time he spends money it comes off the total budget. Spend £2-3m buying the quality additions Leeds United fans are demanding and you’re left with very little to pay them.

What’s interesting is how this relates to our turnover. Plans are afoot to cap wage spending to 70% of turnover. Since our last published accounts were 2009-10 the £27m turnover I’m going to use is based on League One football. It’s safe to say our turnover has increased significantly since then.

Nevertheless, even when we use the League One figure against Ken Bates early season budget this only accounts for 35.2% of our turnover. Even with the “overspend”, we’re still a long way short at 43.4%.

I strongly suspect turnover for last season was closer to the £35m mark which would reduce that percentage even further. You also have to take into consideration that The FA’s guidelines do not take transfer fees into account, which is what Ken Bates has done here. That means other clubs could spend 70% of their turnover on wages and still pay for new players with other funds.

How This Compares To Other Clubs 

As the last published accounts are 2009/10, I’m going to use a table published a while back by The Swiss Ramble – A renowned football blogger and financial expert who compiled the following using public accounts;

As you can see, Leeds United’s reported spending on wages is much higher than what Ken Bates is now telling us. This isn’t because he’s “cooked the books” or is lying to us now, it’s simply because Leeds United’s published figures are incredibly vague. The £14m above includes everybody – Ken Bates, Shaun Harvey, Simon Grayson, the coaching staff, the tea ladies etc…

Knowing what we know now, and assuming our budget has risen somewhat since League One, I’d suggest Millwall (also League One figures) is closer to the actual spending on the first team that year – perhaps a million or so more in Leeds’ case.

Unlike Leeds, most other clubs separate their figures out to offer further transparency. Leeds are not the exception to the rule, but their accounts are amongst the vaguest I’ve ever encountered.

Setting aside that figure entirely and using the figure Ken Bates gave us today, in 2009/10 only six clubs would have spent less than Leeds United on wages.

In itself, that is a shocking statistic, but when you consider that other clubs have separate wage and transfer budgets, it gets even worse.

All of a sudden, the £11.5m Ken mentions starts to sound less impressive. Simon Grayson has basically been left to lead a promotion charge with the budget for a relegation battle.

So we’ll ask you again Ken – “Where’s all our money gone?” 

  • Pingback: Comedy Football And Dissident Uprising « The Scratching Shed – Leeds United Rumours, News and Blog()

  • Dje

    I love how supporting Leeds United and its maladies has turned us all into part-time, semi-professional accountants!*

    [*apologies to anyone who is actually a full-time professional accountant]

    • TSS

      @Dje I was just talking to my brother-in-law on phone and said the same thing. It’s ridiculous.

      • Dje

        @TSS Least it provides an original answer to the girlfriend when she says, ‘it’s only a game’.

        ‘Nope, dear, it’s educational too’.

        Leeds United Season Ticket holders should receive a complementary HND in Accountancy from Leeds Met at the end of each season.

        • TSS

          @Dje I do enough number crunching at work and find it tedious, otherwise I’d take a degree in accountancy and buy myself a Porsche GT3.

        • Dje

          @TSS I bet Shaun Harvey doesn’t even have one of them. Not that he deserves one, mind.

        • TSS

          @Dje He’s probably got a Range Rover Sport. Trying to fit in with the lads.

  • TSS

    I don’t disagree with the £6-15k range for wages, but I’d say that’s closer to 50-60% of our turnover which SHOULD leave some room for transfers (which we clearly haven’t got).

  • Tare10

    I fully understand these articles regarding KBs but where is the support for the playing team?. Unless there is somebody out there to have the urge to buy LU and preferably from local financing circles. For the possible buyer there is couple of things the she/he thinks of: 1. Number of followers of LU in domestic/international scheme 2. Club’s stature in English football 3.Future prospects if n:o 1 and 2 are fulfilled.


    • Dje

      @Tare10 I really hope the Leeds players, after a miraculous 3-1 win today, have better things to do on their post-match night than come looking for praise on the internet – only to be disappointed with yet another article offering in-depth business analysis of the Great Ken Bates con.

    • TSS

      @Tare10 I don’t think we’ve ever written anything negative about the players? The general complaint is that I’m too complimentary of them. Same is true of SG. Hard to find much to praise today though I’m afraid, that was poor. But, instead of slagging them all off (like I’m sure other sites are) we just went on to a different issue.

      • Tare10


        This team that is playing is all we have, I have now clue on your Football history but as a astute reader of Rothmans Football Yearbook the messages from past seasons will be just you to know numbers and names related in it. Tare

      • Gryff

        @TSS@Tare10 You could always have a player’s entrance and a fan’s entrance on a front splash? On one, everything’s all rosey, on the other everything’s slowly going to hell.

  • asbo

    as we all know that ken bates is a con man ……tell me have you stayed in hotel master bates built …in his word to bring in revenue ,,,,,,which will help him to buy more incontinance pads …….

  • mattbb1

    well put. Kens sensationalism may well be aimed to silence the masses, but dig not even slightly deeper, and there lies the truth. £9.5m would no doubt be his budget at start of FY, since then hes had £1.5M for schmeicel, £1.8M for Gradel, £2M for howon, and their wages off the bill so lets add conservatively £5.5m to that, and he is still underspending what ia available.

    • TSS

      @mattbb1 Think Kasper was less than that. Considerably less in fact. As for Howson, there are now reports that the initial fee is £750k which makes much more sense to me. Couldn’t understand why Norwich would pay £2m for an injured CM with 5 months on his contract.

      • mattbb1

        i cant imagine a world though in which ken bates would tolerate an overspend… well not on football players. As i didnt go today i couldnt gauge what the atmosphere was like round the ground – are the fans finally ready to protest en masse? is there any truth in the snoddy rumours – ie an imminent transfer request?

    • Gryff

      @mattbb1 The thing I don’t get is that the average fan nowadays probably spends ages on Football Manager. Which in many ways is a bad thing, but also it gives them a general head for vaguely the going rate.

      Now when I got Leeds promoted (yes! I bought FM for this first time in 5 years this year!) o FM12 I did it with a significantly higher budget than Grayson had, and it was an almighty flog to get the players necessary.

      FM is wildly innacurate, but many fans will look at Bates’ figure and go “that’s not much” because they’ve played it. It’s not the 1950s anymore where we’re all flatcap farmers/factory workers…

      • TSS

        @Gryff@mattbb1 You know were I stand on FM backed statistics. Yellow card.

        • Gryff

          @TSS@mattbb1 No but that’s my point TSS. It immediately makes the suggestible fans Bates is going for (the ones still in the Matrix) suspicious of him, not awe-inspired.

          FM isn’t a good thing. But it’s effect on the fans in relation to Bates’ comment is what’s interesting.

  • Gryff

    It’s shocking budgeting. In 08-09 it was 52% of turnover, 09-10 50% and by his own admission, it is almost certainly way below 50% now.

    There’s a difference between overspending, sensible spending, and underspending. It’s about time Bates read Dante again – underspenders wind up in Hell too!

    • TSS

      @Gryff 2009-10 was probably closer to 25%. I think Millwall’s figure is more accurate there, our accounts are incredibly vague compared to the rest and we have to assume the wage budget has increased since then. I’m guessing it was around £7m in L1

  • DrD

    With gates of 25,000 Leeds can afford an average salary of £9000-10,000 per player. We have dropped to 22,000 coming in which means we need to sell to raise ~£3m. If Norwich and Swansea can get promoted and do ok, we should be able to with the current budget. We can’t get rid of bates as he owns the club. Find a buyer who has £50m to burn on buying the club and another £50m to improve it. It is not going to happen. We just need to play against 10 every week and lady luck we may make the plausible offs.

