What is the cost of owning and maintaining?

Leeds united, not greenfield, pay rates, utilities, maintenance and development.

comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 3 hours, 52 minutes ago
Just seen comments before I logged in.

Won’t bother with Kamara’s demented drivel but will address faiths point.

Nothing is made up.

“The accounts reveal that Leeds entered a lease agreement with Greenfield to June 2032 and were given an “initial rent-free period” of 33 months. Annual rent of Elland Road previously cost the club around £1.7m and increased every 12 months.”

https://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/sport/football/leeds-united/latest-leeds-united-news/leeds-united-announce-financial-loss-during-andrea-radrizzanis-first-year-elland-road-483815

No need to apologise faith, I won’t be reading your comments.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
paranoid

You have no idea what will happen at the end of the initial rent free period though.

One very plausible reason that the initial rent free period is only 33 months would be to protect the asset for any changes of circumstance in the future. Should the stadium have a lease for 0 rent for 20 years this would massively reduce the value of the asset and also make it very difficult to mortgage.

Unless you have any other evidence, what you are moaning about again is your speculation. And because of your incredibly negative outlook on all things, you have speculated doom & gloom.

Leeds United Football Club Limited ('LUFC' is a company registered in England and Wales. Aser Group Holding Pte Ltd (‘Aser&rsquo, a company registered in Singapore, is the ultimate parent company of LUFC via its subsidiary Greenfield Investment Pte Ltd. Andrea Radrizzani is the ultimate owner of Aser. The only other person holding 10% or more of the voting rights in LUFC is the York family via 49ers Enterprises Leeds SPV LP, a company registered in Delaware.

So work out from that where the rent goes and who pays the costs of running the club.

So work out from that where the rent goes and who pays the costs of running the club

————————

So instead of trying to be clever, why not explain what you mean.

I’ll then tell you why it is wrong for us to be paying rent 👍

comment by LIW Radchancer (U8453)
posted 11 minutes ago

So work out from that where the rent goes and who pays the costs of running the club

————————

So instead of trying to be clever, why not explain what you mean.

I’ll then tell you why it is wrong for us to be paying rent 👍
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought you were the clever one?

I skied a simple question. Why not read it and answer it?

Asked!

You didnt ask a question.

You said work it out, implying something. So explain what you implying

comment by LIW Radchancer (U8453)
posted 45 minutes ago
You didnt ask a question.

You said work it out, implying something. So explain what you implying


----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn’t implying anything. I was asking anyone who wanted to work out where the rent will go and who pays for the running of the club - from that statement on the club website.

If you can’t work it out then don’t worry - I’m sure someone will.

Personally I have no idea.

The rent will go rad company

Fans paying shed loads of everything and player sales have more or less covered the running costs the last two accounts that have been announced.



The club added in a statement that the deal would allow them to "significantly reduce their expenditure" and re-direct money to the academy, senior squad and improvements to the stadium.
————————————

Official statement when elland road was bought.

Bit strange to be now charging rent

And if FFP is such a problem, which I keep hearing from fans, like yourself

Why burden the club with more costs, which goes against FFP( stand to be corrected if it does go towards it)

So I have answered the strange question you asked, just my opinion.

So I’ll ask you a question

You agree with the club being charged rent ??

Can a company own a property and when it comes to checking the yearly books say "oh, that property belongs to us but we don't have to say owt because the people living in it don't pay rent"!..

Somehow I'd think that any owner off any property would have to say what they own and would have to say who lives in it, and than sort the paperwork out from there, I cant see people in authority excepting a company owning a property and not taking a payment on it!..

Or is that just another normal thing in the world off football?..

If it is than its no different to what Sheffield, Derby and Villa have done, except where they have sold their stadiums to themselves, Leeds have another company buying their club but pay no rent!..

Can someone explain how that works please?..

"buying their club"...

Sorry, Stadium!.

comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 14 hours, 9 minutes ago
What is the cost of owning and maintaining?

Leeds united, not greenfield, pay rates, utilities, maintenance and development.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

We can start with debt service/cost of capital/reasonable rate of return on the cost of acquiring the stadium.

What was the cost to AR’s company to buy the stadium?

