“I was contacted last year by a man who asked me to give him an interview for a Leeds United fanzine. When I, quite reasonably, asked him what its circulation was he replied, “That’s none of your business”, before disappearing into the night. If there is to be transparency then it has got to apply to everyone.”
- from Ken Bates’ programme notes v Nottingham Forest, April 2, 2011
Dear Mr Bates,
In your programme notes for the match against Nottingham Forest you wrote about the Government’s ongoing football governance enquiry. Following Shaun Harvey’s appearance, the spotlight of this enquiry has become firmly fixed on you and the opaque offshore ownership structure at Leeds United, and it now appears that you wish to deflect the focus from yourself and onto various independent fan’s organisations and collaborations by demanding transparency from all.
During your six year tenure we have learned to read your programme notes with tongue planted firmly in cheek. Normally we simply laugh them off in the same way we would politely ignore the embarrassingly drunken uncle at a wedding, but in this case we cannot allow the implication that The Square Ball is anything but transparent to pass unchallenged.
Your programme notes misrepresent the nature of your encounter with The Square Ball, and your conclusion besmirches the good name of the publication we help to create. We are prepared to excuse your poor recollection of events that evening because, as the Jersey courts are well aware, your recollection of the truth is not always accurate. We are not, however, prepared to excuse misrepresentation, whether deliberate or not.
When We Contacted You
The occasion you speak of in your notes was the Lorimer’s Bar event on April 20, 2010. The night was attended by the co-Editor of the fanzine, Michael Normanton. You may recall an interesting evening where several searching questions were asked about the club’s ownership and the fans’ right to know who owns our club, and where our money was going. You will no doubt recall telling those present that the owners wished to remain anonymous, we had no right to know who they were, and that any complaints about your chairmanship could not be directed to anybody from Forward Sports Fund. In essence, we would have to like it or lump it. (As an aside, Shaun Harvey recently told the football governance enquiry that neither he nor you knew who the owners of Leeds United were. If he was telling the truth then how could you possibly know that nobody from Forward Sports Fund would be prepared to listen to fans with complaints about your chairmanship? If you do not know who you report to then how can you possibly speak for them?)
At the conclusion of the question and answer session, Michael approached you, introduced himself and asked you for an interview for The Square Ball. Your response was to ask what the magazine’s circulation was. Michael asked you who owned Leeds United. “That’s none of your business”, you replied. “In that case,” responded Michael, “our circulation is none of your business.”
Quid pro quo.
You will recall that, at that point, you turned away from Michael and engaged in conversation elsewhere. Far from “disappearing into the night,” Michael stayed at the Lorimer’s Bar event to its conclusion, and actually returned to you before he left. You may remember that he handed you a Visit Beeston postcard containing his name, telephone number and email address. He handed you these precisely so he could not be accused of approaching you anonymously. He told you to give him a call if you decided to take us up on the offer of an interview. We’re disappointed not to have heard from you yet, although you have mentioned the event twice in your programme notes since, so you can’t have forgotten it.
Our Circulation
Our circulation is not and never has been a secret. We have written about it on several occasions previously on Waccoe, the largest fans internet messageboard, and there is a very recent discussion about the matter on The Square Ball forum. The information is in the public domain if only you look for it. On April 20, 2010, you were told it was none of your business on principle, because rightly or wrongly, we believe the fans of Leeds United have a right to know who owns our club.
In order to prevent any future implications from yourself about a lack of transparency on our part, we will put The Square Ball’s publication figures here on our website and in this open letter to you.
This season we will print ten issues of The Square Ball, with each print run being between 1,000 copies to 1,400 copies. Print runs are determined by the number of fixtures covered, and the day and time upon which they fall (like you, we curse live TV appearances because they impact our sales). With two issues still to print this season we cannot give you a final definitive figure for our circulation, because the playoffs will have a bearing on the size of our final print run, but let us estimate that we will publish 12,000 copies this season.
Of course that is a modest figure compared to your programme sales, which no doubt swallow up that number in two matches or less, but we are proud of resurrecting an important part of Leeds United fan culture from a standing start, without a penny in the bank. Demand for our fanzine often far outstrips supply, but we cannot afford to financially overstretch ourselves when we judge the size of the print run, because we operate on such fine margins.
As a further point, The Square Ball is now operated as a limited company, so records of our finances, including any tax we may pay on any profits we may generate, will be available from Companies House. We would not have the brass neck to demand transparency from anybody else unless we were upholding that standard ourselves. So we are.
