Liverpool FC Forum

by **Leonmc0708** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 10:45 pm

Rick Parry spoke at Anfield on Thursday night to the Club's shareholders at the AGM and here is the full transcript of his business review of the last 12 months.
"It has certainly been an eventful twelve months.

In the spring the Board appointed Hawkpoint to advise on funding options.

Subsequently a number of parties have expressed interest in investing in the Club, including one that has approached us very recently (not, I hasten to add, via the Financial Times).

The Board is continuing to evaluate the proposals and is putting a great deal of time and care into this process. You can be sure we are fully committed to doing what we consider to be in the best long-term interest of the Club and its shareholders. The key is to find the right long term solution and not to be deflected by short-term considerations. As soon as we have an appropriate recommendation it will be put before you. Obviously there are significant confidentiality issues and commercial sensitivities and I'm sure you'll understand we are unable to say more at this stage.

Last year I told you we had invested in the squad to secure, at the very least, a return to the Champions League. I said that the key financial objective for the year was to control our net debt and we have done so.

Despite securing Champions League qualification, as you are all aware, the Board decided in May to part company with Gerard Houllier. A 30-point gap between us and Arsenal was too big and it was not acceptable to be out of the title race so early. We could not see how the necessary improvement would come without making a change but we did our best to handle Gerard's departure with dignity, recognising that we had some very good times during his 6-year tenure.

Appointing a new manager is always a challenge, especially for clubs where expectations are as high as they rightly are here.

We needed to find someone capable of taking us to the league title. There was never a debate about English or foreign - it was about ability. Our two key criteria as we began our selection process were:

i) a track record of success in one of Europe's top four leagues;

ii) anambition and hunger that matched our own. This pointed to someone young.

We were delighted that that Rafael Benitez wanted to join us. Having won the Spanish league not once but twice, he met the criteria perfectly. Le me also re-iterate that he was our number one choice. We got the man we wanted and we were not turned down by anyone.

Having had Rafa on board for 6 months, we are sure that we made the right decision.

There have been two great victories this week. Those of us that were at White Hart Lane last night were particularly proud to see us finish the game with seven Academy players on the pitch. And that's not a one-off as the youngsters had already done ever so well to take us through tricky ties against Millwall and Middlesbrough. It's an old adage that you don't know whether they'll be good enough unless you give them the chance to play.

The third major "event" of the summer, which delighted us all, was Steven Gerrard's decision to stay. To Steven's great credit this was never a financial issue - money was never mentioned. He simply wanted to be sure the Club was going in the right direction.

You will all be aware that we finally received planning permission for the new stadium in the summer. This was a culmination of years of effort on the part of the Club and the local community.

I told you last year that the ground share debate had been raised by the North West Development Agency. I explained that the project needs a substantial amount of public funding, not simply for the stadium, but for the refurbishment of Stanley Park, the cemetery and the surrounding environment. We submitted an application for funding of the Agency, along with the City Council, a year ago and unfortunately the position has still not been resolved. The Agency has, through its Chairman, adopted the position that it would prefer to see a shared stadium.

We have rejected a number of proposals and repeatedly statedthat the vast majority of our supporters are opposed to the idea. Now the Minister for Sport has become involved in an effort to resolve the position once and for all within an agreed timetable.

At the moment we are still pressing for our grant application to be considered. It is not possible to say what the outcome will be and the delays are frustrating. It cannot be denied that the public funding is a very important component but beyond that there is little to be gained by speculating on the ifs, buts and maybes."

3 key points for me from the speech:

News of a recent approach from an investor.

Happy at the appointment of Rafa.

Pushing forward with our own stadium plans.

3 key points for me from the speech:

by **JBG** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 11:09 pm

I guess we are in worrying and uncertain times. The two big issues which are threatening to overshadow the playing side are investment and the stadium.

As Parry said, I think its a given that the vast majority of fans of both Everton and Liverpool are against the idea of groundsharing. Bill Kenwright said himself yesterday that the idea of Everton renting from Liverpool, of Everton fans sitting in a Bob Paisley memorial stand etc are completely unthinkable. Benitez himself is against the idea, simply on the ground that the English winter spells havoc for pitches, and its hard enough to keep the Anfield pitch (which actually has one of the best surfaces in the country) in good nick as it is without doubling the amount of games played on it.

