Liverpool FC Forum

by **bunglemark2** » Sun Sep 19, 2010 9:16 pm

With all the posturing by posters on this forum - and I include myself in that group, lest you think I'm a hypocrite - is it not feasible to think that the players themselves are sick and tired of the sorry state of the club ? Would anybody know - either directly or indirectly - if ANY of the players would consider going on record to call for the current owners to leave and sell the club to somebody who actually wants to restore us to our rightful place in world football ?
Is it even possible that at the next home game, we could see the likes of Steve Gerrard with a mike, in the centre of the pitch, making a protest or taking a stance against the owners ? What are they gonna do if he does - fire him ?

by **lakes10** » Sun Sep 19, 2010 9:31 pm

bunglemark2 wrote:With all the posturing by posters on this forum - and I include myself in that group, lest you think I'm a hypocrite - is it not feasible to think that the players themselves are sick and tired of the sorry state of the club ? Would anybody know - either directly or indirectly - if ANY of the players would consider going on record to call for the current owners to leave and sell the club to somebody who actually wants to restore us to our rightful place in world football ?
Is it even possible that at the next home game, we could see the likes of Steve Gerrard with a mike, in the centre of the pitch, making a protest or taking a stance against the owners ? What are they gonna do if he does - fire him ?

they dont have the power to do anything to him.

i can still see all this ending up in court.

by **bunglemark2** » Sun Sep 19, 2010 9:36 pm

lakes10 wrote:
bunglemark2 wrote:With all the posturing by posters on this forum - and I include myself in that group, lest you think I'm a hypocrite - is it not feasible to think that the players themselves are sick and tired of the sorry state of the club ? Would anybody know - either directly or indirectly - if ANY of the players would consider going on record to call for the current owners to leave and sell the club to somebody who actually wants to restore us to our rightful place in world football ?
Is it even possible that at the next home game, we could see the likes of Steve Gerrard with a mike, in the centre of the pitch, making a protest or taking a stance against the owners ? What are they gonna do if he does - fire him ?

they dont have the power to do anything to him.

i can still see all this ending up in court.

Go away lakes.

Read the point of the mail; it's not a request for your "famous" insider knowledge....

by **bunglemark2** » Sun Sep 19, 2010 9:50 pm

Any takers ? Anybody here from the city who might have an answer or idea ?

by **NANNY RED** » Sun Sep 19, 2010 9:58 pm

bunglemark2 wrote:Any takers ? Anybody here from the city who might have an answer or idea ?

Dont think either Stevie or Carra would do it mate, i dont think either of them would have the bottle to do something like that,

aND YET if anyone of them did it , the likes of the fans who YES still think everything is hunky dory and expect others to well what are you doing about it then, maybe then it would open there eyes , if something came out from any of the players, What could the two twa.ts do if them or either player done that sack them , ha ha

by **bunglemark2** » Sun Sep 19, 2010 10:49 pm

NANNY RED wrote:
bunglemark2 wrote:Any takers ? Anybody here from the city who might have an answer or idea ?

Dont think either Stevie or Carra would do it mate, i dont think either of them would have the bottle to do something like that,

aND YET if anyone of them did it , the likes of the fans who YES still think everything is hunky dory and expect others to well what are you doing about it then, maybe then it would open there eyes , if something came out from any of the players, What could the two twa.ts do if them or either player done that sack them , ha ha

Fair enough Nan. Thinking about Stevie though, maybe as Captain of the club, a local lad 'n all that, it might be 'right' for him to do something like that. Can't help but thinking, after seeing his reaction after scoring the second goal today, that LFC means so much to him (or then again, maybe he hates the Scum more

), but I think there would be nothing more powerful than a message from SG to ask the current owners to do what every fan of this club wants them to do, and fook back off to where they're despised marginally less than they are over here...
Better still, both SG and Carra.

by **Igor Zidane** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 12:01 am

Ok the latest from bamba on rawk . This is the lad that first broke the Huang bid on rawk . So i'm not saying this is gospel .You are going to have to make your own mind up . The rocket he talks about is what he first mention a few weeks ago that Huang new about gillett and hicks . Make of it what you will ok .