  • GilFisher

    It is what it is. Leave it alone. Support the lads. Take it up again in the summer.

    • TSS

      @GilFisher And then in the summer we’ll be waiting to see what signings we get, then we’ll wait to see how things progress and before you know it, it’s January again and another year of Ken Bates hell has passed with the rest of our key players shipped out. Doesn’t matter when the campaign starts, there is never a good time. But it’s necessary.

      • GilFisher

        @TSS It doesn`t accomplish anything. The fans can`t get rid of the owner.

        • TSS

          @GilFisher Of course they can. They can stop funding him. In the meantime, you need to win the PR battle or Bates will continue to portray himself as a master of finance, pinning all blame to any helpless individual he can, which in this case is SG – we should always back the manager first and foremost.

        • GilFisher

          @TSS You stop funding the owner, the teams ceases to exist.

        • GilFisher

          @TSS Bates is a dillusional idiot. PR battles have no effect on his intentions. He`s also very stubborn, he`s more likely to sell more players than less if the supporters are backing him into a corner.

        • TSS

          @GilFisher No it doesn’t. At worst it ends up in admin, but Ken would sell long before that happened again. Just like he did at Chelsea when they were on the brink.

        • GilFisher

          @TSS It doesn`t end up in admin unless the creditors take it there. Guess what – Bates is the creditor.

        • TSS

          @GilFisher And he has nothing to gain by it going under. See my point? He’d sell. Exactly like he did at Chelsea.

        • GilFisher

          @TSS We won`t get to the point of going under until we`re in the conference. There are no external debts.

        • Gryff

          @GilFisher@TSS Gil, how do you think Chelsea got rid of Bates? They genuinely saw him the same way as we did.

        • GilFisher

          @Gryff @TSS Roman`s billions got rid of Bates. Which is how this ends for us. We need to continue to support the team, get back to the Premier League and have Bates sell the club. Which is what he wants too.

        • TSS

          @GilFisher He’s in it for the cash. He isn’t going to let his business be devalued by relegation. He’d sell first, I guarantee it.

          Regardless, I aren’t paying him another penny. It’s gone on too long and he’s taken it too far.

        • GilFisher

          @TSS The cash is selling a Premier League club. Its north of 100m quid for this club in the Premier League. THat`s Bates goal, but he`s not going to invest more than he has to on the way.

        • Gryff

          @GilFisher@TSS Yes but the fans were making it awkward for Bates and threw a hissy fit over not owning their stadium (sound familiar) eventually losing masses of revenue for him, boycotting his Chelsea village making it unprofitable and forcing him to get Stamford Bridge to the club which gave him (allegedly, for the lawyers) a one-off sum but no reason to stay at the club.

          That’s when he sold to Abramovich. By Bate’s own admission he has multiple approaches per month from investors/takeovers that he calls “timewasters”. Yeah, just like the fans are morons.

        • GilFisher

          @Gryff @TSS They`re timewasters because they think they can pay pay Championship prices for Leeds. He wants to sell it to someone who values it as one of the top 5-10 clubs in England. He needs to get to the Premier League to do that

        • TSS

          @GilFisher A club that owns no assets is not worth £100m.

          But this is irrelevant. We’ve tried it Bates’ way for seven years and enough is enough. Nothing will change my mind on that, I aren’t funding him any further. If that forces financial trouble he’ll sell. He’ll have no choice. The only alternative is to invest his own cash or go into admin – where he stands nothing to gain.

          That’s the only way he’ll leave.

          Oh and this idea he’ll sell in the EPL is nonsense. He doesn’t want to sell at all, he never wanted to sell Chelsea – he was forced through financial difficulties.

        • Gryff

          @TSS@GilFisher Apart from anything else if we get under his skin and annoy him (and he does get annoyed, even though he plays to it in public) he might get stressed, have a heart-attack and retire to Barbados? lol

        • GilFisher

          @TSS Well he owns the stadium. He has one of the largest supporters bases in the country with some of the highest ticket prices. It isn`t saddled with debt and long term contracts.

          My view since day one has been that he saw an opportunity so take Leeds, restructure them, get them back to the Premier League and sell them for a mint. I`ve seen nothing in 7 years that is inconsistent with that.

        • GilFisher

          @Gryff @TSS There`s always the heart-attack angle. Surely he can`t live much longer.

        • GilFisher

          Fact remains. We have to get behind these lads and not let Bates distract us. At least for a few months. Let`s go get this fucker in spite of Kenny.

        • TSS

          @GilFisher Of course something is inconsistent with that – past precedent. He never wanted to sell Chelsea, he loves being involved with football at the highest levels. He won’t sell up – ever. Unless forced by financial issues.

        • Gryff

          @TSS@GilFisher Megalomania is you lots’ term I believe, TSS?

          I agree about getting behind the team, though. But when the players complain and look uninterested on the pitch we’re blaming Grayson. When Grayson is doing the right things we’re blaming the players.

          If we don’t highlight Bates as the virus in this club then we turn on our own. It’s best to run the anti-Bates line and also get behind the lads, otherwise Grayson will be sacked, Snoddy will leave anyway, and we’ll be left blaming whoever the next generation of poor saps are.

          We do really need to get behind the lads on matchdays though. Really get the chants going. Only by going up do we make LUFC an attractive target to buyers, given ER/TA isn’t owned by us and we’ve expectations and (so Bates would have buyers believe) not the income to support it.

        • GilFisher

          You maybe right, but that was before he bought Leeds. I still believe that his intention is to make a mint on a turnaround project. Time will tell. I won`t root against the club to get rid of its owner.

        • TSS

          @Gryff@GilFisher “My lot” find your use of that term acceptable and your response on the whole, excellently put.

        • GilFisher

          @Gryff @TSS We can`t have protest be the focus of matchdays.

        • TSS

          @GilFisher A turnaround project requires quick investment and quick sale. Plenty of clubs have seen that. Leeds are profitable, it’s more like buying property to rent – constant income stream.

        • GilFisher

          @TSS I don`t doubt that he enjoys the income provided by the investment. I think he`d enjoy the 9 figure sale price too. Nothing to say a tournaround has to be a couple of years. There`s no reason why it has to be, what with the nice income it provides in the meantime.

        • ChicagoWhite

          @GilFisher@TSS even if LUFC ceased trading the assets could be purchased e.g. Name, players registrations by an alternative owner. If Bates even tried to do this I suspect the FA/FL would look positively on keeping Leeds United alive because of the fan base & the fact were one of the biggest & most successful clubs in England. The FL actually helped us previously when Bates played hard & fast with the rules they made a special circumstance for us which of course Bates/Harvey/Taylor screwed up even though we had a 15 additional points deduction levied they offered us immediate acceptance or penalty or immediate appeal which they said would looked upon favorably, of course we accepted the penalty & then tried to come back & get it revoked. Anyway as others have said he would sell & for much less than the 100M he wants for LUFC currently & thats sans ER & TA.

        • NorthEastLoiner

          @GilFisher@TSS If Bates sees a threat to his cash cow then he may be more likely to sell. So not spending money will pressurise him and with season ticket holders we can still support the team. We need to target Bates alone and not Grayson (though that could be difficult unless he rediscovers tactical nous) or the players.

        • Chareose


          incorrect, there are loads of creditors, we will be paying tax, wages, transfer fees, ambulances, electric bills, construction bills etc etc, As soon as ken realises hes not receiving any profit from leeds he will do a runner

  • TSS

    £12m is still only 35% of what I reckon our turnover currently is (circa £35m). We should be looking at, at lest 50% on the squad since 70% of turnover is generated by ticket sales from fans who care about nothing else.