However, I think it is also agreed that Liverpool needs to do something about the capacity of Anfield. Other, smaller clubs, are beginning to surpass us in capacity and the likes of Spurs and Birmingham also have ambitious plans to build super stadiums. There is clearly a major demand for tickets for home matches at weekends, and the club reckons that it could easily get at least 55,000 per average per home game, maybe even more if the team is doing well. No one truely wants to leave Anfield, given the special emotional history of the place, but hands on heart, would people prefer to be still sitting in Anfield in ten years time when we could be a middle of the road mid table club, or in a spanking new stadium fighting it out for the Premiership title? It would hurt everyone to move, but if we want to move with the times, we need to be bringing in far more revenue from ticket sales to compete with the other 4 large clubs (Man UTD, Newcastle, Arsenal and Chelsea).

The stadium is what will dominate our finances in the coming years and like Arsenal, the stadium will limit our spending in the transfer market. Under the current regime, unless we have a couple of extraordinarily successful seasons ahead of us where we start winning major trophies and regularly getting to the later stages of the CL, it is unlikey the club could finance a 110million + stadium on its own, at least without incurring major debt which could be a major millstone around the clubs neck if we underachieve on the pitch. The other option is to groundshare. It seems that the government are beginning to push the idea of a groundshare, and it is likely that they will dangle a major carrot in the form of a large grant in front of us to accept it. While it is unthinkable, I have a feeling that the current board are actually now beginning to backtrack over groundsharing and are privately taking it very seriously.

The third option, is that the club is either sold to a third party who will put together a finance package to build the new stadium or the club will sell some of its shareholding to investors, hoping to take the money and push ahead with its current plans for Stanley Park. Parry has bene actively pursuing investment for the past year or two, but I think he has been correct in being cautios, as we don't need a short term cash injection of 40million which is spent on players only for the new investors starting to throw their weight about inside the club and tightening the purse strings for good at a later stage.

The new investment has to be for the club and the fans, not a quick get rich scheme by a venture capitalist or some lunatic who sacks Benitez and replaces him with some t1t like Philippe Troussier and a Director of Football. The new investment has to maintain the current structures brought so painfully into being last summer, help put in a safe and reliable package to build a new stadium, and hopefully, as a bonus, give us a short term cash injection to buy some new players. We don't necessarily need an Abramovich, just someone who can give us a kickstart and guide us along the proper financial road.

by **Leonmc0708** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 11:41 pm

And David Moores input:

Liverpool chairman David Moores pledged to consider his future during a stormy annual general meeting in which the club announced record losses of £21.9m.

An emotional Moores, chairman since 1991, said he could no longer compete with the financial power of local businessman Steve Morgan, who revealed details of a fourth bid to take over the club.

Moores, whose family have been involved with the club for more than 50 years, said: "I am still considering Mr Morgan's offer and perhaps it is time now. It's been a difficult year. I love the club dearly but it is obvious I cannot compete with Mr Morgan's millions.

"At the end of the meeting I will have to come to a decision one way or the other.

"It has been unbearable for myself and my family and I have hardly slept.

"But all of us have tried to work in the best interests of the club."

Morgan intimated that he failed to understand why the existing board continued to give short shrift to his takeover bids whilst extensively courting other offers, notably one from Thailand.

His latest bid worth £70m is already up against a new offer believed to be from an American 'L4' consortium of entertainment executives.

Morgan is Liverpool's third-largest shareholder and said he had spent £300,000 in legal fees alone this year on launching his bids to claim a controlling interest.

Morgan said: "It's been a lot of anguish and I do not like washing our dirty linen in public. I would like to draw a line in the sand and move forward.

"I have got an offer on the table and you can have the money in the bank by Christmas to give money to Rafael Benitez and get the new stadium on the go. Please accept my offer."

Morgan's comments were all the more timely given finance director Les Wheatley's admission that costs for a proposed new stadium had spiralled to around the £115m mark.

Liverpool's bid to move to a new site on Stanley Park has been stalled by red tape and recently by the re-emergence of the groundsharing issue to which they are largely opposed.

Chief executive Rick Parry said: "We have made our personal preference clear. We have had a number of approaches regarding a groundshare and we have made it clear we want to have our existing grant application processed."

Wheatley blamed the rising cost of the new stadium - which had been marked at £80m at last year's AGM - predominantly on costs incurred during the continuing delay in securing approval.

by **Leonmc0708** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 11:45 pm

Parry also revealed that the club decided to sell Michael Owen to Real Madrid for £8m when the England striker refused to sign a new contract.