I haven’t posted on the takeover for some time, and for a variety of reasons - chief of which was a growing feeling that the information provided was actually helping Hicks and Gillett work out where the threat was coming from and concentrate their efforts on digging the dirt and launching a fightback. But today has been a woeful end to a depressing week and amid all the gloom I feel that people should know that all is not lost. Nonetheless, I won’t believe Hicks and Gillett have gone until their names no longer feature in our club profiles, so I’ll keep this as informative as possible without being specific. As ever, take it at face value or bin it. And as has always been the intention, I’ll spill the beans, fully, when it’s safe to do so.

Firstly, huge respect and support to the groups and individuals who continue to fight the good fight. There is no doubt that the campaigns work, and we should continue to keep on with the emails, petitions, adverts, T-shirts and all other forms of protest and direct action until Hicks and Gillett are gone.

But in no particular order, here are some things that are still worth knowing. The Rocket was launched. It scored a direct hit. Most of the regular posters on this forum are decent and humane people who take little pleasure in the suffering of others. Knowing that George Gillett has retreated to his mountain hideaway, shell-shocked, punch-drunk and waving the white flag will no doubt distress the many who have come to view this jovial old devil as one of our own.

Hicks and Gillett entered into a “Joint & Several” arrangement when they re-financed the time before last. That means they’re responsible for one another’s LFC obligations if one or the other defaults. As a result of the direct hit, George Gillett has been bankrupted and stands no chance of paying his share of the RBS debt by 6th October. Tom Hicks is now legally obligated to pay Gillett’s 50% of the debt. So the obvious danger arising from Gillett’s demise is that if any financial institution were insane enough to lend Tom Hicks the money, he now has the right to buy out Gillett’s 50% of the club.

That’s scary. But a more agreeable way of looking at it is to imagine Hicks and Gillett handcuffing themselves to each other on that fateful day they entered into that Joint & Several pact. Gillett has now given up; he’s jumped off the pier. A horrified Tom Hicks realises he’s still cuffed to him. He clings on by his fingertips as his former partner sinks, his dead weight dragging Hicks closer and closer to the edge. Hicks, wild-eyed, is pleading to the merchant seamen who pass by, begging them to grab his hand and haul him back from the brink. One or two of them come over for a look, but recognise Hicks as the man who killed their trade in Brazil, or Texas… it’s just not worth them getting involved with a man like this. He’ll always shaft you in the end, so they turn a deaf ear to his pleas for one last chance. If Hicks can’t get someone to throw him a lifeline, he’s going down with Gillett, and soon.

Just as Kirdi was in all likelihood a stooge created by Gillett, for the precise purpose of wheeling him out as a stalking horse whenever an offer came in for the club, it’s equally likely that the Blackstone bombshell is Hicks’s last gamble; an empty bluff from a poker player who doesn’t have a hand. But from the RBS’s and from a legal point of view, it’s still complicated. Martin Broughton, Christian Purslow and Ian Ayre are not the enemy. They are carefully and skilfully navigating a path through a minefield, keeping a keen eye on what needs to happen (Gillett and Hicks out) and the strict legalities and procedures for bringing that about. To give just one blunt example, a recent report about Hicks’ refinancing fiasco stated that Martin Broughton is “open minded” about the prospect of Hicks staying on. He can hardly state otherwise, can he? Any suggestion, let alone confirmation that Broughton was not acting in the best interests of the owners would only lead to another hiatus as Hicks stalls and sues and refuses to go. Equally, the supposed Purslow Smirk after today’s game is much more likely to be “if only I could tell you…” rather than “why should I care”. The U.K-based element of the board have gone through a lengthy and diligent legal process to ascertain what they can lawfully do to prevent Gillett and Hicks from re-financing. They’re hardly going to blow it now by playing to the crowd.

Me neither. That’s all for now. Go to bed knowing that it’s not over yet. But neither is it Over.

by **Dundalk** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 12:09 am

Interesting

Thanks for posting that Igor

by **dundreamin** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 12:14 am

RE. Bamber heard all this s.*i*e before, am getting to the point that i dont believe a word from ANYBODY I,ll be happy when its officaly announced that the t.wats have sold up and gone. Until that day i am talking no notice of anything.

by **Fauxy** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 12:57 am

I dont believe much I read either anymore to be honest.

