THE TAKEOVER THREAD - LIVERPOOL SOLD

Liverpool Football Club - General Discussion

Postby 112-1077774096 » Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:29 am

Bad Bob wrote:DIC took more than a month to complete their due diligence procedure, and even now no formal offer has been made.

Reds officials were hoping to vote on the DIC proposals at a board meeting in London last night before the match at West Ham, but the documentation was still not in place.

It was this latest hitch which convinced Moores to reconsider.

liverpool echo mate


DUBAI International Capital today dramatically abandoned their proposed £450m takeover of Liverpool FC.

The investment arm of the Dubai government confirmed at 4pm that they had ended negotiations with the club.

It came after Liverpool FC formally decided not to accept a bid from DIC.

At a meeting before last night’s match against West Ham, the board of directors said they needed more time to consider their options.

The move has shocked many who believed the club was on the verge of signing the deal with the super-wealthy investment arm of the Dubai government.
112-1077774096
 

Postby 66-1112520797 » Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:30 am

Redtildead  agree with most of what you say, dont understand why your havin a go at me, but if youve a problem bring it on, but i worn you im not in the best of moods with all this shat


:laugh:   Bring it on, its the fecking internet FFS :laugh:
66-1112520797
 

Postby Rush Job » Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:32 am

Bad Bob wrote:.
PacemakerAlonso wrote:No it's not, but that's your take on things, other fans should be allowed to express themselves in whatever manner they wish, providing they do not go crazy. Moores thought he'd be clever and mess DIC around (it would seem) and they pulled out, for which I do not blame them. I do not want an American, who has been bankcrupt once and borrows money to buy our club. It's a disgrace, DIC had their own money and were fans, so I must thank Moores for being what would seem far too stubborn.

Vital words right there.  Given that we are all operating on about 2% of the necessary information required to develop a credible, informed opinion on this matter it would seem that this thread is dredging new depths of sh!te talk.

Thats because they havent got a clue what to say because they know we know they feck up. And then do you expect the full story dont be so nieve. Any Boby boy im still waiting for an explanation from your earlyer post, come on.
Dont judge a book by the cover, unless you cover just another, because blind exceptance is a sign,
Of stupid fools who stand in line......  Like..
User avatar
Rush Job
>> LFC Elite Member <<
 
Posts: 2367
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:38 am

Postby Bad Bob » Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:34 am

Rush Job wrote:
Bad Bob wrote:.The irony of it all is that you knee-jerkers have no idea what you are protesting about yet.  Is it because DIC walked?  Is it because this Gillett is a Yank?  Is it because Moores and the Board are money grubbers?  Or because they're too tentative? What is it? 

What would you put on your banner to show the board on Saturday?  With the number of half-baked ideas I've read on here tonight, your banner would need to cover the entire Kop to get all  the gripes in.

FFS, call it a night.  Let things shake out and let the club release a proper statement and then, maybe, you lot could make an informed evaluation of what's happened rather than jumping to a million conclusions.  Unbelievable!  :no

Go on then Boby boy explain to me what makes me a Knee jerker. And ive said sweat FA about a protest, go on have a look.
Just cus theres a tit about dont have a go at every one whos not entirly pleased with the situation.
And whats a grubber.

Alright I'm back for one more cause I missed this in post for all the 'noise' in here...

Fair enough, you never called for a protest at Saturday's game.

Everything else you've said has been knee-jerk, though.  You've presumed that this decision is primarily about Moore's greed.  You've presumed that "this Yank" has no interest in Liverpool besides money (and, yet, we all assume that DIC did?) and that, as an OAP, he'll kick it soon and leave the club in shambles, etc.

It's knee-jerk because it is based in presumption not fact and because your sense of outrage and betrayal has led you to leap to a whole host of conclusions that may or may not be borne out in the days and weeks ahead.

Look, I get the reaction.  I do.  I just happen to think that it's better to give the Board the benefit of the doubt until facts--not speculation--suggest otherwise.
Image
User avatar
Bad Bob
LFC Guru Member
 
Posts: 11269
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 10:03 pm
Location: Canada

Postby Bad Bob » Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:37 am

peewee wrote:
Bad Bob wrote:DIC took more than a month to complete their due diligence procedure, and even now no formal offer has been made.

Reds officials were hoping to vote on the DIC proposals at a board meeting in London last night before the match at West Ham, but the documentation was still not in place.