  • Gryff

    I’m going with “like” simply because I thought you were a nutjob (with a valid point) until your last sentence!

    Howson apparently wanted 25k p/w but definitely I think Johnson & Kilkenny would have stayed.

  • TSS

    But if his numbers are to be distrusted (which is a solid argument), he’s trying to make the point that he’s spent loads. He will have exaggerated them if anything? If that’s the case, then things are even worse (and it’s pretty fucking bad already!)

    • Gryff

      @TSS Or else he purposefuly quoted lower knowing we’d take the bait and then releases the figures next month (I believe) which are higher.

      Either way, I’m sure he’s hardly spending massively. And it would point to wages being stupidly high for non-playing staff whch would make him look even more stupid?

      • TSS

        @Gryff He’s quoted it now. It was his own stupid fault. The accounts will be vague, so if it says £20m wages, we can only conclude that £8.5m of that goes to non-playing staff

    • CasWhite

      If he has exaggerated them, then you’ll be able to write about it in 12-14 mths when the accounts are released. If he hasn’t a wonder if we will get an article or if it’s shown other clubs have slashed there wages.

  • Shawn63

    Bates is a fraud and we have known it for years, but when one of our best plays says he is no negotiating a contract due lack of ambition, that really proves it. The demo’s need to really step up now, I would be there with you, living in the US and having cancer don’t help my cause. Good luck guy’s your goona need it !

    • Gryff

      @Shawn63 Best of luck with the fight, Shawn. Can only echo your comments on Bates.

      • TSS

        @Gryff@Shawn63 Ditto that. Good luck mate.

  • TSS

    All speculative.

    BP’s was invented by the fans.

    Alex Bruce is credited to a Yorkshire Radio employee. How on earth would he know?

    Aidy White and Jonny Howson could be true considering when they signed contracts, but still no evidence.

  • henrymouni

    TSS ” I don’t think we’ve ever written anything negative about the players? The general complaint is that I’m too complimentary of them. Same is true of SG”.

    Perhaps you should!!

    All new players are chosen by Simon and his team.

    KB leaves it to them and their choices have been poor.

    The team is coached and motivated by Simon and his team!

    Most of the time they are a shambles and are not worth £1,000 per week!

    We are annoyed by lack of investment but do we really think it will be well spent??

    Mr Townsend played well for the first game, but I doubt he will remain in the first 11.

    Our boys from Finland are not up to it.

    We all know how many other members of our squad are not up to it.

    Ken is his own worst enemy, but he is not responsible for our limp and rudderless team!!

    In short we are not getting the best out of what we have, and this has been true for several years!

    Unless we back the team, they will continue to stagger and slip!!

    There is no rich buyer waiting in the wings!!

    We are not a big club anymore!!

    • TSS

      @henrymouni I didn’t mean in it the way it’s come across. I meant I’m not one for singling players out for Twitter-esque levels of abuse then holding a grudge against them for months. If someone was poor, I’ll write that, but all players have bad games and fans are often very over-critical of them and will be on their back from kick-off. I think you win and lose as a team and you can generalise a bit in most cases (eg. the team was poor, aside from…). No need for personal vendettas basically.

    • Chareose


      Ken is reponsible ………… The atmosphere at the club is his fault, the players wanting to leave IS his fault and all that will effect the team , be sure of that

      • henrymouni


        Ken is responsible for the atmosphere.

        Calling fans (customers) morons was typical of his arrogance and lack of sensitivity.

        Dictators are always right!!

        Simon is responsible for the team and its performances.

        He seems to support Ken’s budget policy, and he should have done a lot better with what he had.

        We are going backwards!

        If you look at the struggling teams in the Premier League – Wigan: Bolton: Wolves: Blackburn: WBA: QPR etc

        They are ALL 5 times better than us.

        At least 10 teams in our league are better than us!!

        Teams with much smaller crowds, and incomes, have put together these better teams!!

        Maybe not better on paper, but better on the field of play!!

        • Chareose


          well lets agree to disagree mate, personally i think grayson has done miricles to get us close to the playoffs two seasons running with the lack of backing hes had from his chairman. The only thing that does annoy me about grayson is his repeating of bates propaganda

        • Mark45

          @Chareose@henrymouni I don’t agree he has performed miracles at all. It is not just the bates budget that is the problem, it is equally down to Grayson’s judgement in the transfer market that we have the squad we do (i.e. not good enough). I completely agree with your point about Grayson repeating Bates propaganda and that is where i loose all respect for him. He is not the victim of Bates parsimony as many Leeds finds believe, he is a fully paid up member of Bates management team and is complicit in everything that is happening to Leeds. If Grayson genuinely believes all bates smoke and mirrors then he is as much a part of the problem as Bates himself, if he doesn’t believe in all Bates shite then we have a self serving manager putting his own welfare before that of the club he tells all he loves so much. I would love to see Grayson stand up for the supporters of Leeds United, it would show real leadership and bottle and galvanise support for him and the team. It may very well cost him his job, is it worth keeping if you have to abandon your integrity and the hope and aspiration of all the tens of thousands of people you do the job for.

          Whether Grayson is a good enough manager “on the field” is the subject of heated debate between supporters (my own view is he isn’t quite good enough). however “off the field” there can be no argument, his performance lacks any real leadership, integrity or bottle and for that alone a Leeds United manager he is not and never will be.

  • ChicagoWhite

    Aidy is actually on 2KPW he’s been offered a 4 1/2 year contract on 2.5KW which he & his reps have politely declined LUFC have not got back to him since

  • The WhiteLizard

    I think KB’s article in the programme was the start of the coffin door creaking shut on SG. I can hear it now “Look at how much money he’s had & the team still doesn’t perform. He had to go”

    • TSS

      @The WhiteLizard It was definitely aimed at SG I feel. Just a little silly of him to think we couldn’t compare that figure to other clubs. The man really is deluded.

      • ChicagoWhite

        @TSS@The WhiteLizard Birdseye doesn’t believe in reality or consistency but I think many have started to realize this now only taken 7 years

      • Tyler75

        @TSS@The WhiteLizard I agree; I think this was preparing the ground for sacking SG if we had lost today we had lost today. Interesting comments by Warnock on football focus; he said he had been having ‘conversations’ with chairmen about jobs.

        • Tyler75

          @TSS@The WhiteLizard Agreed and let’s be thankful as I suspect SG would have gone today and Warnock would have been in on Monday with a week left of the transfer window. Apart from everything else, Bates is also, fundamentally gutless and risk averse – he should either back his Manager or sack him but he does neither preferring to let him try and make a purse out of a sow’s ear while taking income out of the club to fund god knows what.

        • WoodyUK

          @Tyler75@TSS@The WhiteLizard I think luck has been on his side and I for one want to see him here till the end of the season. The SG doubters are 100% correct in stating he has bought some complete dross (they forget he has also picked up some real talent for next to nothing as well) but the article above explains why he is constantly hunting in the relative bargain basement section for talent. In some ways I feel sorry for him, the obvious (and understandable) pressure to succeed from fans, the demands to succeed from the owner/chairman/board and the hands shackled behind his back by finances.

        • Chareose

          @WoodyUK@Tyler75@TSS@The WhiteLizard

          agree but i just wish he didnt come out and repeat ken bates lies, as suggested he needs to grow some balls

  • TSS

    @ChicagoWhite Because they’re pointless Colin. Even if they are true (I’m sure they are at times) unless you have evidence, there’s nothing you can really do with them. It’s hearsay at best.

    It’s like me saying that Ken Bates categorically owns Elland Road. I suspect he does, but I can’t prove it so would never write as such. I may write a piece using that as a theory, but without evidence that’s all it is.

