Yes it is. Simple economics. Offer to buy at the lowest price possible where you think you will get the necessary votes.
Nothing to do with caring about HMRC or bob the mobile disco. So, in that respect Bates and Morris (and the others) are all alike - they offered a price to the creditors they thought or hoped would be enough to get the club. Apparently Bates was saying we'd be out of admin quicker and things could get back to BAU if creditors voted for him. What is wrong with saying that? Was that an incorrect statement? The major shareholder said they would veto any other bid apart from Bates, so there is no way the vote would have been concluded on the Monday is there? We had a statement on the list from RickD to say that a FL lawyer said that actually LUFC 'might' be able to trade if still in admin. That turned out to be a crock of shit because we came out of admin and STILL have to wait another month. Or is RickD saying the FL would have changed it's rules but only if Bates hadn't won? > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:leedslist- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nigel Holcroft > Sent: 15 June 2007 19:54 > To: 'LUList' > Subject: Re: [LU] The inevitable does happen > > Erm, not sure what the logic behind the, "willing to pay more to the > creditors, > simply to sway their voting" statement was.... > > I think that is simple economics, in buying and selling isn't it? _______________________________________________ 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 Join The Leeds United Supporters Trust at www.lufctrust.org