It was this latest hitch which convinced Moores to reconsider.

liverpool echo mate


DUBAI International Capital today dramatically abandoned their proposed £450m takeover of Liverpool FC.

The investment arm of the Dubai government confirmed at 4pm that they had ended negotiations with the club.

It came after Liverpool FC formally decided not to accept a bid from DIC.

At a meeting before last night’s match against West Ham, the board of directors said they needed more time to consider their options.

The move has shocked many who believed the club was on the verge of signing the deal with the super-wealthy investment arm of the Dubai government.

My point exactly, mate.  Same paper.  Same day.  Totally divergent spins on the same event, both presented as fact.  What are we to believe?   ???
Image
User avatar
Bad Bob
LFC Guru Member
 
Posts: 11269
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 10:03 pm
Location: Canada

Postby Rush Job » Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:39 am

Bamaga man wrote:
Redtildead  agree with most of what you say, dont understand why your havin a go at me, but if youve a problem bring it on, but i worn you im not in the best of moods with all this shat


:laugh:   Bring it on, its the fecking internet FFS :laugh:

No it isnt is it, you must be one of the smarter people on here,
"bring it on"- tell me your problem.
I can explain in simpler terms if you need me to.
Dont judge a book by the cover, unless you cover just another, because blind exceptance is a sign,
Of stupid fools who stand in line......  Like..
User avatar
Rush Job
>> LFC Elite Member <<
 
Posts: 2367
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:38 am

Postby 66-1112520797 » Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:42 am

Rush Job wrote:
Bamaga man wrote:
Redtildead  agree with most of what you say, dont understand why your havin a go at me, but if youve a problem bring it on, but i worn you im not in the best of moods with all this shat


:laugh:   Bring it on, its the fecking internet FFS :laugh:

No it isnt is it, you must be one of the smarter people on here,
"bring it on"- tell me your problem.
I can explain in simpler terms if you need me to.

:laugh:
66-1112520797
 

Postby DZed » Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:47 am

Liverpool in limbo as Dubai group pull out of Anfield deal
By Nick Harris
Published: 01 February 2007


Liverpool's plans to become a debt-free club in a new stadium under the ownership of one of the world's richest men lay in tatters last night after Dubai International Capital sensationally withdrew from advanced talks about a £450m takeover package in disgust at the club's handling of its offer.

That leaves the American entrepreneur, George Gillett Jnr, in pole position to take over at Anfield. The details of his bid have yet to be made public, but Liverpool's current shareholders will certainly make more money personally from selling to him. His willingness to fund a new stadium and his ability to invest in the club or players is less clear.

A Liverpool spokesman said: "There is a process under way with Mr Gillett Jnr, and a decision can be expected in the next few days." The DIC deal was all but signed. DIC and Liverpool had already agreed the wording of a joint statement to announce the takeover next Monday.

But after a meeting between Liverpool's chairman and majority shareholder, David Moores, and a group of other shareholders and board members on Tuesday evening, Liverpool decided to reconsider another offer from Gillett. Having made a verbal agreement with DIC, Liverpool effectively opened the floor for a bidding war, one that may yet go down in history as one of the costliest own goals in the club's history.

DIC was not informed that Tuesday's meeting would discuss Gillett Jnr. This infuriated DIC executives, who tried but failed to find out what was happening, and they made a unilateral decision to pull the plug on Liverpool yesterday.

DIC had offered £4,500 per share for Liverpool's stock, which is 51.1 per cent owned by Moores, in a deal worth £157m to shareholders. In addition it promised to write off the club's £80m debt and build the new £200m Stanley Park stadium, with work due to start as early as March. Moores would have been guaranteed a role as honorary president while the chief executive Rick Parry's job would also have been safe. DIC sources had also made it clear substantial transfer funds would have been made available.

Gillett Jnr has apparently offered £5,000 per share, meaning an extra £17m in total into shareholders' pockets, including an extra £8.5m for Moores. Although he has said previously that he wants to share a stadium with Everton, he has given written assurances that a ground-share is not in his plans. No timetable is in place. No detail about debt-clearance or transfer funds has been made public. Nor has Gillett Jnr made it clear how his bid would be funded. Loading Liverpool with debt, as Malcolm Glazer has done at Manchester United, is an option.

