If you want proof of the Agents comments look at the post from Get Em On Side below - taking his bat home and not attending next game. Well aren't you the future! Well done Chairman - one down already! Get a grip!

That was my interpretation from Michael Carter's statement and I was relatively optimistic when reading the text. However, after reading the post match comments from RA and his slant on the situation. He alludes to a cashflow problem as he states that Tim Smith was sold to pay player wages. I don't know whether this is in the immediate future ie this month's wages or further down the line in the off season when we don't have as much income coming in (hence the need to buy season tickets now). The player's reaction as outlined by RA implies to me more of an immediate 'problem', but perhaps I'm (hopefully) wrong.

Apparently Radio Leeds said prior to yesterday's game that MC would be holding a press conference today, but they did not know the time.

On another note, has anyone seen a photograph of MC, either on the official website or in the general media?
Or is he really Daddycool?

I've spoken to him in person - he's a tall chap who is always suited and booted; drives a rather impressive vehicle and certainly does not have a massive furry head and fake sunglasses. I'm unaware of his ability to somersaults or his prowess in racing mascots over the length of a rugby field.

I'd laugh my t its off if he gave his press conference in a daddy cool suit!

under capitalisation from my understanding (not knowing the full details i grant you but being a chartered accountant) basically means that in order for the business to continue is current capacity will need to find £400k.

Looking at the cost base of the business that suggests that the business cannot afford to pay all the staff salaries that it is currently contracted to do so - i.e. it can’t afford all the players’ salaries that it is contracted to over the off season.

That logic would make the sale of Smith more reasonable. You reduce the financial burden by reducing your future spend but at the same time get extra funds to cover the existing burden.

It does not suggest that it has £400k of debt looming which it cant pay and therefore will default on this but the directors have looked ahead and said we need to find £x to carry on with the same level of expense that we have now.