>>I go by what management and Blackwell said about the wage structure after the fall from the Prem. << Healy was on decent championshiop money. Better than a lot of prem strikers I'd guess. We still had a big wage bill for a championship club, and I'm not including ex-players like Mills & Fowler. >>that depends on (a) who and how many want him and (b) how soon they need him…<< And who he's prepared to go to. >>And your point differs how, from the contracts they’ve given to the others? Of course, having signed the others first they may have had not so much left in the budget or it may have been a case of identifying the weakest link in negotiations, as they became the only interested party still looking.<< You're conveniently ignoring the bit about the player's age. A £5m player age 21 will, in most cases, be worth at least that at 26. Maybe a lot more. So he's on the books as a valuable asset that isn't depreciating. A £5m player age 28 will be worth a lot less when he's 33. So his book value is less - which affects his transfer value. >>That may well be true, in which case Bates could have said that as a reason he was to be sold and his disloyalty would have been a reason to say, “ never again” just as with Nichols. (gotta wonder just how much we got for him from PNE when he was so set on returning to Luton)<< What Bates "said" and what went on in negotiations with Fulham and Healy's agent are totally different. Do you really think Ken Bates takes sh*t from agents? The fact that he has no truck with football's leeches is his most endearing characteristic, IMO. As for Nicholls, my guess is we didn't get much for him, but the receivers used the proceeds to keep the club going. Bates probably used that to keep KPMG happy, allowing him to hang on to Healy & Blake, from whom we'll receive over £2m. As for Nicholls going back to Luton - that was when (a) Newell was manager and (b) Luton were in the c'ship. What makes you think he'd have gone there now? Or that Blackwell (who must have known he'd signed a fat, disloyal knacker) would resign him now he's a luton? Nicholls has actually done quite well for himself, going to a decent c'ship side. I'm just glad we're rid of him. >>Saying what he said was never going to endear the club to player and deter him from sabotaging any rival transfer inquiries.<< What rubbish. Healy will have told his agent to get him the best deal that involved Lawrie Sanchez. I don't believe there was ever a rival enquiry for Healy that Healy would have considered. He was a potential target for (a) mediocre prem clubs and (b) championship promotion hopefuls. Possibly (c) half-decent scottish sides, though they pay even less. But he wanted to go to Fulham, and Sanchez wanted him. Fulham is a well-funded mediocre prem club, almost certainly prepared to pay him more than Sunderland or Wolves, say. >>hile there is some degree of logic to what you say on valuation, there is still no better way to get the best price than to keep the player “on your side,” and feeling as loyal as possible, << Oh, like they care. Healy knew what he wanted and he got it. And frankly we got an OK deal for a player whose English league scoring record is hardly stellar. >> projecting an idea of not needing to sell, engineering a demand not p*ssing him off.<< Who'd you be trying to kid? We're in Div 3, FFS. "Not needing to sell". What a joke. Having no option but to sell, more like. >>I don’t and I certainly wouldn’t put it past “Honest Ken” to pull such tactics with any player (see Kelly); however, it seems a little backwards doesn ’t it. If you do not want to pay a bonus, surely you are the one who should be emphasizing that you do not want to sell the player and not listing him for transfer. You surely let the player tell you that he wants to move and let interested parties approach and tell you of their interest. I can’t say I remember any “doublespeak” from Healey prior to Bates’ outburst..<< A high risk strategy. Remember he's only got effectively 6 months' contract left. You would risk Healy's agent telling him to sit tight till December, and then go to Fulham on a Bosman on Jan 1 (which he would be entitled to do, and would mean more money for him - at least £1.5m over the length of the deal). We'd not only lose £1.5m - we'd have to pay another 6 months wages to a demotivated player who wants out and is shirking every challenge so he doesn't get injured - money that could be used to pay for a replacement player. >>Think about it. If he'd been sold when we were in administration the money would have gone to the adminsitrators, and put into the pot for paying the creditors, keeping the club afloat etc. Post-admin Bates gets the money. It's not rocket science. Really??? ! Are you saying that Bates is a self centered liar who is in it to line his own pockets, not with the best interests of the club and supporters at heart.?.<< I'm saying he's playing the game very cannily. Get off your moral high horse. They're all f*cking liars in football! (*) >>The money could have been used by KPMG to fund the daily running expenses, till a proper sale was conducted, but that’s another story eh.<< How would that have helped? Surely better from the club's PoV to get the money after exiting receivership, rather than paying HMRC, Bob's disco et al another 1p in the £? >>No hiding the former, is there; however just which of the many ins and outs, of his term do you base the latter upon? Next you’ll be telling us he is a wizard like genius when it comes to football club finances, in general..<< Assuming we get the golden share back (which I would say is likely - the delay is probably paperwork-based. And does the FL really want the hassle of chucking out the single biggest member club of its league?), has he not pulled off a fantastically clever bit of business? Effectively clearing out the residual debts and ending up with exactly the same assets as he had before? And done it through the administration system, without breaking the law? Mark (*) with the possible exception of Dave Whelan, the Wigan chairman, who seems to be an absolutely top bloke and as straight a businessman as you'll ever find.
_______________________________________________ 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
