Liverpool takeover moving quickly

[ronk]

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.

[Lee_R]

Does this mean we can sign Ged & Torres for £1 in January?

[Dameerto]

They bought a Champion's League club, they're selling a club in a relegation fight. How they expect to walk away with a profit is beyond me.

[BobKowalski]

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.

H&G effectively surrendered control of the club to RBS in return for rescheduling the debt. H&G gambled in the hope of the club being sold at a profit before the new deadline day which is 6th Oct (with 9 days grace).

Short of H&G coming up with a buyer in the next 9 days then they are screwed and no one is going to offer the £600m that they want when you can buy the business for £300m.

The only question remains is do H&G hang on like grim death in the vain hope that someone is stupid enough to meet their valuation when the main creditor values the business at £300m and is 9 days away from having outright as opposed to proxy control.

Personally I hope that the deal does through as is it secures Liverpool's future (well for the short term anyway) with owners who do not have the deep pockets to invest the way ADUG are investing in City. I just hope they keep Roy in place as he is doing a bang up job.

[Beefymcfc]

Just heard a scouser on the radio saying that he is extatic with this deal and that they don't have a problem with the Americans, just Hicks and Gillette. Sounded like he'd suck the new guys cock if he had the chance.

[ronk]

RBS are acting like typical liquidators. The value they've placed on Liverpool is their fees and their secured debt. They don't care about any other stakeholder in the slightest. They're going through some pains to appear to be on the good side of Liverpool fans for PR purposes, but that's it. The way Liverpool fans are at the moment they'd welcome a bloody nose for Hicks and Gillett, even if it wasn't necessarily good news for them.

They gain nothing from such a sale. They even end up seeing rival American sports franchise owners get rich from their misfortune. Why would they sell a club for a huge loss when they can't lose any more by fighting for a better deal?

They've got nothing left to lose, but they can hope to either get something out of the deal or cause great inconvenience for people who've been happy to try and bankrupt them or even leverage that 2nd case to get something out of the first case.

[Beefymcfc]

Was listening to an American Sports correspondent who was saying that although Henry will turn the club around, he will do it in a way that won't suit the main fanbase. He was saying that Henry turned the Redsox into a top class team, but in doing so inflated prices so high that the man on the ground could no longer afford to attend.

Looks like the Spirit of Shankley will have many more protests to come, from outside of course 'cos they won't be able to afford to get in!

[ant london]

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

[CITYSTEVEDON]

if either hicks or gillett put up the money 50mill, then they will not sell pool. and thats all whats needed to keep pool down

[The Man In Blue]

It is going to get very ugly at LFC before this deal goes through. Hicks remains determined to fight this sale at all costs

From Oliver Kay's Twitter...

[youtube]OiWDIb_nph0[/youtube]

[The Man In Blue]

Here's some more from Twitter, a text conversation between Hicks and a 5live journo about the proposed deal:

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.

This next one's a beauty - Americans eh?

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

[gillie]

What do you know i was ITK about this before it broke and i PM'd a certain poster off here.If this drags on Scouse1 will end up in administration.To be totally correct i did know who was buying but had been told by a member of the shankly mob that they had to get rid by the end of the month or it was admin and Purslow was having kittens about trying to sell.

[ronk]

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

I know, I don't have any sympathy for H&G either, I was just explaining why they're going to want to fight. It is, as you say, business. Their avarice has taken away their best chances out of this, but they're not finished yet.

[BlueMoonAwoken]

Intresting times.

[Patrick]

As a global brand and customer base, Liverpool are about as good as it gets, what a fucl up.

Also as dumb is the apparent situation that the football authorities will support any foreign owner who wants to saddle English clubs with massive debt, but will do as much as possible to frustrate a genuine benefactor actually trying to pump his own money into city

[Slim]

Would rather they got taken over by someone who could write off the debt.

Make it all the sweeter when they go down without a pariah to blame it all on.

[john@staustell]

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!

[Esky]

Their global status and brand power notwithstanding, does anyone else think that LFC is now something of a poisoned chalice?

As above, when H&G began there, they were a European heavyweight. Now, sans Gerrard and Torres, they're an upper mid-table club with few sale-worthy assets, mountains upon mountains of debt and a global fanbase that's used to dining at the Top 4 table.

Given the remonstrations of late, I don't think it'd be enough to clear what's owed and consolidate as a mid-table Premiership club. Rightly or wrongly, title fights and European cup runs have been the norm in Liverpool for 20 or 30 years. That kind of status breeds entitlement and expectation. As pragmatic as the Scousers might think they are, it'd be hard to accept new owners who didn't have the cash to rocket them back into the Premiership elite and, from what little I've read, it doesn't seem like the Red Sox people have the resources to do that (as well as to fund the new stadium, etc, etc).

Chelsea and ourselves have set the standard in that sense - where we've spent and spent, and will soon consolidate on that spending, every other takeover will be compared and contrasted against it.

Liverpool are nowhere near as bad as their current position suggest. It's a bad run of form, no more, and once Hodgson settles I'm sure they'll be in the mix for Europe.

Still, with the feeling around Anfield now and the fact that City/Arsenal/Chelsea/Spurs are all strengthening, I'd be wondering what kind of a return any potential buyer could think they'll one day be getting on their investment.

[Beefymcfc]

Their global status and brand power notwithstanding, does anyone else think that LFC is now something of a poisoned chalice?

I blame it all on good old Franky Shinawatra, or should I say credit him?

[blues-clues]

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!

That confused me as well but apparently Broughton was appointed as Chairman by RBS and was given control over board appointments. As chairman his responsibility is not to the share holders but the creditors (he was quoted as saying this in the Times this morning) this surprised me somewhat as I though it was the other way around but perhaps that was the remit he was given by RBS on his appointment. In effect RBS now have ownership of the club as it is unable to pay its debts, to all intents and purposes it is trading insolvent after October 15th. Basically when RBS lent them the £240m there were LOTS of strings attached and G&H pretty much had no choice but to accept the terms. That has now come back to bite them BIG style as it would seem they are about to lose everything they invested in the business.