"It is telling that there were no other bidders for Michael Owen," said Parry. "We did test the water and there was no interest."

thought that was pretty interesting too.

by **JBG** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 11:48 pm

Thats a MAJOR development from the last AGM.

Back then Moores also said that he would consider selling out should the team not get to the CL, but ruled out any sale to Morgan.

He sounds tired and worn out in that speech, and it looks like its now possible that Morgan has maneovered the club into accepting his offer.

It remains to be seen whether or not that is a good thing.

by **parchpea** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 11:48 pm

After tonights AGM its reported that Moores is on the brink. The guy has put up the cash and kept faith with managers but now hes spent up. He cannot take Liverpool any further without serious money which he plainly does not have. According to reports he admitted at the meeting he could not match Morgans finance. Thing is he really wants people to throw money at the Club but he still wants to be in control. Its not realistic and hes finally buckling under the pressure. Theres no way he can go it alone investing in the team and the stadium. This has been a long time coming. The old guard have been hanging on for grim death but their grip is loosening now.

by **Leonmc0708** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 11:49 pm

Club saddled with £22m losses after making £11m pay-off to end Houllier era
By Tim Rich
03 December 2004

The Liverpool chairman, David Moores, last night indicated he may be ready to step down. The admission came at the club's annual meeting during an extraordinary exchange with his major critic, Steve Morgan, who has had four separate offers to take over the club rejected.

Moores confessed that he was deeply troubled by Liverpool's situation. "Perhaps it is time to consider my options,'' he said, his voice sounding desperately weary. "I love this club dearly but I can't compete with Mr Morgan's millions. It is becoming unbearable, it has affected my family and I haven't slept properly for a year. Everyone now needs to act in the best interests of the club.''

Although he did not name Mike Jefferies, the Merseyside-born, Los Angeles film producer, who yesterday claimed to be in talks with the club, Liverpool's chief executive, Rick Parry, said he had been presented with "a new and exciting offer which the board is bound to consider''.

In September, Jefferies, who has spent the last two years producing a so-far unreleased football film in co-operation with Newcastle United, claimed to be in talks with Hawkpoint, the organisation charged with finding new investments for Anfield. This time, however, he claimed to have the support of the Kraft family, who own the franchises for the New England Patriots American football club and the New England Revolution football club.

Liverpool desperately require investments. The club's debts may have been trimmed from £15m to £13m, but a £3.6m profit last year became a £21.9m loss. Of that, £11m resulted from paying off their former manager, Gérard Houllier and his back-room staff. This was despite the fact that Houllier had only a year remaining on his contract when he was sacked in May.

"We did all we could to minimise the costs of the termination,'' Parry told the meeting arguing that some of the £11m had been used to pay off "one or two'' players. "But you have to remember that change is expensive.''

The meeting gave considerable support to Morgan, who claims to have spent £300,000 in legal fees alone in mounting his bids but said that the board had consistently mislead shareholders over the true cost of the new stadium at Stanley Park which could rise to more than £120m.

Small shareholders vented their frustration by forcing a vote on the re-election of two directors, Les Wheatley and Noel White. The board's block vote centred on Moores' 51 per cent stake would, however, ensure their re-election in a formal ballot.

In advance of last night's annual general meeting, Jefferies claimed that his consortium L4, named after Anfield's post code, had already begun talks with Hawkpoint, the group brought in by Parry to find new funding for Liverpool.

Jefferies said: "I can confirm L4 exists with the purpose being to conduct ongoing discussions with the owners of Liverpool Football Club. There are a number of different constituent elements, both individuals and entities that we believe have a direct connection with the culture and heritage of the club - as well as the experience, resources and appetite to get the club back to where we believe it deserves to be."

Liverpool retorted that they had "absolutely no comment to make".

Jefferies, whose company Milkshake Films intends to produce three football films, tracing the rise of a South American teenager from Newcastle to Real Madrid and thence to the 2006 World Cup, is a very minor player in Los Angeles, and claims that he was "a Hollywood film producer" did not impress Liverpool when his first bid surfaced in September.

Jefferies and his business partner, Stuart Ford, claimed they could buy out the 51 per cent controlling stake owned by Moores, and began talks with Hawkpoint. These were swiftly terminated.