Radz or Leeds didn't own Elland Rd before buying it back, so it's totally different to what other clubs have done. We won't have self valued it at 100m either, it's probably worth 10m and that's what Radz will have paid for it.

comment by Wetherby White - (Formally Harrogate) (U6810)
posted 4 minutes ago
Radz or Leeds didn't own Elland Rd before buying it back, so it's totally different to what other clubs have done. We won't have self valued it at 100m either, it's probably worth 10m and that's what Radz will have paid for it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There was a pricing calculation fir purchasing ER it was a lot more than 10 mill.

Jonny you’re right in terms of the cost of the financing.

Well, the devil's in the detail of the accounts, I'm sure.

Jonathan Wilson flags an interesting parallel with Spurs relating to the absolute necessity to continually refresh a squad that is playing the "high-pressing" style that Poch adapted from Bielsa.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2019/nov/20/mauricio-pochettino-spurs-jose-mourinho-gamble-jonathan-wilson

Levy may well have blown it big time by appointing Mourinho.

Great find Jaz.

Some striking parallels no senior signings this summer and a lot of players on 4 year deals.

comment by LIW Radchancer (U8453)
posted 13 hours, 28 minutes ago
The rent will go rad company

Fans paying shed loads of everything and player sales have more or less covered the running costs the last two accounts that have been announced.



The club added in a statement that the deal would allow them to "significantly reduce their expenditure" and re-direct money to the academy, senior squad and improvements to the stadium.
————————————

Official statement when elland road was bought.

Bit strange to be now charging rent

And if FFP is such a problem, which I keep hearing from fans, like yourself

Why burden the club with more costs, which goes against FFP( stand to be corrected if it does go towards it)

So I have answered the strange question you asked, just my opinion.

So I’ll ask you a question

You agree with the club being charged rent ??


----------------------------------------------------------------------
It depends on how it’s set up. Can it be offset against anything?

I don’t know I’m not an accountant. Maybe there is some accounting reason or maybe Radz just wants some cash back.

In principle I’m not in favour but as I said I don’t know if there’s an accounting reason.

Anyone?

comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 23 minutes ago
Great find Jaz.

Some striking parallels no senior signings this summer and a lot of players on 4 year deals.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But no mention of the £1billion cost of the stadium financed by loans, revenue and the clubs own resources.

I think Spurs will get through this and should have stuck with Poch. The special one will either be very short lived or will take them further down the table.

If there’s a comparison (other than Bielsa and a Poch) it’s that both clubs are short of working capital. Different leagues though - yet both need to attract decent crowds to fund their prospects.

We need to go up this season. Spurs need to get in the top four. Anything else could be a disaster for either club. Our saving grace is we are becoming more attractive to a buyer who wants the PL riches.

Going back to the rental issue. I know with domestic rentals you are bound by tax reasons to charge a fair rent. Letting it out under the market value, for example, is frowned upon by the inland revenue.

Yet it’s been let out free for 33 monthsz

We’re on thin ice complaining about other clubs stadia deals when our own is not straightforward.

comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 51 seconds ago
Yet it’s been let out free for 33 monthsz

We’re on thin ice complaining about other clubs stadia deals when our own is not straightforward.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Firstly who’s complaining about other clubs deals (other than those selling at inflated costs to circumnavigation FFP)?

Secondly we don’t know the ins and outs of why we are suddenly going to charge rent. Maybe they have had tax advice? Maybe they are in breach of some rule?

Bottom line is - according to some - that Greenfield own the ground, not Leeds United (which was also bought through Greenfield?). If that’s so then maybe one has to charge the other rent and pay applicable tax on the income? The other then offsets it as an expense?

Please notice the question marks.

We also have to factor in where Radz got the £20m from and how it has to be paid back.

If it’s loans from outside there will be interest and a repayment timespan. If it’s his money then I would think it’s either a loan from his company or share acquisition.

It came from somewhere and will either need paying back or the asset increase will be the goal.

Anyone know the answer?

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Back to Pablo. Love him. Keep him. He might only play 20/25 games or come on as sub but his brain and ability will be worth the cost I think.

He could even be a future manager of the club.