The Next Question
We must admit to being curious as to why you wish to know the size of our circulation. We do not wish to leap to a false conclusion, but going on past evidence and the self same notes in which you deride the Guardian’s circulation figures in relation to Yorkshire Radio’s audience, we are sadly drawn towards the assumption that you wish to belittle our publication and declare it unrepresentative of the fan base. You will have to forgive us if we are wrong, but you have form in this respect.
To claim that The Square Ball is unrepresentative would be to entirely misunderstand what we are doing and why we are doing it. We do not claim to represent anybody; we simply offer a platform for fans to express themselves in an unrestricted, uncensored way. The club’s public face and its media output is so tightly controlled, with any uncomfortable or unwanted questions kept at a safe distance. The hardest thing to stomach about your programme notes is that there is absolutely no right to reply when you denigrate Leeds United fans. The Square Ball, in all its forms, aims to offer exactly the opposite: open, healthy discussion. If somebody reads something they disagree with, we offer them the platform to respond, whether we believe they are right or wrong. We encourage it. Vive le difference.
Our circulation may be miniscule in the grand scheme of things, but in my opinion it’s what we stand for that gives us great integrity.
Democracy
So while our sales figures may only be modest, there is more to it than that. The beautifully democratic thing about the internet, and in particular a news aggregator such as NewsNow, is that it gives us equal standing to the club’s website, through which you channel some of your opinions. Of course the internet has its downsides, allowing any and all opinions the platform to express themselves, but it also allows me a place to publish this letter to a number of people far in excess of those that will read your programme notes. To us, that seems fair. All we can do is politely offer our response for the sake of balance. As always, the reader will judge.
If you would like to offer us any further response then you can rest assured that The Square Ball has pages available for you.
Finally
In order to finally put the implication of a lack of transparency to bed, we will publish our final figures for the season in the first issue of next season. We fully agree that if there is to be transparency then it should apply to everyone. We look forward to your contribution to transparency by all.
So, our circulation figures are now in the full public domain, you have them, and you are free to use them as you please. We’ve done our bit, so how about that interview now, Mr Bates? You have Michael’s number. Quid pro quo.
Yours sincerely
Michael Normanton & Dan Moylan
Co-editors
The Square Ball
Company no: 7355076
Footnote 1
In your programme notes from the Nottingham Forest game, you state that the circulation figures of the Guardian are lower than Yorkshire Radio’s audience figures. The latest Audit Bureau of Circulations (ABC) figures for the Guardian show a daily circulation of over 262,600. The latest audience figures, supplied by the Radio Audience Joint Research (RAJAR) body, show Yorkshire Radio to have an average of 70,000 listeners a week. Could you please explain how you came to your conclusion?
Footnote 2
With further reference to the Audit Bureau of Circulation, the body owned by the media industry, whose role it is to independently verify circulation figures of newspapers and magazines, you can find circulation figures for both Manchester United and Chelsea’s official magazines. However, there is no evidence on ABC’s website of circulation figures for the soon-to-be-defunct Leeds Leeds Leeds magazine. Is or was Leeds Leeds Leeds a member of ABC? Have its circulation figures ever been independently verified?
As ever the square ball is spot on with its observations and editorial comments. please keep up the great work MOT
A nice factual piece of journalism, but don’t expect a response from Bates as he does not deal in “facts”, only self propaganda and insults.
Brilliant and well written. No hint of malice, sarcasm or any of the other tactics Mr Chairman uses in his publication. I await his response
Well done
When he is told by Shaun how to switch on his computer (which entails the latter also reading a manual passed on to him by ‘Dewsy’), Ken will see a well-argued and reasoned letter based on facts.
Which he doesn’t deal with ever so well.
I cannot understand why anyone still purchases the programme. Of course you get your collectors who won’t want to ruin a life’s passion, but they should be passionate about a programme which chronicles the life and times of their football club – and not one which provides a platform for the personal ramblings of its chairman.
Excellently worded. Keep up the good work, this is the non offensive style that is sadly lacked by KB!
It puts the right questions in a factual statement.
Ken Bates can either ignore the article, slag it off or if he has any sense at all commend it, swallow his pride and give an honest interview. I doubt the latter as he would be forced to become evasive over the ownership again.
well put.