    You have to be careful with this kind of stuff because the truth quickly gets distorted otherwise. We end up with Eric Cantona shagging Lee Chapman’s wife becoming certifiable fact (or SG shagging OB’s) and other such nonsense.

  • ricobumf71

    need you ask where it’s gone , i thought it was glaringly obvious ; THE EAST STAND !!!

  • ChicagoWhite

    @TSS AOB fiance dumped him because she was appalled he asked her to sign a prenup, I just don’t understand where the BS comes from about SG tapping her or that some LUFC would perpetuate this rumour. SG as anyones personal life is private in my book & should be respected as such.

  • Taekwondo_white

    My friends sister works for the marketing department at ER and I’m still working on ways to get her to bump captain Birdseye off when he’s in the office!

  • Taekwondo_white

    My friends sister works at the ER marketing department, we’re both still trying to get her to push Birdseye down the stairs!

    • Tyler75

      @Taekwondo_white Try harder; maybe we can have a whip round – Love Leeds, assassinate Bates.

  • TSS

    Couple of good tackles and a decent run. We were bypassing the midfield again, that didn’t help.

  • phi1888

    This is all so disheartening, even the manner of our victory today was saddening, not to mention Snoddie’s stand point.

    So to condense what i’m reading all over the net, a ‘vociferous few’ ( feels like there are rather alot of us) are entirely dissatisfied with the running of OUR club. This has been festering for 7 years but is now a fully blown infection. We are agreed that the chairman has no respect or kinship with the morons who are his customers, he lies without conscience or remorse, he dictates which journalists are allowed at ER and all that is broadcast on YR and generally behaves in a blatant dictatorial manner, well aware that the dissidents are too dimwitted and disorganised to do anything about it. None of us wish for a repeat of the financial fiasco that put us in this situation, but what are we going to do about it? Can we do anything about it? Would KB cut off his nose to spite his face and liquidate before letting anyone else get their mits on his Beeston project. Our enemy is well trained and experienced in this manner of situation as well as completely deluded if the above figures hold water. There is no cure for a virus but they struggle to thrive if the host is healthy enough. Leeds UNITED.

  • Chris Clingo

    Interesting spin on the finances this boss! Begs the question will Leeds ever be transparent?!

  • DubaiWhitesNo2

    The rumours that Snoddy has now broken off contract talks has got to be worrying if not inevitable! Promises, Promises Promises…..its not only us he lies to but his own staff too. It’s interesting that the article (broken in the UAE suprisingly?) says he’s also a little pissed at the fact he hasn’t been made captain after Howson’s transfer – and on this i think he might have a point. Is he now Leeds’ longest serving 1st team player? i think he would handle the responsibility well. Lonners only came in the summer and generally Goalkeepers dont make good full time captains (myself excluded!!) TSS why dont you run a vote for who the next Leeds Captain should be? BATES OUT!!

    • TSS

      @DubaiWhitesNo2 The decision has been made now. I should have done it before it was announced, to do it now is just calling SG’s reasoning into question and whilst I agree it should have been Snoddy, I don’t know how the lads are in the dressing room and why AL was chosen. He may well be the best player for the role.

      • WoodyUK

        @TSS@DubaiWhitesNo2 My preference would be keeper or CB (at our club that negates CB as they’re too young). Leave Snodgrass to concentrate on what he does best. Just my opinion and I respect other peoples views.

      • Gryff

        @TSS@DubaiWhitesNo2 Snoddy’s been trying his heart out and I’m told he was hanging around the pitch after everyone else went applauding the fans. He seemed good mates with Howson and taken in with our history – I’d be surprised if he isn’t hurting a little right now…

        Even last season when he was one of our key underperformers at times, it was always through fatigue not lack of effort. Great player, great work ethic, and if he goes any time soon I actually can’t imagine the reaction of a lot of the fans…

        • Gryff

          @TSS@DubaiWhitesNo2 I see Pugh as more useful than I think a lot do. White’s a great talent but I don’t think we should rush him. Have him in a few games, then give him time out to keep his perspective and let him digest what he’s learnt.

          Agree about Thompson with Beausejour.

        • TSS

          @Gryff@DubaiWhitesNo2 I agree and I fully understand Simon’s reasons for resting him – he is very young remember. Also, there’s a tactical element to having him on the bench. Pugh is a sure enough bet to have at LB, he’ll do a job for sixty minutes while everyone tires, then you unleash the pace of White and the opposition are left rattling – which to some extent, is exactly what happened.

  • WoodyUK

    Depends what you mean by a quiet game. As a creative force he wasn’t the Delph I remember. He played a lot deeper than before but his tackling has improved immensely, he hardly wasted the ball at all and even though he has been out for a while he still looks to have a great engine – given a choice between him and Brown I’d take him every time on this showing. Let’s be honest Howson has been played out of position nearly all season due to the emergence of Clayton as an attacking CM and the failure of Brown to do what he was employed to do.

  • WoodyUK

    One of the key reasons we are unable to invest is we have wages on expensive contracts not contributing to the 1st team. Paynter, O’Brien and Connelly are on good contracts and would aid the cause significantly by freeing up their wage bill else where. We could also do with losing some other fringe players like Bromby, Parker and Bruce even if their wages are not significant – if they’re not going to play let them have a chance somewhere else – your only get one playing career, do they want to spend a good proportion of it playing in the stiffs ?

  • WoodyUK

    One of the biggest problems here is that some of the higher wage earners are not 1st team regulars – you cannot end their contracts and therefore the ‘real’ 1st team players get less than some of their counterparts in the reserves. The wages are skewed because some came on free transfers and were therefore able to demand large wages to offset no transfer fee. False economy really especially if the transfer fees come directly out of the wages profit and loss.

  • WoodyUK

    The one thing that is nailed on fact about the article in the programme is that Ken Bates knows the fans are unhappy. He likes to state things like vociferous few but he knows it’s not a few and that it’s dangerous waters he’s treading. When he has to answer questions (which he doesn’t like doing) you know whatever we’re doing is having an effect. We have to keep it up.

  • WoodyUK

    Looking at the table teams like Forest, PNE, Bristol City and Ipswich are spending more on wages than their turnover which explains why they are able to attract the best players – if however they don;t get promoted their gamble could cripple their clubs. Even teams like Palace, Watford, Coventry and Cardiff seem to have their mathematical models completely wrong. You would think a wages to turnover ratio of 60-70% would be sensible but most clubs in this league seem to be gambling the family silver for the chance of promotion to the promised land.

  • Chareose


    Rico if thats the case why not tell us thats why ??? why try and hide it ??

    • AdsHG1Leeds

      Because it is owned by a company in the British Virgin Islands – ie a tax haven. He can pull the rent out of Leeds and pay himself (he clearly owns the company based in the Virgin Islands). The income will not be subject to tax either. If he admitted that he owned the ground then he couldnt pull the £2 million plus out of the club!!

      Pure scum

  • Chareose

    TSS do these figures include the 10 to 15 million in transfers we received for players over the last few years ?

    • TSS

      @Chareose Our turnover is the bottom line of everything so that should include the player sales for 2009-10. Whether Simon Grayson’s £9.5m budget includes any player sales is open for debate. Ken claims it does, I’m not convinced. If it does and SG had £9.5m at start of season then the sales since would not make him overspent by £2m.

  • Chareose


    no wonder poor old Aidy wants to leave……….thats a rediculours wage for a half decent footballer

  • number1inyorkshire

    the fact is and i said it earlier it works on this equation

    2 million in (howson )

    new player in (joe public)

    10k per week in wages

    3 years deal ==1.5 million quid

    joe public transfer fee 500k

    therefore joe public is a shite player

    transfer kitty and wages have to be 2 seperate budgets

  • CasWhite

    Only problem with these figures is it doesn’t mention those with parachute payments (although this is easy to work out). As for not being able to say out of the figure quoted what we gave to players, why did the individual who came up with the above figures not try doing a bit more research as from memory it was on the club website a figure of £7.7m was mentioned for players.

