ronk wrote:Looks like John Henry, the Red Sox owner, is in pole position to become the next owner of Liverpool. He seems to have a good track record but it's hard to know how that will transfer. He's certainly not the lifelong Liverpool supporter their fans crave.
At this stage I have to admit to having doubts about whether this will take place. RBS have been playing tough with Hicks and Gillett and the board members seem eager to sell and get out of there at any price, but that's sorta the issue.
£300 covers the RBS debt & fees, and the costs relating to expenditure on Stanley Park so far. There's essentially zero left for Hicks and Gillett to cover either their ownership or their own loans (about £140m) to Liverpool FC.
Short of the club going into administration those debts will still count. Hicks and Gillet bought Liverpool for £435m, bollowing £185m from RBS and funded a spending spree. I have lots of problems with what they've done and how they've done it but they've still put a lot of their own money into buying the club and it's strange to see it possibly being taken over for such a huge loss.
This is all being pretty strange.
It is going to get very ugly at LFC before this deal goes through. Hicks remains determined to fight this sale at all costs
had correspondence with Tom Hicks "We've legally reconstituted the board and the board is not in favour"
"we've removed Purslow and Ayres"
last night emergency board meeting via conference call. Clear Hicks+Gillet being outvoted 3 v 2.
Hicks: "I'm replacing Purslow/Ayre". Broughton: "You can't do that." Hicks "I've just done it". Hicks then put the phone down
Tom Hicks latest text to 5live: "that's why there are laws and courts" with reference to his contested "removal" of Ayre and Purslow
Hicks spokesman tells Bloomberg Broughton didn't have power to block changes to LFC board. Sale unlawful owners claim
ant london wrote:Ronk mate, RBS are acting like most people would who had lent a lot of money out and had a borrower who didn't look like they were going to stivk to their side of the bargain.
They are not "ignoring all other stakeholders" per se....the simple fact is that their loans rank in priority to everyone else's claims.
Sure its not very touchey feeley and warm cuddly stuff but that is business and its the rules of the game....not RBS' rules.
RBS have given Hicks and Gillett more than enough breathing space on this. They may now exercise their rights but if people want to point the finger of blame at people who "prejudiced Liverpool FCs stakeholders' interests" they should look at Hicks, Gillett, the LFC board of directors who took on the loans.....and David Moores/Rick Parry who got them into this mess.
I know quite a few people who have been very closely involved in lots of parts of this saga over the last 3 years. It boils down to very unrealistic expectations on behalf of the owners and directors who have rebuffed exit route after exit route until they got to this.
I have zero sympathy
Esky wrote:Their global status and brand power notwithstanding, does anyone else think that LFC is now something of a poisoned chalice?
john@staustell wrote:Beats me how this 3-man board goes against the owners who hired them. I know about the RBS debt but surely it's a bizarre set-up? Not sure about how a judge will see that, although Twitter e-mails is probably not the best way for Hicks to build his legal arguments!
All these new guys are doing is making the same noises as Hicks and Gilette, who said, categorically:
They wouldn't use leverage against the club
They would invest in new players (done this bit - £170M)
They would start digging the new stadium next month (at the time)
Also anyone see that £60M has been spent on planning and research etc for the new stadium? Scandalous - lots of 'consultants' involved there making a packet!
Return to The Maine Football forum
Users browsing this forum: Bluemoon4610, Hazy2, Pretty Boy Lee, Scatman and 171 guests