Liverpool FC Forum

by **fivecups** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 9:34 am

SouthCoastShankly wrote:
devaney wrote:
bavlondon wrote:Good post Treywn! Out of the 3 current parties in the running I'd have to side with Huang. I don't expect them to throw away money each year but I would expect them to at least get our squad in a good nough shape to get back into the top 4 and later push for the title.

How can you possibly make such an uneducated selection when by your own admission only yesterday you haven't got a clue what sovereign debt is?

Also a top four position should be within our grasp with or without a new owner.

With the investment a new buyer will offer, I woud expect a title challenge at least!

Blimey..

16-1 for title Liverpool. I remember we were 7-4 last season. I put a tenner on every year as a show of blind optimism.

by **Ciggy** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 9:34 am

lakes10 wrote:ok say they do take over, i am the only one that is uncomfortable that this bid might be back by the Chinese government?

Do we want to open that can of worms? If we do we will be going around in circles all day.

The USA 65 years ago this week, dropped TWO atomic bombs on Japan and neutralised 60,000 Japanese (mainly civilians) in one go. And lets not go there with Iraq and Afghanistan and sweat shops.

And Britians Human Rights, protects terrorists, Peadofiles and murderers.

by **tubby** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 9:42 am

fivecups wrote:
SouthCoastShankly wrote:
devaney wrote:
bavlondon wrote:Good post Treywn! Out of the 3 current parties in the running I'd have to side with Huang. I don't expect them to throw away money each year but I would expect them to at least get our squad in a good nough shape to get back into the top 4 and later push for the title.

How can you possibly make such an uneducated selection when by your own admission only yesterday you haven't got a clue what sovereign debt is?

Also a top four position should be within our grasp with or without a new owner.

With the investment a new buyer will offer, I woud expect a title challenge at least!

Blimey..

16-1 for title Liverpool. I remember we were 7-4 last season. I put a tenner on every year as a show of blind optimism.

Up until last season I used to do that with the CL each year. Came off one year! :laugh:

by **Ciggy** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 9:42 am

From the CIC website:

CIC undertakes its investments based on a set of principles:

CIC selects investments based on economic and financial objectives, and an assessment of the commercial return.

CIC allocates capital and assets within the given risk tolerance of the owner to maximize shareholder value.

CIC usually does not seek an active role in the companies in which it invests nor attempts to influence those companies’ operations.

CIC seeks long-term, stable, sustainable, and risk-adjusted return.

http://www.china-inv.cn/cicen/investment/investment_investment.html

by **lakes10** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 9:46 am

Ciggy from what i was told is that Andy Lynch handed over a 5 year plan and all the information on their bid, this coverd who and how the bid was to be founded, going by what you posted this might not now be the case.

by **SouthCoastShankly** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 9:49 am

lakes10 wrote:ok say they do take over, i am the only one that is uncomfortable that this bid might be back by the Chinese government?

I'd be more worried if I was owned by Saudi Arabia (Man City)

by **Scottbot** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 9:59 am

boodiddy1 wrote:Benny this so true. But, there is one thing that scares me. I really believe the board would go against broughton. How do we not know that Purslow hasnt been offered a sweetner from Hicks? Isnt Ayre also hicks man?

its just a fear i have. I really hope the Haung bid goes through. Its similar to DIC takeover, which would of been bebeficial to us.

We can see what hicks does. Look at today with the rangers. He's defaulted on so much. The man doesnt care.

I've got the same worries about the board mate. Hicks employed Ian Ayre and has sung his praises on several occasions over the last 18 months. Purslow is another Hicks/Gillette man plus they both have a vote themselves. Who else is on the board beyond Broughton?

by **tubby** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:00 am

Good quote from Tompkins on twitter.

"Personally, I don't think anyone with the kind of money needed to buy #LFC will be squeaky clean and morally robust. But need to be careful."

by **Scottbot** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:05 am

this is gonna keep going back and forward, changing every day by the looks of things. The situation is so unique compared to your usual football takeover with the owners SUPPOSEDLY not taking part in the sales process and yet desperately jockeying for position, the involvement of Barcap, the debt situation with RBS and the spin coming from all interested parties. It's gonna be a rollercoaster ride.

by **lakes10** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:12 am

i am being told this, again make your own mind up if it true or not.