    As for the above again it’s all historical. I understand for example Barnsley’s figure for this year will be closer to £9m. How many other clubs are reducing funds whilst we are increasing. Also using the turnover figure is also a bit misleading unless you know how that is raised. As we have many other activities that raise our figures above the normal ticket sales, tv, merchandise, then these have inherent costs associated and this is why our our wage bill increases to the figure mentioned.

    In the accounts is should also be noted for this year quoted, we held £3m in cash at bank (what about these quoted), had paid £2m to build a pavillion for the benefit of the club (incl fans), given £250k to the administrator.

    • WoodyUK

      @CasWhite KB has pointed out that the £7m invested in stadium development is loaned from a bank – something he cannot do for player purchases. Unfortunately it’s a strange comment because a) they would also loan the money to re-purchase the stadium to reduce our rental charge and b) we have to repay the loan which means every year it’s another fixed fee that comes straight off the profit and loss (and unless we’re in the premiership won;t pay for themselves)

      • CasWhite

        Woody, I haven’t heard how they have funded the development. Previous improvements, like pavillion, Billys bar, moving press lounge etc have been from club funds.

        This obviously was a bigger deal, but someone mentioned to me some of it is being funded by Caddicks with a repayment plan. Not sure how true this is.

        • WoodyUK

          @CasWhite repayment plan to Caddicks, repayment plan to bank the same is true of both, it has to be repaid and isn’t self financing which purchasing the ground back would be but thank you for the information. KB seems genuinely happy with Caddicks, one of the few groups of people he’s ever been happy with.

    • TSS

      @CasWhite The turnover figure is what The FA are basing the 70% rule on so that’s the figure we have to go by. The vast majority of Leeds’ turnover (about 70% if memory serves) is ticket sales. All in accounts.

      As for it being historical, it has to be. You publish accounts for previous year. We don’t get 2010/11 accounts until April.

      • Gryff

        @TSS@CasWhite Gates for the last lot of figures were roughly 11.5mil – which is what Bates says Grayson is spending on the entire playing side of the club.

        That leaves the multi-million sponsorships, TV revenue, etc. to pay for the tea-lady, board, coaches and rent.

        • henrymouni


          The tea ladies are on £1,000 per week!!

          Ken has given them squad numbers.

        • WoodyUK

          @Gryff@TSS@CasWhite Leases for ER and TA, business rates, policing, advertising, ground maintenance, salaries for non team members, lawyers fees, accountants. The fact is that we spend approximately 50% turnover on player salaries and if we’re only making £1m a year profit our overheads are staggering.

        • Gryff

          @WoodyUK@TSS@CasWhite Lawyers fees, especially!

          We’ve spent £7mil on the East Stand. Either that’s £7mil that could have gone into the squad, or an expensive loan on completely pointless improvements that Bates insists he is not about.

        • WoodyUK

          @Gryff@TSS@CasWhite £7m to improve East Stand or £13m to buy back Elland Road and stop the £1.5m a year drain of cash. I know where I’d have spent the money. Others would prefer it going on transfers and wages but I still believe we would be better served long term doing a Swansea or Norwich and scouring League 1 for the best young and hungry players for reasonable transfer fees and affordable wages. If our coaching staff can’t improve them further into excellant championship players then they’re not doing their job.

        • Gryff

          @WoodyUK@TSS@CasWhite Sure, I’d buy back ER instead of upgrading it as well. Think everyone would. Also don’t mind looking at young lads from League 1. But the problem is we had a few – Snoddy, Howson, BJ, etc. and we didn’t spend enough to keep them.

          When does it end? Can it end? If you keep on getting in quality and then selling them on you’ll end up risking demotion and never having a real chance at promotion.

        • TSS

          @WoodyUK@Gryff@CasWhite Totally agree. I’d have no problem with the club taking out a mortgage to repurchase the ground (£2.5m rent) or TA (£1m rent). The fact they haven’t yet continue to sink money into them regardless is highly suspicious.

  • Chareose

    There is another problem we havent covered on these blogs, im currently living near Portsmouth and one of the issues they have is that different parts of the ground and site are owned by different people………. My fear at Leeds united is that even if a buyer came in to buy the club Bates may still want to keep some of the other facilities , hotels that hes used our money to fund…….. we could end up being charged extortionate rental rates for the stadium (that Ken bates probably does own)……

    And this will put a lot of buyers off buying the club……..

    • CasWhite

      Or he probably doesnt own ER or TA and we are being charged extortinate rental already. That’s what’s already putting off buyers. Whoever owns TA bought this from Krasner and co before Bates was even looking at getting involved with the club. ER was also sold by Krasner and co, but I understand was then sold again. Again the first sale was down before Bates involvement. Don’t forget he tried to by Wednesday before Leeds so why would he have an interest in buying these assets.

    • WoodyUK

      @Chareose The club have the rights to purchase the stadium and if a buyer was found those rights would not have changed. The club also still retain the rights to purchase Thorpe Arch but no longer at a preferential price – now at the true value. I do not think it would put a buyer off. If Bates has purchased Elland Road the original legally binding contract is still in place. Makes me wonder if he will ever sell prior to that arrangement expiring.

      • CasWhite

        Woody, don’t think even Bates can live that long. The original agreements will have about 17/18 years to go. There again maybe he’s hanging on for a card from the Queen.

        • WoodyUK

          @CasWhite Very true for the stadium, I thought Thorpe Arch agreement was much shorter. Also that is where the money will be made as maybe some of the land there could be used for residential dwellings in the future.

        • CasWhite

          Sorry, for any confusion. The agreement for TA is the same length as ER, ie 25 years. Difference with ER is the preferential buy-back agreement lasts for this period, whereas for TA it was only 5 years. You are right it doesn’t stop us buying TA though if we put in an offer. The use of TA would come down to the Council in the end and I always was of the understanding they didn’t want it to be residential. But things always change, apart for our love of the Whites. MOT

        • Chareose


          Cas, he owns or atleast partially owns ER, Bates wouldnt spend money on extensions if he didnt.

        • WoodyUK

          @Chareose@CasWhite Possibly. Many people believe that he owns both Elland Road and Thorpe Arch but it doesn’t make it a fact. It’s fine as a conspiracy theory but that’s all it is. The club (not Bates unless he has a new legal contract set up between himself and the club as a company) has a legally binding contract option to purchase both sites. In theory he can spend money on improving the asset as the club has the option to buy the asset at a fixed price as part of it’s sale agreement. This agreement has not expired so unless he decides he isn’t buying the ground then this is not improving an asset that belong to someone else. If however he lets the agreement expire it’s money down the pan, as he has done with Thorpe Arch which must now be purchased for going rate. As I’ve said before my priority would have been to purchase the ground, then improve the squad and only then to upgrade the facilities. Others think squad first to get promotion and then they don’t care or would demand further improvements to stay in the premiership but all of that is gambles with no guarantees of success.

      • WoodyUK

        @Chareose The figures for the arrangement are that LUFC can purchase back Elland Road for £13m. We currently spend £1.5m a year leasing it plus a further £1m a year for Thorpe Arch. Spend the £13m on buying our home back and it pays for itself within 10 years. How many years will it take for the executive boxes, museum etc to pay for themselves ?

