----- Original Message ----- > Agree that's what we hope, but why should that be the case? As I said, > Kranser sold all those rights away to service our debts, we seem to be > expecting to reap the benefits of any of that, but we have absolutely no > rights to it whoever does get to benefit. Would we be up in arms if > Adler, > for example, was about to make a mint from the property? I don't think > so, > it would be another reason to hate Krasner's lot.. they are the ones who > sold everything.....,
Of course we WOULD be up in arms. I'd be trying to raise hell about it for a start and there would be lots of others doing the same. That is WHY there is a buyback clause, or at least that is supposed to be why. The buyback clause is there to protect those rights amongst other things. What is so hard to understand ? If a shedload of money may be made then the club should exercise the buyback clause so that the funds come to the club. That is why there is a predetermined price formula in the buyback clause so the price does not increase to the market price if future developments arise. _______________________________________________ the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list administrators accept no liability for the personal views and opinions of contributors. Leedslist mailing list [email protected] http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist 'I am in shock,' said Ferguson.
