Liverpool FC Forum

[NANNY RED]

Told you the Inter fans were singin on Sunday Theres only one Roy Hodgson

[JBG]

We're going to hear a lot of rumours over the next couple of days, particularly from people who claim to have inside sources from banks claiming that they know about refinancing/deals with RBS/whatever.

A word of warning: chances are that these rumours/sources will most likely be 99% .

Banks owe a legal duty known as a fiduciary duty to their customers. This means that they have a higher standard of duty to their clients than say, a department store has to its customers or a restuarant to its patrons. It means that not only must they be careful with their customers affairs, they have to be extra careful.

This fiduciary duty also means that banks owe a duty of confidentiality to their clients. If a bank breaches this confidentiality and a customer suffers some form of damage or loss as a result, then the bank itself may be liable for damages for this loss.

Leaving aside this legal duty it has always been encumbant on banks as a matter of good business practice to maintain confidentiality. Who wants to go to a bank where its employees are likely to run their mouths about your private affairs in the pub?

If a bank employee breaches this duty of confidentiality it will be an automatic sacking offence and they will likely be blacklisted from the banking sector forever as having committed a cardinal sin.

Nonetheless, bankers are aware that in the age of anonymous internet forums, some low grade bank employees are likely to leak information and as such will take extra care in high profile cases. This will be particularly the case in relation to Liverpool FC and Hicks/Gillett where there have been a number of minor leaks in the past. If Hicks/Gillett are doing business at the moment its likely that they'll stress big time to their bankers that the transaction has to be a 100% confidential and will back this up with a threat to take legal proceedings against the bank if there are any leaks.

Therefore major transactions or even minor transactions involving high profile clients will only be handled by senior executives at a bank who will keep their files under personal lock and key and who will only divulge certain details of the file to their most trusted employees.

Therefore anyone who claims to have an inside track on what is happening at the banks are talking , pure and simple. it just doesnt happen.

There will always be a certain minimum amount of information which will get leaked, such as a low level employee who might have spotted Hicks or one of his underlings having an appointment or calling into a bank for a meeting, and with high profile clients there will be gossip beside the water cooler about whats happening, but thats it.

If a person comes on here, ahem, mentioning no names, claiming to have a friend in a bank who has the inside track then they are talking , pure and simple. Its possible that this insider has the tiniest amount of info, for example, he saw Hicks talking to his boss, and he has exaggerated that tiniest piece of truth out of all proportions, just to look important, and our forum member is gullible enough to believe him.

[akumaface]

We're going to hear a lot of rumours over the next couple of days, particularly from people who claim to have inside sources from banks claiming that they know about refinancing/deals with RBS/whatever.

A word of warning: chances are that these rumours/sources will most likely be 99% .

Banks owe a legal duty known as a fiduciary duty to their customers. This means that they have a higher standard of duty to their clients than say, a department store has to its customers or a restuarant to its patrons. It means that not only must they be careful with their customers affairs, they have to be extra careful.

This fiduciary duty also means that banks owe a duty of confidentiality to their clients. If a bank breaches this confidentiality and a customer suffers some form of damage or loss as a result, then the bank itself may be liable for damages for this loss.

Leaving aside this legal duty it has always been encumbant on banks as a matter of good business practice to maintain confidentiality. Who wants to go to a bank where its employees are likely to run their mouths about your private affairs in the pub?

If a bank employee breaches this duty of confidentiality it will be an automatic sacking offence and they will likely be blacklisted from the banking sector forever as having committed a cardinal sin.

Nonetheless, bankers are aware that in the age of anonymous internet forums, some low grade bank employees are likely to leak information and as such will take extra care in high profile cases. This will be particularly the case in relation to Liverpool FC and Hicks/Gillett where there have been a number of minor leaks in the past. If Hicks/Gillett are doing business at the moment its likely that they'll stress big time to their bankers that the transaction has to be a 100% confidential and will back this up with a threat to take legal proceedings against the bank if there are any leaks.

Therefore major transactions or even minor transactions involving high profile clients will only be handled by senior executives at a bank who will keep their files under personal lock and key and who will only divulge certain details of the file to their most trusted employees.

Therefore anyone who claims to have an inside track on what is happening at the banks are talking , pure and simple. it just doesnt happen.

There will always be a certain minimum amount of information which will get leaked, such as a low level employee who might have spotted Hicks or one of his underlings having an appointment or calling into a bank for a meeting, and with high profile clients there will be gossip beside the water cooler about whats happening, but thats it.

If a person comes on here, ahem, mentioning no names, claiming to have a friend in a bank who has the inside track then they are talking , pure and simple. Its possible that this insider has the tiniest amount of info, for example, he saw Hicks talking to his boss, and he has exaggerated that tiniest piece of truth out of all proportions, just to look important, and our forum member is gullible enough to believe him.

But what if the buyers leaking the information? 

[metalhead]

just to look important, and our forum member is gullible enough to believe him.

Now thats where your wrong

[Redman in wales]

isn't the deadline tomorrow?

no its the 15th.

but be prepared for another extension.

mark my words, refinance will be granted and the loan will be extended

[NANNY RED]

isn't the deadline tomorrow?

no its the 15th.

but be prepared for another extension.

mark my words, refinance will be granted and the loan will be extended

Got the same feeling mate,
was told first hand by someone who works quite high up in RBS that the bank dont want to own us , dont want to take us back,

[jacdaniel]

We're quickly declining on the field at the moment.  Another year under these Yanks is unthinkable.  It will surely be the death of the club for many years to come.