  • GypsyJoe

    Just a passing comment here but I compared the spending on Our squad too that of Middlesbrough in terms of transfer fees(yes I have too much time on my hands) and have found that Boro have spent a whopping 11.2 million on their current squad whilst in the championship and we are still only three points behind them. Just imagine what Larry could do without Bates cutting his legs off from underneath him.

    • WoodyUK

      @GypsyJoe Maybe slightly one sided view as in the past 3 seasons Boro have sold players for a gross sum of £52 whilst indeed spending £12m on replacement. Incidently so far for 2011/2012 they have only had free transfers incoming. Steve Gibson is an old school Chairman who loves his club and has sunk a fortune into it to try to make it successfull. I consider Boro’s fans to be fortunate to have him as a chairman/owner.

      • GypsyJoe

        @WoodyUK As they should. It probably helps that Gibson is a Boro fan and not some nutcase who is hellbent on sucking the life out of our club. I need to add that Boro have just bought Lukas Jutiewicsz for 1.3 mill. Nice to see some owners still invest in their club.

    • TSS
      • GypsyJoe

        @TSS cheers for that. Don’t know why some people slag Larry off so much though as by following that he is the best manager in the league. It would be nuts to sack him.

        • Gryff


          There’s two or three for each club which are questionnable/just plain wrong.

          I will not stop banging on about this :-P

        • Gryff

          @GypsyJoe@TSS But for all that, the 9.5mil budget shows Grayson IS indeed good value per point

        • TSS

          @Gryff@GypsyJoe No entirely, no, but they’re a good enough guide and the best option we have in this cloak and dagger football world we live.

  • WoodyUK

    Not sure if mentioned anywhere but update from Paul Dews is that the Snodgrass story is complete rubbish but then again as well as his title of chief sports writer for the YEP he is also the Leeds United media officer. Probably why we never get any real investigative journalism from them. True conflict of interest job roles for a journo being employeed by a single city football club and being the chief writer for the cities local rag.

    • WoodyUK

      Oops my bad Phil Hay is writer for YEP, now why in God’s name did I think it was Dews. Must be having a brain meltdown.

      • CasWhite

        Your ok Woody. Dews was with YEP before he took the job with Leeds.

        • TSS

          @CasWhite Also, if the story was false I’d expect Dewsy to have dismissed it by now. It’s allowed to build if he doesn’t.

  • henrymouni

    I am desperate for Simon to be successful with us, and I am grateful that he got us out of Div1 – by the skin of our teeth.

    Once we hit the Championship we were all expecting a big push for promotion.

    A decent investment in the playing squad.

    Many of our players were out of their depth in the Championship.

    Before the season started the ‘War chest’ was first mentioned by KB.

    The whole thing was mismanaged by KB & his team, including Simon, who maintained that we did not need to spend big money (or even small money, as it turned out) to get promotion!!

    Look at us now !

    Further away than we were last year, playing terrible football for the last 18 months, for the most part.

    At least the present unrest cannot be blamed for the teams poor performances.

    They have been under-performing for ages!!!

    All there is, is NOW!!

  • WoodyUK

    Have to admit Villa’s result was one of the first Prem results I looked yesterday (for obvious reasons) and I smiled when I saw the scoreline. Saw Duncan Castles tweeting we are also getting Lichaj on loan from Villa (have been told he’s a reliable tweeter but have my doubts after Paul Dews statement yesterday). Now I would be happy with Delph and Lichaj in on temporary contracts plus Pugh permanent. Still would like another CB plus either Keogh or Hulse but maybe I’m being greedy. What would definately make me happy would be seeing Paynter, O’Brien, Bromby, Bruce and Connelly leaving and getting 2 or 3 new players but it’ll never happen. Kilkenny was a sulky, whinging git but he did know how to pass the ball and pick out players – still glad he’s gone though, Clayton is better.

  • ellisno9


    i heard bruce is on somewhere between 10 and 15k a week!

  • TSS

    @WoodyUK Agree, he does seem a little panicked.

    He’s mentioned season ticket boycotts twice in the last week. Starting to sound a little desperate to me.

    • WoodyUK

      @TSS Add to that the club rolling out it’s ‘popular to fans’ mouth piece in Lorimer and Larry’s recent statements the club are having to ‘explain’ the situation daily. On the back of this more rumours are being generated than normal (I am sure some of it is mischief making). More transparency and it wouldn’t be required.

    • Gryff

      @TSS@WoodyUK What I’ve taken away from Bates recently (though not a pscyhologist) is a slightly stunned reaction to the fans seeing Grayson sell and instead of banging on about Grayson not being good enough, we’re getting to the root of the problem.

      And the old bastard has only made matters worse for himself by giving us cold hard proof that Grayson’s missing out on targets is 95% Bates & the Board.

      @WoodyUK I agree with you about spending a bit too much and then being crippled for a few years, but the thing is we had Delph’s sale + 1.5mil and put it into an East Stand. For that, we could have kept Bradley Johnson, Jonny Howson and Robert Snodgrass and gone a long way to replacing Max Gradel. That would give us a similar team to the one that nearly got automatic promotion last season – instead we’ve a much worse team.

      It’s not a matter of sensible spending. Bates is spending on a stadium that will always be there over good young talent that will move on and will have to be replaced somehow.

    • Gryff

      @TSS@WoodyUK Speaking of which, did anyone else see Nimely for Coventry on the FLShow? I knew he was a rated youngster but he has tidy footwork, a massive header (better than Becchio’s) and a good finish on him.

      Worth a look?

  • GypsyJoe

    I think Bates just says these things in order to get under our skin. I bet it brings him great pleasure thinking about us complaining and picking apart what he says.

    • Gryff

      @GypsyJoe It took about 2 minutes of picking for most, Joe!

  • Gryff

    and Scummer.

  • Gryff

    @WoodyUK I’ve never seen a Duncan Castles tweet that hasn’t been very plausible. I can remember one or two instances when he was wrong but deals fall through.

    He seems quite conscious of the quality of the rumours he tweets and he is (after all) an investigative sports journalist…

  • WoodyUK

    @Gryff Grayson says it’s complete rubbish, Dews says it’s not accurate so I’m assuming Castles information is wrong (he tweets what he hears but that doesn’t make it correct). My problem is where is he getting some of his information. He states no player is on > £18k a week, no one but the board, human resources/payroll and Grayson should know what every player’s salary is. He’s adamant the Howson fee is £750k plus variables but doesn’t know what the variables are – this intimates the news isn’t from the club, Howson or his agent (all of which probably do know).

  • TSS

    Why do we have less TV income now than in League One? Think you’ll find we’ve been on quite a lot this season.

    You get more money for being in the Championship anyway (like you get more for being in Prem.)

    You said yourself sponsorship is higher, crowds aren’t actually up but prices are so that’s an increase. No idea why you think wages effects turnover – your understanding of that term is obviously wrong. Turnover is total income. Outgoings aren’t figured in. We don’t take wages off the turnover then decide our wage budget based on what’s left – how would that make sense? We’ve already paid them!

    So basically, all income has gone up yet the £27m turnover in League One hasn’t?

    Our wage budget – by Ken’s own admission is £9.5m. If turnover has gone up (which I’ll bet you any sum you care to wage it has) then 30% is probably about right. Regardless, I never actually mentioned any turnover based on estimations, I used the turnover from League One and current wage figures meaning the percentage will be less than what I actually stated when our turnover is revealed.

  • TSS

    Why do we get less TV income in the Championship than in League One exactly? We’ve been on about the same amount of times, if not more, and Championship games cost more (so pay more). Also, the Championship as a competition pays more to teams – just like the Premier League does.

    If sponsorship and ticket sales are higher, then turnover IS higher. Wages have no bearing on turnover, you clearly have no idea what the term means. Turnover is your total income. You don’t deduct everything first then come up with a figure. We don’t take wages from our total income, then use the remainder to pay wages – how would that make sense?

