Interesting. Last week Master Bates told us that he would like to tell the fans more about the deal with GFH Capital but couldn't because he was bound by a confidentiality agreement; now GFH Capital Chief Executive David Haigh has claimed, "The importance for us to talk to the numerous fans and supporter groups of Leeds United on the acquisition of the club can not be underestimated, but at this time, we have to respect the confidentialities of a deal of this nature."
So let's just translate that shall we? Bates wants to be open with the fans but can't be because of a confidentiality agreement signed with GFH Capital; and Haigh wants to be open with the fans but can't be because of a confidentiality agreement signed with Bates. Hmmmm.
Here's an interesting thought. Given both parties want to talk to the fans and both parties feel constrained by the confidentiality agreement, why don't they both agree to tear it up?
And of course they would do if this was anything close to a done deal. But somebody is playing silly buggers. Is it Bates, holding out for more than GFH Capital want to pay? I doubt it. He would then be inviting rival bidders to join the fray.
So is it GFH Capital? They are feeding off of free publicity at the moment and rumours continue to circulate regarding their financial well being. In fact, the Yorkshire Evening Post claim "Gulf Finance House held less than £4m in cash in June this year, £800m less than at the end of 2008." That seems a pretty dangerous rumour to peddle if there is no truth in it. If I was the CEO of GFH Capital, I would be threatening legal action if a newspaper was unfairly slurring the reputation of my company. After all, a bank without reserves is like harem without women: fcuking useless!
So what is going on? Haigh insists he has spoken to nobody - and most definitely not LUST - and is even denying quotations attributed to him. He has not claimed the deal could be done in three weeks apparently. Nor did he compare the club to Pamela Anderson.
Meanwhile another GFH Capital talking head, Salem Patel has said that both sides are looking to reach "as swift a conclusion to this deal as is possible". Really? Then sign the bloody contract and show Bates the exit! If a buyer wants to buy, a seller wants to sell and the deal has been agreed, there's no reason for a delay is there? Unless the buyer doesn't have the funds to complete the deal, of course. Then the delays could stretch on for ever.
Incredibly, in the light of the lack of substance in the so called "joint statement", United chief-executive officer Shaun Harvey said: “As with all speculation, not all of it is correct. And we are pleased that both are able to clarify the situation.” That is clarify as in stirring up the muddied waters or steaming up a frosted glass window presumably?
Five months in and still nobody has any idea what is really going on!