It is understood that Moores came under pressure from "minor shareholders" (who own almost 49 per cent of the club) to consider the bigger cash offer for them. It is understood Gillett Jnr may now try to combine forces with Steve Morgan, Liverpool's third largest shareholder who made his fortune from Redrow homes, to buy the club. Moores and Parry would be unlikely to have any role in a Gillett Jnr regime.

DIC's chief executive, Sameer Al Ansari, a Liverpool fan, said: "We are very disappointed. DIC is a serious investor with considerable resources. After a huge amount of work, we proposed a deal that would provide the club with the funds it needs."

DIC is an offshoot of the business empire controlled by Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum, who is worth £7bn and has family assets of double that.

Who is George Gillett Jnr?

George Gillett Jnr, 68, has amassed a fortune estimated at 440m pounds primarily through meat production, but his business portfolio also includes car dealerships, ski resorts and gardening products.

His business career began as a management consultant with McKinsey & Company and through his work there in the 1960s he became owner of the NFL's Miami Dolphins, who he later sold.

He was also the owner of basketball's Harlem Globetrotters and he currently owns the NHL's Montreal Canadiens. Any Liverpool takeover deal would require debt or business partners in order for him to fund it.
User avatar
DZed
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2005 2:33 pm

Postby 66-1112520797 » Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:55 am

DZed wrote:Liverpool in limbo as Dubai group pull out of Anfield deal
By Nick Harris
Published: 01 February 2007


Liverpool's plans to become a debt-free club in a new stadium under the ownership of one of the world's richest men lay in tatters last night after Dubai International Capital sensationally withdrew from advanced talks about a £450m takeover package in disgust at the club's handling of its offer.

That leaves the American entrepreneur, George Gillett Jnr, in pole position to take over at Anfield. The details of his bid have yet to be made public, but Liverpool's current shareholders will certainly make more money personally from selling to him. His willingness to fund a new stadium and his ability to invest in the club or players is less clear.

A Liverpool spokesman said: "There is a process under way with Mr Gillett Jnr, and a decision can be expected in the next few days." The DIC deal was all but signed. DIC and Liverpool had already agreed the wording of a joint statement to announce the takeover next Monday.

But after a meeting between Liverpool's chairman and majority shareholder, David Moores, and a group of other shareholders and board members on Tuesday evening, Liverpool decided to reconsider another offer from Gillett. Having made a verbal agreement with DIC, Liverpool effectively opened the floor for a bidding war, one that may yet go down in history as one of the costliest own goals in the club's history.

DIC was not informed that Tuesday's meeting would discuss Gillett Jnr. This infuriated DIC executives, who tried but failed to find out what was happening, and they made a unilateral decision to pull the plug on Liverpool yesterday.

DIC had offered £4,500 per share for Liverpool's stock, which is 51.1 per cent owned by Moores, in a deal worth £157m to shareholders. In addition it promised to write off the club's £80m debt and build the new £200m Stanley Park stadium, with work due to start as early as March. Moores would have been guaranteed a role as honorary president while the chief executive Rick Parry's job would also have been safe. DIC sources had also made it clear substantial transfer funds would have been made available.

Gillett Jnr has apparently offered £5,000 per share, meaning an extra £17m in total into shareholders' pockets, including an extra £8.5m for Moores. Although he has said previously that he wants to share a stadium with Everton, he has given written assurances that a ground-share is not in his plans. No timetable is in place. No detail about debt-clearance or transfer funds has been made public. Nor has Gillett Jnr made it clear how his bid would be funded. Loading Liverpool with debt, as Malcolm Glazer has done at Manchester United, is an option.

It is understood that Moores came under pressure from "minor shareholders" (who own almost 49 per cent of the club) to consider the bigger cash offer for them. It is understood Gillett Jnr may now try to combine forces with Steve Morgan, Liverpool's third largest shareholder who made his fortune from Redrow homes, to buy the club. Moores and Parry would be unlikely to have any role in a Gillett Jnr regime.

DIC's chief executive, Sameer Al Ansari, a Liverpool fan, said: "We are very disappointed. DIC is a serious investor with considerable resources. After a huge amount of work, we proposed a deal that would provide the club with the funds it needs."

DIC is an offshoot of the business empire controlled by Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum, who is worth £7bn and has family assets of double that.

Who is George Gillett Jnr?

George Gillett Jnr, 68, has amassed a fortune estimated at 440m pounds primarily through meat production, but his business portfolio also includes car dealerships, ski resorts and gardening products.