If the Kraft family are involved this time, Jefferies would have the financial muscle he so obviously lacked three months ago.

Liverpool's other suitors, the Thai businessman Paiboon Damrongchaitham and Morgan, who is the club's third-largest shareholder, certainly have money, although the Anfield board has been reluctant to accept it.

Nevertheless, last week Paiboon said that his offer to buy into Anfield was still on the table, although it was likely to be less than the original 30 per cent offer.

To last night's AGM, Jefferies' move will have come as a diversion since the overwhelming need is meeting a Christmas deadline to satisfy the Sports Minister, Richard Caborn, that sharing a new stadium with Everton is a viable proposition.

by **JBG** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 11:52 pm

It looks like Morgan is becoming a major player once more.

BTW, I hear Morgan is worth 350m. However, does he lead a consortium who will front some of the money or does it all come from his own pocket? Buying a controlling interest in Liverpool, providing the manager with some hard cash to spend and putting a decent financial plan for the stadium in place would cost at least 100 to 150million in the short to medium term. I think I have heard that some of Morgan's investment money comes from other parties.

by **Paul C** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 11:54 pm

Hmm some interesting points there guys, good post.

I just hate seeing that smug b3satrd Kenwright, I don't want this groundshare, just because their a broke a55 club doesn't mean that we should groundshare to suit them :angry:

Fingers croosed next years AGM is talking about out own ground, the profit we have made, the inprovement in league position and great new squad we have :cool:

by **Leonmc0708** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 11:56 pm

John Barnes' Granny wrote:Thats a MAJOR development from the last AGM.

Back then Moores also said that he would consider selling out should the team not get to the CL, but ruled out any sale to Morgan.

He sounds tired and worn out in that speech, and it looks like its now possible that Morgan has maneovered the club into accepting his offer.

It remains to be seen whether or not that is a good thing.

A short term influx of cash is not the answer here. The Moores family have been a part of this club for fifty years, and the success the club has had with them at the helm has been tremendous.

I think we need to take a step back, a big deep breath and weigh up all the options. Morgan, Thais and the Yanks deals have been floating about for a while now, but we've waited for this a long time so a few more weeks won't make any difference.

I just don't want Moores backed into a corner and making a decision that will come back to haunt all of us and we all deeply regret!!!

The line about Morgan having money in the bank by christmas really worries me. He looks like he is really applying the pressure, and it won't help anyone. All it will do is end up with a rash decision, and that is not what we want.

Its like Rick Parry said its the long term future that counts, making the right decisions is vital.

by **JBG** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 11:57 pm

Isn't it ironic that given tonight is one of the most important nights for the club in recent years there are very few people on the forum?

Do people actually care?

THIS IS ALL A VERY BIG DEAL. :glare:

by **parchpea** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 11:58 pm

Just seen Parrys interview on Sky and he looked shaken. Its obvioulsy not been a comfortable night for the major players there. Looks like the shareholders have made it clear they aint happy with the way they are dealing with matters. Maybe at last we are going to see some action and here and when we do let the cards fall as they may. Its time for a change me thinks.

by **Leonmc0708** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 12:09 am

John Barnes' Granny wrote:Isn't it ironic that given tonight is one of the most important nights for the club in recent years there are very few people on the forum?

Do people actually care?

THIS IS ALL A VERY BIG DEAL.

Luckily enough, it is an AGM and not an EGM, that would have spelt real trouble.

This meeting is only on as it was scheduled, so whilst it is a good time for the fans to get an insight, I would not read too much into the goings on. Its more of a formality.

I think the fact that Morgan was so outspoken proves he likes the sound of his own voice. I really do not want the guy anywhere near my club.

There was a discussion on the ground share idea, and a vote in terms of arms up all those in favour. Parry was the first to raise his hand to vote against it, but Morgan ABSTAINED. I hope that the echo and all other media types pick up on that, as a few idiots who think Morgan is the saviour need to ope their eyes and realise what he stands for.

by **JBG** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 12:10 am

David Moores, Liverpool FC: 1991 to 2004?

by **Leonmc0708** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 12:12 am

John Barnes' Granny wrote:David Moores, Liverpool FC: 1991 to 2004?

Please God NO. Morgan replacing Moores will be a BIG mistake.

Just hope David and Rick take a look at the forums and see the support most fans have for them.

Liverpool FC Forum

Rick parry agm talk - Intresting read......

Who is online