Good stuff. Now all you have to do is direct Dewsy’s attention to it so he can print it off and give it to the chairman in a format he understands. This will inevitably be followed by another rant in the programme notes. Still, there’s no such thing as bad publicity.
Keep on at him. Ken Bates is everything that’s wrong with football and Leeds United are the most cynically run club in history
How I wish this measured, polite, detailed and (apparently) factual open letter will get a similar “transparent” reply from Bates. But history says I shouldn’t hold my breath. Hoping against hope that the promised legislation, which has been granted Parliamentry time soon, comes to pass into law- and PDQ. And IF we creep into the Prem, will that also turn the screws on ownership transparency obligations? After all, £30-£40 million (?? Not sure of the latest figures) will be shoved at the club over the following 4 years-even if we drop straight back down.The opportunity for this to be hi-jacked without accountability, as things are set up at the moment.That’s the scale of mis-appropiation that would/should have the FSA on red alert for an urgent legal based enquiry, surely, if was in the City?
Keep up the really good work, guys.
you’re getting dragged down to his level now.
Not at all, Kev G. I think TSB are trying to drag Kenneth up to theirs.
Beautifully written. Over to you Ken
Thanks for sensible article.
I can’t comment about the accuracy of conflicting accounts of the meeting/altercation between Ken Bates and Michael Normanton. But that is not important.
I have learned some facts and figures about The Square Ball that I didn’t know before. Again, not really so important (no disrepect).
What is important is that I know I can find out more if I wish; that information is in the public domain, as it should be. How much more important that such transparency should apply to our football club? OUR football club.
What I do know is that The Square Ball invites ‘ve learned more about The Square Ball
great piece spot on, Bates is a classic bully his absolutely entitled to his own opinions but not his own facts!
Well put! Doubt you will get a call or reply from Uncle Ken.
He will just continue to spout his usual propaganda and not address the issue directly
Though I think the above is worth saying, youre playing right into Bates’ hands by rising to his taunts. Keep on pushing for the truth and dont get pulled into this sort of thing by Bates. I read the programme notes, and couldnt help thinking, is this guy running a football club or does he think he’s writing a column for private eye?
Fantastic letter. Can Ken resist a reply? I think not.
I’ll be listening to Yorkshire Radio’s interview on Wednesday with extra interest now.
May I echo those of you above and thanks for informing us who was behind KB’s Saturday allegations. This is a beautifully written piece without venom or spite. I will buy your publication in future. Only factual well written jounalism will bring this tyrant down.
Good article. No chance you’ll get a coherent reply though I’m sure. He’s a little (read ‘very’!) old and set in his ways for that, and of course he’s never wrong.
But hold on, did I miss something- since when was Leeds Leeds Leeds ‘soon to be defunct’? Anyone know what’s going on here? Don’t really see why it should be closed down, that sounds like a retrograde step. Not as if it’s free even for members anymore…
So refreshing to read a well considered and factually correct response to his lordships programme propaganda. I disagree with anyone who says you are stopping to his level, quite the opposite, you have replied without feeling the need to be-little and poke fun at those without the chance for a reply.
Hopefully some of the pro bates sheep who frequent waccoe and believe every word that comes out of official sources will give some consideration to this article and start to question the running our our club.
Excellent article on this darker business that shrouds the name of Leeds United….Cant wait for Kens reply
really good reply..can’t ever see ken doing an interview though as we all know too well he tells us very little about our club apart from the bare facts..this issue regarding our ownership has been rumbling around for too long now, I for one am becoming a little concerned why whoever it is owns us will not let themselves be known, what do they have to hide???????..well done for tackling him about this..keep up the crusade..M.O.T…
Absolutely spot on.
I think he no longer has any excuse for not giving you an interview, he won’t give you a straight answer!
I just don’t understand why he is allowed to get away with printing lies in an official club programme, it isn’t what it’s for.
Clearly, concisely and calmly argued. So unlike Mr Bates. Keep up the good work, TSB.
mot
Great piece! As a Norwegian I’m not as in the middle of it as you all are, but I am a faithful follower of both TSS, Clarke One Nil, and of course TSB amongst others.
This is one of the best written pieces I’ve seen in a while, and although I doubt you’ll get your interview with Kenneth, I am positive his hair turned even whiter after your letter. I hope for all of our’s sake that he responds in some way, but I somehow doubt it’ll make much sense…
Anyways, let’s win the final 7 as well after seeing off NF. Feeling optimistic (No joking, I am!) on our chances for the run-in now.