The liverpool board are set to rush a deal to sell the club in the next 4 days due to a high risk of being billed over $100 mil by US firms that Hicks owes money to.
The Liverpool board are trying to get blocks on their account as they are about to be sold but this could take too long and leave the club open to be billed.

ok in truth i dont know the ins anbd outs of this but it dont sound good.
I know US law is not the same as ours and it might come down to how our club is listed and whos name is on it. Hicks has been very cleaver over the years by not putting anything in his name, but under new laws in the US they can still go after him if he is part of the company set up.

by **boodiddy1** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:12 am

Its Liverpool Scott. Never has been an easy ride. It went beyond ridicoulous a long time ago. I really think that this syrian guy is just a smokescreen from Gillett to try to prise more money out of the Chinese bid.

Who is Keith Harris working on behalf of? I heard Moores was involved in some consortium. Is this the English based one?

by **devaney** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:12 am

boodiddy1 wrote:
Benny The Noon wrote:At the end of the day South Coast the board has the power to out vote the yanks and go with the bid they see best for the club and not best for H&G . So even though Heung bid maybe too low for the parasites if he board think it's best for the club then the two parasites won't be able to do a thing to stop it . The two parasites want the most amount of profit to them qs opposed to the best bid for the club which is why they want the guy from Syria as he gives them profit . The two parasites thought by appointing Barcap it would give them the best chance to maximise their profit but it seems Broughton is going to go for the best deal for the club in order to keep his rep in tact . The two parasites are fighting like mad to get profit but it seems they may of shot themselves in the foot and could easily walk away with Fu.ck all which would be a fantastic result . I'm holding out hope that the Chinese group get the club - they have the backing and track record to be great for our club .

Benny this so true. But, there is one thing that scares me. I really believe the board would go against broughton. How do we not know that Purslow hasnt been offered a sweetner from Hicks? Isnt Ayre also hicks man?

its just a fear i have. I really hope the Haung bid goes through. Its similar to DIC takeover, which would of been bebeficial to us.

We can see what hicks does. Look at today with the rangers. He's defaulted on so much. The man doesnt care.

Does anybody know who can vote on the board and what the split is?

by **maximus** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:15 am

lakes10 wrote:can i point out once again that so far there is no Chinese bid, the guy was only trying to by the debt in a bid to a stake in the club.
he was going via the backdoor and that might say a lot about what sort of owner he might be...MR Short cut. if he built the new ground he might make it of of lego or buy it in IKEA

Lakes, I read that as well in The Daily Star this morning :suspect:

at the Petrol Station, whilst filling up, buying a Mars bar and a packet of Mini Cheddars.

I didn't post it though because I didn't want people on here thinking I was up my own :censored:

and a general nob with a know it all attitude to everything that is Liverpool FC

by **devaney** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:17 am

bavlondon wrote:
devaney wrote:
bavlondon wrote:Good post Treywn! Out of the 3 current parties in the running I'd have to side with Huang. I don't expect them to throw away money each year but I would expect them to at least get our squad in a good nough shape to get back into the top 4 and later push for the title.

How can you possibly make such an uneducated selection when by your own admission only yesterday you haven't got a clue what sovereign wealth is?

Well that fact that the Syrian guy is so closely linked with Gillett irks me and that Rhone group would probably bring in more leveraged debt.

Plus going by that Times article this morning thy seem to be the best option for the club.

So your selection is based on the inability of the other possible buyers rather than the ability of your preferred buyer! That just maybe how we ended up with G & H !!!!!

by **lakes10** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:20 am

SouthCoastShankly wrote:
lakes10 wrote:ok say they do take over, i am the only one that is uncomfortable that this bid might be back by the Chinese government?

I'd be more worried if I was owned by Saudi Arabia (Man City)

but we will become the foucus of every human rights campaigner in the UK.
they will be ruuning on during games and end up getting us booted out of the EL and Cl

Liverpool FC Forum

TAKEOVER COMPLETE - H & G Finally Jibbed!

Who is online