His business career began as a management consultant with McKinsey & Company and through his work there in the 1960s he became owner of the NFL's Miami Dolphins, who he later sold.

He was also the owner of basketball's Harlem Globetrotters and he currently owns the NHL's Montreal Canadiens. Any Liverpool takeover deal would require debt or business partners in order for him to fund it.

Oh f.uck
66-1112520797
 

Postby Rush Job » Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:02 am

Bad Bob wrote:the yank
Rush Job wrote:
Bad Bob wrote:.The irony of it all is that you knee-jerkers have no idea what you are protesting about yet.  Is it because DIC walked?  Is it because this Gillett is a Yank?  Is it because Moores and the Board are money grubbers?  Or because they're too tentative? What is it? 

What would you put on your banner to show the board on Saturday?  With the number of half-baked ideas I've read on here tonight, your banner would need to cover the entire Kop to get all  the gripes in.

FFS, call it a night.  Let things shake out and let the club release a proper statement and then, maybe, you lot could make an informed evaluation of what's happened rather than jumping to a million conclusions.  Unbelievable!  :no

Go on then Boby boy explain to me what makes me a Knee jerker. And ive said sweat FA about a protest, go on have a look.
Just cus theres a tit about dont have a go at every one whos not entirly pleased with the situation.
And whats a grubber.

Alright I'm back for one more cause I missed this in post for all the 'noise' in here...

Fair enough, you never called for a protest at Saturday's game.

Everything else you've said has been knee-jerk, though.  You've presumed that this decision is primarily about Moore's greed.  You've presumed that "this Yank" has no interest in Liverpool besides money (and, yet, we all assume that DIC did?) and that, as an OAP, he'll kick it soon and leave the club in shambles, etc.

It's knee-jerk because it is based in presumption not fact and because your sense of outrage and betrayal has led you to leap to a whole host of conclusions that may or may not be borne out in the days and weeks ahead.

Look, I get the reaction.  I do.  I just happen to think that it's better to give the Board the benefit of the doubt until facts--not speculation--suggest otherwise.

Know i did not he obviously does have an interest in the club or else why would he wont to buy but the fact is he is not a fan so his only interest is one of a busines where as the sheik is a fan. And i didnt say he WOULD leave the club in a shambles i just worry we`ll be needing a new buyer in the not to distont future whitch will put us back to square one.
Is that knee jurk, is that a whole host conclusions.
Think before you start having a go at a fan with a few douts.
:angry:
Dont judge a book by the cover, unless you cover just another, because blind exceptance is a sign,
Of stupid fools who stand in line......  Like..
User avatar
Rush Job
>> LFC Elite Member <<
 
Posts: 2367
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:38 am

Postby The Manhattan Project » Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:05 am

Screw it. It's best to give it lengthy consideration.

It would be more damaging if we rushed into something and it ended up causing problems.

If DIC really was interested, they would have given us the time we needed. Since they didn't, maybe that's a good thing.
china syndrome 80512640 reactor meltdown fusion element
no uniquely indefinable one 5918 identification unknown 113
source transmission 421 general panic hysteria 02 outbreak
foreign mutation 001505 maximum code destruction nuclear
reflection 01044 power plutonium helix atomic energy wave
User avatar
The Manhattan Project
>> LFC Elite Member <<
 
Posts: 5416
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 7:22 am
Location: Reactor Number Four

Postby account deleted by request » Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:06 am

Liverpool set to open way for takeover by American
Oliver Kay



Liverpool were close to sanctioning a £180 million takeover by George Gillett, the American sports tycoon, last night after a dramatic 24 hours in which the personal intervention of Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum, the world’s fifth-richest man, led Dubai International Capital (DIC) to withdraw its offer.
The club were still coming to terms with the shock announcement that DIC had pulled out of negotiations, but David Moores, the chairman, is understood to be close to selling his 51.6 per cent shareholding to Gillett, owner of the Montreal Canadiens ice hockey franchise, whose previous approaches had been looked upon unfavourably by the club.



Gillett has convinced the sceptics on the Liverpool board over the past week, most notably by offering a written guarantee that he had dropped his plan for the club to share their proposed new stadium in Stanley Park with Everton, although it remains to be seen whether Liverpool would be forced further into debt by any takeover.