MOT
There is zero chance of Bates giving an interview to anyone or anything that’s not for the profit Leeds. That’s why he does all his communications via the programme and the radio station. I don’t have a problem with that at all to be honest as the money generated can be reinvested in the club.
I also couldn’t give a crap who owns us and who runs Leeds United as long as they manage it sensibly and support the manager and the team.
When has anyone liked a chairman be it football or otherwise. No matter who is at the helm they will get stick and probably are a wanker. But I prefer our wanker than most of the others!
I do wonder sometimes where this sort of thing is going, not wishing to come across as being too mystic here, but fine I was pretty convinced when I read Bates Column, that it might end up with some responses like the above, where he was proven to be dealing in the realms of opinion rahter than fact, but does anyone on here actually think that he will change his ways, or that these exchanges will prick the conscience of a wealthy investor? Because they havent so far
Looking at yesterdays turnover of £27M (while we were in league one) and a profit of £2m (admittedly a £700K operating loss) youre looking at having to offer Ken at least £50M to shift him, and a further £20m? i think to buy ER? correct me please if thats wrong.
So does anyone on here know of someone who could do that? Because if we dont then we will be arguing with KB from his old folks home in ten years from now if we dont…
Very well written, if he does sober up and get back to you why not ask him who gave him permission to rip the East Stand apart. Once we have established that, we may find out who owns it.Unless he has been very naughty and claimed squatters rights.
Excellent piece of writing. Top marks. However good it is though, I would expect Geezer Bates to do what he always does, and ignore it.
That day may be coming to an end, as there is now talk of Leeds not being allowed promotion if they gain it.
The reason – “The chief executive of the Football League Richard Scudamore explained to MP`s at the Football Governance enquiry that they need better disclosure from Leeds as to who owns the club.”
Excellent stuff.
It’s a shame we all already know what our Chairman’s response will be…
Beautifully crafted piece – well done Square Ball. We all know it will not get anywhere in the long run but I suspect immense personal satisfaction in at least trying
Superb letter, don’t hold your breath for a reply though, unless it is from his solicitors of course! Good healthy replies too, prompted a debate on a number of things, ownership of the club, stadium, Thorp Arch etc. I do take on board those replies that suggest he is doing a good job, but do remember that we as fans are being squeezed and squeezed in terms of product pricing, with many other products you can walk away to a better value rival, but not with a football club! He has us by the nuts and is squeezing every last penny out of us. He bleats about the cost of Thorp Arch, and how previous regimes have left us with this legacy, but who owns TA? Who is benefittng from the ever increasing rent?
Every game he is poking at someone he does not like for whatever reason, I want to read about his plans for Leeds United not his squabbles with journalists, MP’s etc. nor his plans for hotels (like Leeds needs more hotels!) shopping centres etc.
Finally after about 3 weeks of ticket sales his notes tell us that ticket sales for Rod Stewart are, (having sold approx 1/3 of them)going well! Any regular attendee at such a function will tell you that tickets can sel out in a matter of hours! I@m not sure if it says more about Rod Stewart as an attraction or how far our chairmans head is in Cloud Cuckoo Land (remember our club is in his hands!)
Keep up the good work TSB
[...] Unfortunately, there was no response or recognition of The Square Ball’s Open Letter To Ken Bates. [...]
It’s the spir [url=http://www.win7keyforsale.com]free windows 7 ultimate product key[/url] that counts, isn’t it? The city’s restaurants and hotels are dripping with tinsel- good places for a mug of cheer. windows 7 professional upgrade key In case an individual who posses a license for hunting than http://www.win7keyforsale.com is more commonly referred as lawful hunting in order to distinguish [url=http://www.win7keyforsale.com]www.win7keyinsale.com[/url] from poaching which in turn is the practice of killing, trapping or capturing of the hunted species. As a result, no matter what I s and write, I always have some scrap of paper with words.
[...] burnt between previous ownerships and independent Leeds United outlets. The case in point being Chairman Ken Bates’ dismissal of fanzine The Square Ball in his programme notes before a home game against Nottingham Forest in April 2011. It’s no [...]
[...] burnt between previous ownerships and independent Leeds United outlets. The case in point being Chairman Ken Bates’ dismissal of fanzine The Square Ball in his programme notes before a home game against Nottingham Forest in April 2011. It’s no [...]