What i don't understand is why Hicks wont just leave?  He is not going to make any money when we're in the championship and all our best players have left.

[Reg]

I'd say its 99.9% sure RBS will extend however the terms will be even more stringent than the last, giving an instruction to Broughton to go outside the box to sell the club as he sees fit hopefully an investor/fans scheme.

[Reg]

Theres a rumour on TLW that the new owner wants Rafa back that will cheer the Royston lovers up no doubt 

Rafa who? 

[JBG]

just to look important, and our forum member is gullible enough to believe him.

Now thats where your wrong

Of course, mentioning no names. 

[Redx]

We're quickly declining on the field at the moment.  Another year under these Yanks is unthinkable.  It will surely be the death of the club for many years to come.

What i don't understand is why Hicks wont just leave?  He is not going to make any money when we're in the championship and all our best players have left.

Thats what I was thinking, why dont Hicks just leave..

[Fauxy]

We're quickly declining on the field at the moment.  Another year under these Yanks is unthinkable.  It will surely be the death of the club for many years to come.

What i don't understand is why Hicks wont just leave?  He is not going to make any money when we're in the championship and all our best players have left.

Thats what I was thinking, why dont Hicks just leave..

Well he obviously still thinks if he controls the club for a while longer he can sell the club for a larger amount so he can get profit.

Allll about the profit. He doesnt want to walk away with a loss.

[Kukilon]

It would probably fetch Hicks more money if all of our top players would be sold. Then he can sell the club cheaper. The players are worth nothing to the owner but a place in the EPL/CL is.

[Redangel]

Rumours are that there is an emergency board meeting tomorrow and Broughton is going on Thursday. Don't know anymore but it's been reported on Lfcreds and a friend who is usually spot on has just txt the same.

[Ciggy]

Latest rumours are emergency board meeting called for tommorrow Broughton resigning on thursday, if true it means twit & tw@t have re-financed or got the money from somewhere.

And that Kirdi b@stard has resurfaced.

Related News:World Sports Canadian Group Shelves Plan to Purchase Liverpool Over Valuation, Debts
By Tariq Panja - Oct 5, 2010 3:34 PM GMT+0100 Email Share
Business Exchange Twitter Delicious Digg Facebook LinkedIn Newsvine Propeller Yahoo! Buzz Print A Canada-based Syrian investor says his group shelved plans to acquire Liverpool after failing to agree on a price with the 18-time English soccer champion’s owners and amid uncertainty over its debt.

Yahya Kirdi, who says he’s leading a Gulf-based group, said the club’s three English directors are divided from American co- owners George Gillett and Tom Hicks. In June the board blocked an attempt by Hicks to refinance parent company Kop Football (Holdings) Ltd.’s 237 million-pound ($376 million) debt, which has grown to about 280 million pounds because of penalty fees.

“Right now is not the time for me and my group to enter into any negotiations,” Kirdi said in a telephone interview. “Once everyone is united and there’s logic in the price and the overall deal, me and my group will be prepared to return to the table.”

Most of the debt is owned by Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc and is scheduled to mature later this month. That gives prospective buyers days to reach a deal with Barclays Capital, the adviser appointed by Gillett and Hicks in April to handle the sale. The board plans to meet tomorrow. Hicks said the team, which cost 219 million pounds including debt in 2007, is worth as much as 800 million pounds.

If the club isn’t sold, and RBS doesn’t give the team’s owners an extension, Liverpool may end up being run by the government-owned lender. The bank hasn’t detailed what its plans are should the debt be unpaid when it matures.

Public Interest

Kirdi and Hong Kong-based QSL Sports Ltd. were the only two groups that went public with their interest. Indian conglomerate Sahara said in August it looked at a bid but won’t make an offer for the time being. QSL has also withdrawn.

Kirdi, a one-time pizza-business operator, said he understood why his refusal to name his backers has provoked some Liverpool supporters into questioning his seriousness. Gillett’s son Foster is a friend of Kirdi. One fan website said the Syrian’s interest was “the joke bid.”

“I’m a serious man,” he said. “I’m not playing but my group said they didn’t want to go public because we haven’t done the deal.”

Liverpool, which is in the bottom three of the Premier League after suffering its worst league start for more than half a century, needs “millions and millions” to be spent on rebuilding the team if it’s to start winning titles again, Kirdi said.

Worst Start

He said potential buyers would probably want RBS to defer much of the repayment of the loan as a condition of buying the team.

“That would allow investment in the team and work on the new stadium to begin,” he said.

Soccer is hugely popular in the Middle East. Qatar is bidding to become the region’s first World Cup host in 2022 and Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, a member of the Abu Dhabi ruling family, has pumped more than 500 million pounds into Manchester City since buying the team in 2008.

“Football is like drinking water: It’s in the blood in the Gulf,” Kirdi said. “I’m sure if Liverpool was bought by someone from the Middle East they would be like Sheikh Mansour and focus on it 24 hours a day.”

To contact the reporter on this story: Tariq Panja in London at at tpanja@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Christopher Elser at at celser@bloomberg.net