But I do think Broughton and Purslow arent the bad guys. They couldnt do much to much to avoid getting stick really, the situation they are in is a very poor one for their reputation because they have to try and keep on side with both the fans and the owners. Tricky stuff

by **Reg** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 1:31 am

The most important thing is to keep the pressure up - the more we do that, the more we help Broughton see off T&T.

by **Octsky** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 2:47 am

bavlondon wrote:The protests haven't worked, Hicks is a hard nosed , you could probably hold his mother to ransom and he wouldn't sell up.

It's time to invade the pitch and cause disruption for all to see. The only bad thing is the club will probably end up with fines or worse, points deductions but if that goes on for a while it will surely make Hicks sit up and take note he isn't wanted here.

hick dont give a rat's a55 to what happens to our club, you can burn Anfield to ground and he will still hold on in wait for a buyout,

pitch invasion is like beating your own kids to get back to your ex-wife, it doesnt make sense!

we need bring the fight to his own backyard.

by **The Raven** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 9:03 am

Octsky wrote:
bavlondon wrote:The protests haven't worked, Hicks is a hard nosed , you could probably hold his mother to ransom and he wouldn't sell up.

It's time to invade the pitch and cause disruption for all to see. The only bad thing is the club will probably end up with fines or worse, points deductions but if that goes on for a while it will surely make Hicks sit up and take note he isn't wanted here.

hick dont give a rat's a55 to what happens to our club, you can burn Anfield to ground and he will still hold on in wait for a buyout,

pitch invasion is like beating your own kids to get back to your ex-wife, it doesnt make sense!

we need bring the fight to his own backyard.

You charter the plane for texas and we will hop on. :Oo:

by **Ciggy** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 9:32 am

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/8012321/Tom-Hicks-courts-hedge-fund-Blackstone-in-desperate-bid-to-stay-in-control-at-Liverpool.ht
ml

It was Hicks’s refusal to countenance an offer from Rhône, which had offered £110 million for a 40 per cent stake in the club, prompting the Royal Bank of Scotland, which holds the majority of Liverpool’s £282 million debt, to appoint Martin Broughton as chairman and instruct Barclays Capital to secure new owners for Anfield.

That Hicks is now prepared not just to consider such an offer but actively to court Blackstone, one of 11 potential investors identified by Barcap, according to a document received by the supporters’ union Spirit of Shankly, is a measure of how desperate he is to remain at Anfield despite agreeing to sell the club six months ago.

Hicks called a full board meeting in London last Wednesday and informed Broughton of his intention to agree a package that would enable him to remain at Anfield beyond the early October deadline set by RBS for the repayment of its loans.

The Texan’s plan centres on being granted a loan to refinance £100 million of Liverpool’s debt – all but wiping the RBS loan from the balance sheet – and seeing Blackstone inject as much as £180 million of equity into the club.

Though that would greatly reduce Liverpool’s headline debt figure and the onerous interest repayments which have hamstrung the club for so long under the tenure of Hicks and George Gillett, his partner, Liverpool would not be cleared of debt entirely.

There also remains some doubt over whether Hicks plans for Blackstone to take shares in the club in exchange for their cash injection or whether the equity would involve high-interest payment in kind notes, like those employed by the Glazers at Manchester United.

Hicks’s plan is likely to be opposed by Broughton, managing director Christian Purslow and commercial director Ian Ayre, the remaining three members of Liverpool’s board. It is not known, though, whether they would be able to block such a move, and the legal firm Slaughter and May has been engaged to assess their options.

The Premier League would also have to approve any substantial change to the ownership structure to ensure that Liverpool would be able to meet their debt obligations and were not at risk of failing to fulfil their fixture requirements for the season.

by **Octsky** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 9:48 am

The Raven wrote:
Octsky wrote:
bavlondon wrote:The protests haven't worked, Hicks is a hard nosed , you could probably hold his mother to ransom and he wouldn't sell up.

It's time to invade the pitch and cause disruption for all to see. The only bad thing is the club will probably end up with fines or worse, points deductions but if that goes on for a while it will surely make Hicks sit up and take note he isn't wanted here.

hick dont give a rat's a55 to what happens to our club, you can burn Anfield to ground and he will still hold on in wait for a buyout,

pitch invasion is like beating your own kids to get back to your ex-wife, it doesnt make sense!

we need bring the fight to his own backyard.

You charter the plane for texas and we will hop on.

if u r good with a 9mm, u can fly first class, no problem.

Liverpool FC Forum

TAKEOVER COMPLETE - H & G Finally Jibbed!

Who is online