    You obviously misunderstood the above completely and have jumped in ranting without the foggiest clue what you’re talking about.

    I never once said 25% nor did I base that on current turnover. I said current our wage budget that Ken Bates revealed in his match notes was 35.2% of income based on the turnover of 2009/10 – a turnover that will have since risen due to promotion (the same as it does for all teams).

    Do you need a calculator?

    • number1inyorkshire

      @TSS i think bates also said that tv revenues were up and are not in any budgets .leeds have done well this season for tv games so thats more money

  • number1inyorkshire

    THE fact is for those in the table that are paying more than they are getting in ,in wages well frankly its suicidal .

    especially as the likes of bristol etc are not likely to ever get promoted in the near future .

    20 k per week is a million quid a year, i would guess that none of our players are near that and right now apart from snodgrass i do not believe they should be

    • TSS

      @number1inyorkshire Wouldn’t disagree with that. But we’ll lose Snoddy, like Howson and BJ before him because we won’t pay reasonable enough wages to keep quality players. We don’t have the funds to bring quality in either.

      • number1inyorkshire

        @TSS the thing that winds me up is the budget for leeds includes wages for players as well as transfer money ,The wage bill would be poor anyway and could increase %wise another 10% say ,but the way bates does it it would,t make any difference .

        What should happen is the wage budget is 11-13 million fair enough but the buying budget is 5-6 million plus what you make from sales, sales obviously make wages available ..

        That would allow grayson to decide how he wants to spend his money, 2 miilion on a striker a million on a defender etc ,and would mean that instead of panic buying we could add 2-3 quality additions every year and sell the same ,that would allow for a settled squad ..

        You just do not get quality for the money we are spending ,

        interesting that he also said since he has been at leeds he has spent 20 million on building projects . i have to say elland road of the pitch is a better place to go over all ,but because of whats going on ,on the pitch there are fewer people going to E R ..

  • Simon Roberts

    Not while a certain person ‘owns’ this club. There is a huge amount of money swishing around and it doesn’t go towards getting players in. Work it out yourself!

  • Gryff

    @number1inyorkshire I’d be careful on the countries angle Colin. The only reason countries like Ireland and Greece haven’t been liquidated is because of IMF, & other countries stepping in. If that happened, it would spread like wild fire.

    We’ve been unportrayably fortunate the crisis wound up as it did (so far). LUFC is nowhere near similar to countries’ economies.

  • Gryff

    @WoodyUK Or else he was simply told it was 750k plus variables when he asked but isn’t told anything more than that.

    He’s reasonably reliable. When he gives a rumour I take it seriously. But you’re right it’s still a rumour.

  • number1inyorkshire

    To be fair to Bates colin he did that with Beckford and took a a hit, although as Newcastle were in the champs at the time he never wanted to go there .I also believe that it was grayson who sanctioned the sale of howson and i do think he does make team decisions ,However and its a big however he is tied by the constraints of the budget he is given .

    howson would not have signed simple as that and because of his injury which might be 1 week or 6 weeks or rest of the season he might not have played for the rest of the season ,it was better to sell him, than him walk for free ,i agree with that .

    But for bates to say that grayson gets that for his transfer kitty is wrong and misleading and if i have to be truthful is almost a lie.

    in real terms what has happened they have got 2 million + wages .

    the wage bill has gone down so he should be able to go spend 1.5 million on a player and then his wages will replace howsons in the already agreed budget .the budget is the same for wages we have a new decent player for 1.5 mill and there is 500k to add to snoddys wages .

    But the bates way for 2 million quid we get a 500k player it makes no sense moving forward

  • number1inyorkshire

    well thats what we are been lead to believe by leeds 2 million quid .obviously his wages are what we will not have to pay for him if he leaves ,but i bet we will have to pay the remainder of his contract as he never asked for a move ???

    I agree with showing ambition by keeping the better players, its what should be done ,however the said player aswell has to want to sign ,beckford, howson never wanted to ,funnily enough the only 1 that did was Bradley johnston or did he .i think some players price themselves out to get a move ..

    its the Bates way of player transfer/wage budgets that is holding us back because of the amount mentioned in his program notes you have take of the amounts paid for players bought ,which makes the actual wage bill smaller ,which is why Grayson is trying to get frees so he can pay them the going wages

    Does that include agents aswell do we know ??

    Managable debt is ok ,we all know about credit scores etc ,we should have some loans now should we not ??.But debt for the sake of it is ,well pointless

  • number1inyorkshire

    Surely the 20 million pounds spent on building projects in seven years would have bought the ground back by now .

    that surely would have made more sense

    what is the amount we have to pay to get the ground back now does anyone know ??

  • number1inyorkshire

    wow thats seems a lot ,so bates has spent half the value of the ground on repairs and he does not own it ,

    That howards restaurant is a f@#$ing eyesore i expect Jack and Vera Duckworth to appear from it at any min

    its like a zit on a super models face

  • number1inyorkshire

    looked at that stadium to day it is fantastic went to watch rugby 7s in commonwealth games ,it is fantastic place ,mind so is mk dons stadium .

    i do like the new stadiums my fav place to watch footy is wembley .not that we as leeds fans get there often lol but i go watch England matches

  • WoodyUK

    @number1inyorkshire £13m to buy back Elland Road and (if they’d done it in the correct time frame) £5m to buy back T.A. (now we have to pay market rate to get T.A. but we do have exclusive rights to buy it until the lease runs out).

    • number1inyorkshire

      @WoodyUK thought 35 mill was a bit high ,thats probably its value ..

      so instead of bates whingeing about the rent he has had to pay because of krasner etc ,he should have just bought it with the 20 million he has spent, he could of had both buy now a.built training ground where it used to be on the car park and sold thorp arch for building .

      ive said it before this man is an idiot ..

  • econ

    @number1inyorkshire in plain terms, your a fool, as an economics graduate from York uni, i can tell you being in debt and an acceptance of debt is what has led to this global financial crisis, and is what will cause a collapse in the way football is run. Your argument for the way manchester united is run is how Leeds united got into its debt problem initialy, because your loan is not secured against a tangable good such as a building its against a tempermental 20 something year old. the idea of borrow now pay later when in the Prem is essentialy a form of gambling as it relies on you staying up and matching increasing expectations which are being fuelled by players only there due to your increasing debt. Ultimately debt has led to people losing persepctive with the true cost of running a football club, and leeds united is just one the few being run as a business rather then a play thing.

    • TSS

      @econ@number1inyorkshire Debt is necessary for most businesses to exist and grow and is always a gamble.

      The global recession was caused by an American mortgage crisis that had a knock-on effect. It happens. Economies have ups and downs as I’m sure you know, that doesn’t mean the lending that builds economies needs to stop entirely – it means people shouldn’t lend beyond their means. So long as projected turnover is higher than loan repayments, that’s a sound enough gamble

      I work for a major highstreet retailer. If we want to build 200 new stores, we don’t save up for a few years until we can afford it. We borrow from the bank, build the stores, increase profits by doing so and repay the loan. This is perfectly healthy business practice that benefits the economy all round. The banking industry benefits, we create new jobs instantly, our total profits rise (hopefully), builders are put to work, everyone is a winner. All this requires lending however.

      But we’re gambling just as much as a football club is by doing that. They’re relying on the players to perform and we’re relying on trade. Hopefully, we’ve both done our homework and can minimise risk, but there always is one. Businesses fail every day just like football clubs, that doesn’t mean you just stop trying and happily accept the rut we’re in.

