| Welcome to 606 Rebels. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: Wealso allow junior members. |
| Could be good news?; If it comes off | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: 14th March 2007 - 11:54 AM (349 Views) | |
| Fitz | 14th March 2007 - 11:54 AM Post #1 |
|
Perfectly formed member
![]()
|
By DAVID MARSH and PAUL ROBINSON LEEDS United are seeking a multi-million pound loan from Leeds City Council. The club is trying to raise cash to buy back Elland Road from Teak Commercial Limited, a mystery firm based in the Caribbean tax haven of the British Virgin Islands. United are also looking for help from the local authority to re-purchase their Thorp Arch training complex near Wetherby. Both sites were sold to Manchester businessman Jacob Adler as United fought to avoid administration before the arrival of present chairman Ken Bates. Mr Adler later sold Elland Road to Teak Commercial, who are currently charging the club £1.15m annual rent. Leeds hold a buy-back option of around £13m on the stadium and of about £5m on Thorp Arch. United chief executive Shaun Harvey said: "We have approached the council with a request that they assist the club by providing a mortgage so we are able to re-purchase both the stadium and Thorp Arch. "The mortgage sought from the council would be comfortably covered by security in the form of a charge over the stadium and Thorp Arch and also a personal guarantee from a prominent Leeds businessman. "The council is able to borrow money and with the club repaying them, there would be no cost to either the council or the taxpayers. "If the club owned the stadium then there would no longer be any mystery as to who owns Elland Road. It would enable the club to play a full part in the redevelopment of the Elland Road area and create income streams to support the club on days other than matchdays. "Our dialogue with officers of the council is ongoing." In December 2005 councillors agreed a £9m loan to Yorkshire County Cricket Club to enable it to purchase its Headingley stadium. Council leader Coun Andrew Carter said the authority had replied in writing to the club. He said no negotiations were taking place. Coun Carter told the YEP last week that the council could not commit to plans to make Elland Road the heart of a new "leisure quarter" until it knew who its owners were. Even Leeds themselves admit they do not know who is behind Teak. If a loan was forthcoming, one option could be for it to be made to a third party – such as the Leeds United Supporters' Trust – which would then buy Elland Road and act as United's landlord. A deal involving the not-for-profit trust would be far more favourable to Leeds than the one they currently have with Teak – and would also give fans a key role in the future of their club. A spokesman for the supporters' trust said: "We would be keen to play a part in any scheme that is for the good of the club." The council recently granted United "hardship relief" on Elland Road's business rates, a move costing local taxpayers about £33,500. |
![]() |
|
| Mugsey | 14th March 2007 - 12:02 PM Post #2 |
|
100% Leeds
|
would eb nice to own the ground and thorp arch again and should be done asap before interest rates go through the roof and any perspective deals costs us much more than it might do at the moment. also would be nice to organise some other areas of revenue using the ground in order to try and boost the old coffers a tad. |
![]() |
|
| Matt | 14th March 2007 - 01:05 PM Post #3 |
|
Dee's a liar....
|
something definitely seems to be in the pipeline as more and more stories are coming out about this and other similar stuff |
![]() |
|
| 305miles2EllandRd | 14th March 2007 - 02:04 PM Post #4 |
|
Stand up Comedian
|
Wonder who the "prominent Leeds businessman" is |
![]() |
|
| Fitz | 14th March 2007 - 02:27 PM Post #5 |
|
Perfectly formed member
![]()
|
Garlic Bread.... |
![]() |
|
| strachans shinpad | 14th March 2007 - 02:45 PM Post #6 |
|
Most Sensible Poster 2005
![]()
|
I'm intrigued. If a prominent Leeds businessman is ready to act as guarantor, why isn't he just putting the capital in? Surely obtaining a mortgage or a loan on behalf of someone else is close to being fraudulent as well, isn't it? Sounds a bit odd, but anything that helps the club financially has to be good. |
![]() |
|
| Matt | 14th March 2007 - 02:52 PM Post #7 |
|
Dee's a liar....
|
Might want to help the club but won't deal with someone on the board. Levi seems to be sticking a spanner in the works a fair bit according to some reports. And acting as a guarantor isn't fraudulent, the onus is on the person (in this case the club) who it benefits to repay the loan. If that person (the club) can't pay then the guarantor has to pay. Plus the business man might have the money but knows if we got the ground and TA back the club would be able to afford the repayments. therefore saving his money to invest again later? Double benefit i think... |
![]() |
|
| Mugsey | 14th March 2007 - 03:14 PM Post #8 |
|
100% Leeds
|
fair points there matt because if we do get the ground and thorp arch back the onus really would be on us to then make the repayments ourselves, which shouldn't be too crippling tbh and stand on our own two feet in our quest to move forward and stop looking for big money investors to bail us out the wholetime. |
![]() |
|
| garlic bread | 14th March 2007 - 03:37 PM Post #9 |
![]()
SHIRT LIFTER!!!!!!!!!!
|
In terms of the repayments, they are not expensive at a return of 8.8%. If I had an asset of £13m, I would expect around the 8-10% mark..... Given our circumstances and history, any finance agreement would be around this mark also so the repayments will not change very much. The main difference would be that LUFC would have the asset on their own books which can help with further finance or attracting a potential buyer :scarehair: |
![]() |
|
| Sir Quej Of Quejdom | 14th March 2007 - 06:52 PM Post #10 |
|
100% Leeds
|
Maybe the "Prominent Business man" is willing to Gaurantor the loan because it is pre-emting a takover bid by him and therefore he would end up paying it anyway??????? |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
![]() Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today. Learn More · Sign-up for Free |
|
| « Previous Topic · Rebels Chat · Next Topic » |








3:12 PM Jul 11