Liverpool FC Forum

by **Reg** » Wed Sep 08, 2010 11:12 pm

Ciggy wrote:60 million wasted on an imaginary stadium and now they have the bare faced cheek to want to put Anfield, the players & Melwood up as collateral

I dont believe for a moment they've spent 60 million on stadium plans - they've charged us for it - but I dont believe they've spent it.

I dont understand why SOS dont make it a primary issue to investigate.

by **crim cram** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 1:54 am

As an architect and somewhat familiar with an early stage project delivery - the fees are nowhere near 60 million, I would be shocked if more than 5 million, closer to 2. And the thing they trotted out looked seriously underbaked and needed much more development/engineering before they would have been able to proceed. The fees for this type of project vary but somewhere below 10% for Architectural and Engineering are usual - that would mean at most 30 mil, but that's for the entire life of the project(until completion). those guys are total scammers.

by **J*o*n*D*o*e** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 7:03 am

that figure is probably peanuts to the amount of interest where having to pay on there loans, Oct 6 is d day for me, if they manage to refinance then its down to us all to step it up, we`ve done everything we could to end this but there comes a time when the gloves have to come off and you have to get your hand dirty.

by **Reg** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 1:57 pm

There's complete silence on the newswires about LFC. The Mirror article is the only one for days, things haven't been this quiet for months. No references to LFC, Hicks or Gillett.

Usually means theres something going on.

by **moop1970** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 2:51 pm

There's complete silence on the newswires about LFC. The Mirror article is the only one for days, things haven't been this quiet for months. No references to LFC, Hicks or Gillett.

Usually means theres something going on.

Completely agree with you there - even Lakes has been quiet!

by **shabelle50** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 8:18 pm

Silence eh?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/footbal....verpool

Buy buy losers Hicks and Gillett! Bye bye p*** off back to where you came from and take all your ragtags and bobtails with you!

by **tubby** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 8:32 pm

Good news that, time really is ticking for those 2 now. Step forward Sheikh Mo.....

by **Greavesie** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 8:41 pm

I actually hope it's one of Lakes posts that finally drive the nail into this thread. It would be massively fitting

by **Fauxy** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 9:56 pm

Im a bit worried about who RBS bring in as new owners if the current board dont make the choice.

Get the feeling they would just flog it for the most money they can get

by **RED BEERGOGGLES** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 10:22 pm

The very latest from the Telegraph 21:56 pm

Liverpool loans shifted by RBS into 'bad debts' division
Royal Bank of Scotland shifted the loans of Liverpool co-owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett into its "bad debts" division in March as part of negotiations over the future of the club.

By Paul Kelso
Published: 9:49PM BST 09 Sep 2010

Paul's Twitter
Liverpool debt was shifted by Royal Bank of Scotland to restructuring group
Well supported: Liverpool fans will hope that whatever changes happen in the Anfield club's off-field situation the players will improve on the pitch Photo: GETTY IMAGES

Sources with knowledge of the deal told The Daily Telegraph on Thursday night that the decision was taken to shift the American’s £237 million loan to RBS’s Global Restructuring Group when Hicks and Gillett were in negotiations over extending their financing deal with the bank.

The outstanding debt secured against Liverpool's holding companies was largely incurred in the purchase of Liverpool in 2007. When debts secured against the club are included the complete debt package totals £351m.

Liverpool's £350m debt sets off alarm as Tom Hicks and George Gillett warned

By shifting management of the loans from the bank’s corporate arm in the spring, RBS may have effectively emphasised to Hicks and Gillett their growing impatience with the financial position at Liverpool.

In the years following their purchase of the club RBS has demanded increasing levels of security from the Americans, including rising personal guarantees.

The banks’ patience had worn thin by the spring, and the shift to the restructuring group was part of the negotiation process that culminated in Hicks and Gillett agreeeing to put the club up for sale and appoint Martin Broughton as chairman to oversee the process.

In return RBS agreed to extend its financing deal to the American’s for a further six months, albeit on apparently more onerous terms.

That deadline expires on Oct 6 at which point the bank will face a crucial decision.

Attempts to sell the club have failed so far, with a flurry of activity at the start of August culminating in two apparently interested parties, Sahara and Chinese businessman Kenneth Huang ruling themselves out.

RBS could extend the financing for a further term to allow Broughton to try and complete a sale, or sell the debt to a third party who could then call in the loan from the Americans.

It could also call in the debt itself, effectively forcing the American’s out of the club and then run it for a period while it searched for a buyer.

That would simplify the process and probably reduce the price, but it would still be a huge step for the bank given the pubic relations implications and the volatility involved in running a Premier League football club.

by **Ciggy** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 10:32 pm

Please god let it be true, please let this be over in three weeks time and hope and pray we get an owner in that actually cares about the club and not more LBO merchants.

by **tubby** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 10:36 pm

The only way I can see them getting out of this is if they get some financing from BOA or some other non UK source. Or has that ship sailed too?

Fingers crossed this is it for them.

by **Ciggy** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 10:45 pm

http://www.shanklygates.co.uk/index.php ... &Itemid=18

Royal Bank of Scotland have switched the debt used to acquire Liverpool Football Club to its restructuring team. Many observers believe is a clear indication that George Gillett and Tom Hicks will not find it easy to restructure their finances and retain ownership of the Reds.

Their hopes of engineering another deal may well now be impossible as the debt is effectively considered a toxic one.

The extended £237 million loan facility inituially granted in February 2007 is set to expire on 6 October 2010.

If the bank does not take direct control of the club it perhaps suggests they will play a huge part in finding a buyer. Effectively becoming a sixth board member.