Until Gillett’s plans become clear, though, Liverpool’s largest shareholders — Moores, Granada and Steve Morgan, the founder of the Redrow property empire — will face accusations that they are simply opting for the highest offer, one that will earn them £5,000 per share as opposed to DIC’s offer of £4,500.

It is a remarkable turn of events, one that has caused unease among supporters, who had been persuaded of the merits of the DIC bid by Rick Parry, the chief executive, in recent weeks.

Moores and Parry were expected to retain roles under the DIC regime, but, with the chairman ready to accept the higher offer for his shareholding, it now seems that the doors to the Anfield boardroom will be opened to Morgan, his old adversary, who, having failed with several bids of his own in recent years, has thrown his support behind the Gillett bid.

The first cracks in DIC’s bid appeared on Tuesday evening when a board meeting in London — at which Gillett is believed to have been present — ended with Moores and his directors failing to accept the offer. That news prompted an angry reaction from Sheikh Mohammed, who previously had taken only a passing interest in the takeover proposal by the private-equity investment arm of the Arab state.

Sameer al-Ansari, the chief executive of DIC and a lifelong Liverpool supporter, hoped to revive the bid yesterday but the instruction came from the Sheikh, irked by the club’s approach to negotiations, that he was to pull out of the bidding process.

DIC expressed sadness and disappointment with the turn of events. “Having completed due diligence, DIC submitted a comprehensive offer to the Liverpool board. The offer had been accepted in principle by majority shareholder David Moores,” a statement read.

“It appears that the Liverpool board and . . . Moores were unable to approve these terms in order to allow DIC to make a formal offer to all shareholders.

“We are very disappointed to be making this announcement. DIC are a serious investor with considerable resources at our disposal. At the same time, we are supporters of the game and of the club.

“Liverpool’s investment requirements have been well publicised and, after a huge amount of work, we proposed a deal that would provide the club with the funds it needs, both on and off the pitch. We were also prepared to offer shareholders a significant premium on the market price of the shares. However, we will not overpay for assets.”

Nor was the drama at Anfield confined to the boardroom. The club finally received permission from Fifa yesterday to proceed with the signing of Javier Mascherano, the Argentina midfield player, from West Ham United, but, as the midnight transfer deadline approached, they were still waiting for the 18-month loan deal to be ratified by the FA Premier League.


Now Morgan raises his head again :(
account deleted by request
 
Posts: 20690
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 5:11 am

Postby Rush Job » Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:28 am

Bamaga man wrote:
Rush Job wrote:
Bamaga man wrote:
Redtildead  agree with most of what you say, dont understand why your havin a go at me, but if youve a problem bring it on, but i worn you im not in the best of moods with all this shat


:laugh:   Bring it on, its the fecking internet FFS :laugh:

No it isnt is it, you must be one of the smarter people on here,
"bring it on"- tell me your problem.
I can explain in simpler terms if you need me to.

:laugh:

If you found my simple explanation that funny you may wont to get out a little more.
Simple things and all that.
Dont judge a book by the cover, unless you cover just another, because blind exceptance is a sign,
Of stupid fools who stand in line......  Like..
User avatar
Rush Job
>> LFC Elite Member <<
 
Posts: 2367
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:38 am

Postby ste123lfc » Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:29 am

Surprise Surprise, Steve morgan is in favour of the Gillet takeover.

times on line
From Shankly to Brendan we follow our team, Rome to Istanbul we've all lived the dream. Our journey is long, our goal stays the same, to keep for our children the famous red name.
User avatar
ste123lfc
LFC Super Member
 
Posts: 802
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 3:53 pm

Postby 66-1112520797 » Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:30 am

Rush Job wrote:
Bamaga man wrote:
Rush Job wrote:
Bamaga man wrote:
Redtildead  agree with most of what you say, dont understand why your havin a go at me, but if youve a problem bring it on, but i worn you im not in the best of moods with all this shat


:laugh:   Bring it on, its the fecking internet FFS :laugh:

No it isnt is it, you must be one of the smarter people on here,
"bring it on"- tell me your problem.
I can explain in simpler terms if you need me to.

:laugh:

If you found my simple explanation that funny you may wont to get out a little more.
Simple things and all that.

:laugh:
66-1112520797
 

PreviousNext

Return to Liverpool FC - General Discussion

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 66 guests

  • Advertisement
ShopTill-e