      Anyway, all this is besides the point. The point is, our turnover should allow for a much bigger player budget. We should be able to compete with other clubs and retain key players but can’t.

    • number1inyorkshire

      @econ managable credit is not the same as debt ,it only becomes that when you can not afford to the repayments e:g manu ,

      the problem i have with economics graduates is the move on to become MP’S and its them that get us into this mess .can;t wait for you to have a go lol

      i will also assume you are replying to colin not me .. i thank you

    • number1inyorkshire

      @TSS@econ can we get replys sorted out LOL i got called a fool and we all know thats colin lol ..

      only joking colin

      whats funny is it was by a graduate tax dodger !!!!

    • number1inyorkshire

      @TSS@econ thats a good argument tss i agree with every thing you say

      THE only thing i would say is that .football clubs are over spending because alright a few administrations but none has disappeared yet .it might do for football if 1 or 2 did go altogether ,there always seems to be a knight in shining armor at the last min .

      i felt pompey would have been the 1st 1 and still might ,it might help football a little and rid football of that big fat smelly git with all the tattoos etc LOL

    • Gryff


      You’re right TSS – it happens. It’ll happen again if we keep accepting debt as a wise thing. To a very limited extent it can help reinvigorate a business, or tide it over a bad time, or help it do something like buy a property. But this isn’t the kind of debt we’re talking about either in terms of countries or football clubs.

      It’s less than 100 years since there was no concept of debt in boom-times. Governments would run up surpluses in good years, and then wrack up debts in recessions or wars. Then they’d build up the surpluses again. When they were in surplus they cut taxes and invested in the country; then when they were in recession they’d raise taxes and cease a lot of the investment.

      And that was a good thing. It’s only 130 years since Gladstone damned the Conservatives because their warmongering meant the income tax had gone up from 2p to 5p in the pound(!!!) Now we’re used to massive rates because spending has to always go up and taxes, if anything, always have to come down.

      And the answer? Debt! That wonderful thing that makes budgets balance – until the next loss of confidence. It’s entirely the Emperor’s New Clothes.

    • TSS

      @Gryff@econ@number1inyorkshire There’s nothing wrong with debt. The word has just taken on extra meaning recently it seems.

      People buy homes because of debt, businesses are started and grow because of debt, most big companies (LUFC included, I’m sure) have enormous overdrafts on their current account because money doesn’t always come in at a steady pace, yet they have the same outgoings every month – think ST renewals for LUFC with players wages, rent, utility bills etc… coming off monthly.

      The mismanagement of debt, an over-reliance on debt and this culture we have of consumerism debt may be problematic, but that’s people abusing an otherwise necessary and important thing.

      You’ll never change it in this country either. It may be managed better now, but Britain’s economy is built on the financial sector. It’d be like Germany shutting down it’s car industry or China ceasing to make shit plastic pieces of crap.

    • Gryff

      @TSS@Gryff@econ@number1inyorkshire That’s what I said, though. Debt is okay as a very limited boost – to buy a property, to tide you over if you have a short-term shortfall.

      What Colin’s point was, was that we should all embrace living in a constantly indebted club (and country). That’s wrong – that’s the wrong use for debt.

      And I assure you the “extra” meaning of debt existed for a century before the 1920s, then came back through the 30s, 40s and 50s, and only slowly disappeared again under Maggies “who gives a f*ck” yuppie government.

  • TurnDevil

    We have 1 big problem which creates 2 others. The 1 is Bates, and the problems he creates are short sightedness, and bad practice.

    He sells players in order to report a profit, which is justified by saying they want to much money. To me, if a player is worth £20k (ie JH) then its better to pay that for 2 years than to take a million now and simply use it to paper over the P & L. A wage of £1m a year is simply easy to justify if we get promoted as he will be worth more simply for been a premier league player. He’s worth £2m now (but we sell him for £1m), £3m+ in 17 months in the Championship and £5m if we get to the premier league. Either way we have sold him for half price now when we could have used him for anither year or two and then sold him to cover the wage we offered. Some think this will get us into trouble, but it’s all about CapEx which is how all business function (long term write off), and as uncle Ken keeps telling us that this is a business then he needs to stop attending the Risdale school of Exonimics and step aside so someone with vision and a business brain can run LUFC.

    Lets face it, if we have too many people on the books, or pay too high a wage on a select few – it’s Uncle Kens fault not ours or SG.

  • TSS

    That’s been largely discredited due to the fact it’s a voluntary survey sent out to all pro footballers. A pro footballer is classed as anyone on a professional contract, so anyone earning money from the game basically. Most clubs will have 20+ youth players earning token sums (by comparison to the “big” players) so this massively distorts the figures. Furthermore, the highest earners may be less inclined to reveal salary than those on low wages. It’s fundamentally flawed either way.

    • TSS

      Besides, we’re comparing our wage budget to other Championship clubs. There is no better point of comparison I can think of – you?

  • dess

    Nice looking chest, I guess Ken’s retirement fund is in there. Where’s the egg cup for Simon’s player fund?

    • TSS

      @dess The chest was dropped on. It’s crushed.

  • henrymouni


    “No Problems Over Snodgrass Deal” Grayson.

    “Norwich submitted a bid of around £3m for Snodgrass last summer – an offer which Leeds refused – and the winger turned down the offer of a new contract from United soon after, leading to what Grayson claimed was an amicable and temporary suspension of negotiations.”

    Grayson said: “His contract talks have not got going since the summer. We turned down a bid from Norwich and both parties agreed then that we would leave it until it suits us both. It’s not as if we’ve got round the table in the last 10 days and things have stalled.

    “There’ve been no negotiations for four to five months and that was agreed in the summer. He still has 18 months on his contract so we’re in a good position. We’d like to keep him longer, which is why we offered a new contract, and when you turn down a fee from another club it’s courtesy to offer a new deal.

    “We didn’t have to do that in the summer and that’s why we’ve left it. Whoever’s come up with the story saying talks have broken down is talking rubbish.”

    The idiot has just confirmed that talks HAVE BROKEN DOWN, and Snoddy will be gone at the end of this season!!!

    ” amicable and temporary” = broken down!!!

    ” He still has 18 months on his contract so we’re in a good position”

    Good position my a…!!

    Now is the time to sort it.

    • Chareose



    • Gryff

      @henrymouni What more can Grayson do?

      • henrymouni


        Warm greetings Gryff my friend!

        1. He must get the team playing winning football – that is his job!

        I think you will agree that we are still under-performing, and he must arrest the slide and get a grip!!

        Our recent form has been terrible, and imagine where we would be without those flukey victories!!

        2. He must not let this transfer window go the way of all the others,

        with hard luck stories and bull….!

        He has money and KB’s support (Aaaggg!) to bring 2 or 3 players in!!

        He claimed in December that he had players lined up – where are they??

        3. He must stop pretending we are playing quite well, as this insults our intelligence.

        4. He must stand up for himself, if he feels he is not getting full backing from KB.

        5. KB has said he wants promotion this year!!

        So Simon knows what more he needs to do!!

        I really hope he can do it!!!

  • Pingback: The Contradictive Nature Of Leeds United Fans | The Scratching Shed - Leeds United()

  • jigzy84

    Case and point potsmouth at number 1 in the wage table says it all really!!

  • jigzy84

    Allow me to highlight that out of the 24 clubs in the league 16 are more than likely recording a loss year on year according to the data out of them 6 clubs spending are over 100% of turnover on player wages meaning instant accrual of debt, and 10 other clubs spending over 80% of turnover on wages meaning very likely accrual of debt.

  • Pingback: The Wages Saga: A Must Read | The Scratching Shed - Leeds United()

  • Pingback: Google()

  • Pingback: http://www.google.com/4tbsfcr4543()