The American duo have been accruing fees for Payment in Kind (PIK) loans of £2.5 million for every week which has passed since the beginning of the UK financial year on 6 April.

A charge which they are personally liable for rather than the club.

Experienced football financier Stephen Schechter, chief executive of London based Schechter & Co., warned: "The roulette wheel stops spinning on October 6."

He added: "If you were a prospective buyer, I would call RBS and say I’m interested in buying your loan.

"I would notify Gillett and Hicks that I’m the new lender and there will be no extensions, renewal or modifications of the loan: It is due and payable in full on October 6.

"What that does is stop the game."

by **Ciggy** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 10:46 pm

PIKs and Liverpool FC

http://www.shanklygates.co.uk/index.php ... &Itemid=18

Those infamous spades or, as George Gillett certainly said back in February 2007, shovels in the ground within 60 days are just example of the hyperbole uttered when two Americans pitched up and took "custodianship" of Liverpool Football Club.

At that same time their compatriots the Glazer family were held up as an example of how not to do things when arriving in a Premiership boardroom.

Yet it seems every note and move dreamed up by the Old Trafford hierarchy has been followed.

Well there was of course one possible exception. Sir Alex Ferguson has until recent windows been relatively unhindered in the transfer market even if the fans have seen increases in their ticket prices and other methods of squeezing the pennies out of pockets from Stretford to Singapore.

Late last year - at the same time that details of 8% ticket prices rises were leaked - the world was also informed then Anfield manager Rafael Benitez could possibly, for the next five years at least, receive less than his current annual net spend of £20 million.

This sum including not only transfer fees but wage increases.

A little deeper in the reports Liverpool's dysfunctional duo were said to have seperately had plans drawn up by investment bankers Merrill Lynch and Rothschilds during spring 2009 was something a little harder to explain within newspaper columns and broadcasts - payment in kind loans.

PIKs for short.

If no extension of their borrowings could be negotiated a further debt of £50 million would be placed not on each owner or the Kop Football Holdings company they set up to purchase the club. They would like much of the £350 million debt they used to leverage the purchase be placed squarely and firmly on the shoulders of the club.

Manchester United’s £680 million worth when they were taken out of Plc status attracted a massive interest or service charge. It is now even higher than initially projected and PIKs were largely responsible.

They also meant that even when the Champions League and Premiership trophies were secured by the Old Trafford club in 2008 with all the riches those two competitions bestow upon the winners were tallied up the Red Devils reported huge losses.

A PIK arranged in the summer of 2006 - two years earlier - totalling £138 million with annual interest of 14.25% was responsible. And it kept on running as the loan needed to be either repaid or the debt it relates to - that original purchase cost - refinanced.

This eventually happened through a bond issue in January 2010. Though this course carries financial implications of its own.

Liverpool’s then projected £50 million PIK over its five year course would have seen the debt double and then some as interest is charged on a compound basis.

Imagine a sum running on a mortgage or credit card debt which if you structure a plan to pay nothing in return for higher rates of interest over half a decade and there is a practical idea of how it would constrict finances.

Hicks and Gillett who have a lesser burden than their fellow countrymen were until the spring of this year able to extend their arrangement with Royal Bank of Scotland so the PIK road was never travelled down.

However, at that time city sources suggested there were chances of a further refinancing through PIKs unless additional funds from whatever source were injected. But with the level of debt scaring off potential investors there was a vicious circle.

Despite reporting a record turnover for the year up to 31 July 2008 of £159.1 million and a pre-tax profits of £30.2 million there was simply is not enough money coming into the club to cover the interest already accruing.

Hikes in admission prices, further constraint of transfer and other budgets plus PIKs would be the tip of a very big iceberg.

An agreement with Royal Bank of Scotland and Wells Fargo entitled 'Project Langworth' reavealed that PIKs attracting a massive daily rate of interest had been taken out.

£110 million of the initial loan to purchase the club is said to have been converted into a PIK loan with 9% interest or £2.5 million per week had been accruing since 6 April 2010.

This will total £60 million by October.

by **mjlfc09** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 11:09 pm

Ownership protests at the match...
Now I know this has been discussed before and the general feeling was not to do it during games so it didn't have an influence on the performance of the team, something Utd's green and gold campaign has proved is not the case, and that we shouldn't do it.

However, with this date of October 6th looming large on the horizon, a day that will be defining in the history and future of the club, I think it is time we actually did it as vocally as we can.

Even those that argue against it because of the supporting the team issue must surely see that it is needed. To put it bluntly, a few games where we really hammer home our feelings against them so as we have a team to support after the 6th October. Now I don't believe the club will go bust, however I do believe that this clubs future plans will be greatly impacted upon as a consequence of that day.

I believe it is time to turn up the heat. We are getting nothing from the club as regards takeover updates, and the whisperings that the owners may indeed be able to re-finance the loan are quite frightening.

It is time to really stand up and fight. The club comes first for the next few weeks. The chants of " Get out of our club " and so on must be sung loudly and viciously at the match. Let the world see our anger. We need to do this. None of us want this scenario but it is what we are faced with and one we must deal with now.

Also a few banners and chants telling RBS where we stand in case they are in any doubt as to our thoughts on them re-financing them. It is time to turn the screw and fight for this club. One final push.

I don't usually do threads like this but I feel I had to.

Stand up and fight.

Yanks Out.

just took this from the .tv forums courtesy of King-Carra.

So are you all for it? because i certainly am, anything to get these yanks out will do me no matter what it is.

Liverpool FC Forum

TAKEOVER COMPLETE - H & G Finally Jibbed!

Who is online