Liverpool FC Forum

by **66-1112520797** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 4:55 am

LFC #1 wrote:Copy this into your signature bar in your profile.

Code: Select all
[img]http://img212.imageshack.us/img212/3874/scholes7tdyw5.jpg[/img]

Cheers

by **Pedro Maradona** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 6:47 am

RedorDead wrote:
Leonmc0708 wrote:A lot of people are going to feel very silly readign this thread i nteh next week or so.

Calm Down Calm Down

I think you are very right, people are just coming out with so much dross when the simple fact is that none of us know exactly what is happening. Personally speaking I think Moores and Parry have only ever acted in the best interests of our club, they have made mistakes but have never acted wrecklessly or been so wide of the mark that serious harm has come of it. A little trust is needed i think. Very few of us know what it takes to run a football club, our job is to SUPPORT the club through thick and thin and in situations like ours where we have an experienced and trustworthy board we need to let them get on with it.
Some on here go on about how Man Utd were in uproar when the Glazers took over, and you're right there was a furore like never before and the fans were scared and angry.....those same fans now are singing loud and proud every week as their team sits atop the premier league.

What I am trying to say in a very long winded fashion is: Let's just wait and see before going off on one.

thats not true.....from what i hear there is a big possibility of ronaldo being sold for massive cash to clear the bank loans glazier owes on the utd deal......id hate to see a similar scenario evolving in the future with our star players

by **Pedro Maradona** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 6:56 am

Bad Bob wrote:
Ciggy wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal_Canadiens

These sound familar great history but havent won anything since he took over.

True enough, Cigs, but hockey's a much different kettle of fish...

For one, there's a salary cap so that no team can do a Chelsea and buy themselves the title...they actually have to build a team and Montreal's been doing a decent job of it for the last few seasons.

For two, there's the "regular season" and "the playoffs". Doing well in the former gets you into the latter but, then, all bets are off. It would be like playing the regular season in the Premiership and then having the top 6 or 8 teams play a number of Best of 7 knock-out series to declare the league winner. It's not unlike the Champions League, were an unfancied but in-form team can put together a great run. I would suggest that the Canadiens have done much better since Gillett took over but, because the playoffs are such a lottery, they've not had the tangible results to highlight this improvement.

For three, the NHL has been entirely turned on its head in the last two seasons do to a year-long lock out of the players in 2004-2005. The league's rules, scheduling etc. have all been monkeyed with, as have the rules regarding trades (aka transfers) and salaries. All teams are trying to adjust to these changes, making it hard to compare the current Canadiens team to the pre-lockout team.

As I said in my earlier post, I don't know that much about Gillett, don't have any real sense of why Moores and the board are looking at his bid more carefully and have no idea what he would do to the club if he took over (no one does). But, it seems to me that people are making wild assumptions and accusations about his motives based on nothing whatsoever.

I'm sure a lot more to this story will be revealed in the days and weeks ahead. It's hard to keep a sense of perspective amidst the disappointment but let's wait to hear a bit more about the why things have turned out as they have before we cast this yank as the villain of the piece, hmmm?

how on earth can u make comparisons between ice hockey and football?

? two different sports, two different sporting cultures, two different business environments....... I want someone with an interest in football owning my club, i never thought is say anything positive about abramovich but at least he seems generallly interested in football and chelsea (even if being interested in both chelsea and football seems impossible!)

by **Elchris** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 6:58 am

Pedro Maradona wrote:
RedorDead wrote:
Leonmc0708 wrote:A lot of people are going to feel very silly readign this thread i nteh next week or so.

Calm Down Calm Down

I think you are very right, people are just coming out with so much dross when the simple fact is that none of us know exactly what is happening. Personally speaking I think Moores and Parry have only ever acted in the best interests of our club, they have made mistakes but have never acted wrecklessly or been so wide of the mark that serious harm has come of it. A little trust is needed i think. Very few of us know what it takes to run a football club, our job is to SUPPORT the club through thick and thin and in situations like ours where we have an experienced and trustworthy board we need to let them get on with it.
Some on here go on about how Man Utd were in uproar when the Glazers took over, and you're right there was a furore like never before and the fans were scared and angry.....those same fans now are singing loud and proud every week as their team sits atop the premier league.

What I am trying to say in a very long winded fashion is: Let's just wait and see before going off on one.

thats not true.....from what i hear there is a big possibility of ronaldo being sold for massive cash to clear the bank loans glazier owes on the utd deal......id hate to see a similar scenario evolving in the future with our star players

where u heard bout this :censored:

by **Pedro Maradona** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 7:39 am

Elchris wrote:
Pedro Maradona wrote:
RedorDead wrote:
Leonmc0708 wrote:A lot of people are going to feel very silly readign this thread i nteh next week or so.

Calm Down Calm Down

I think you are very right, people are just coming out with so much dross when the simple fact is that none of us know exactly what is happening. Personally speaking I think Moores and Parry have only ever acted in the best interests of our club, they have made mistakes but have never acted wrecklessly or been so wide of the mark that serious harm has come of it. A little trust is needed i think. Very few of us know what it takes to run a football club, our job is to SUPPORT the club through thick and thin and in situations like ours where we have an experienced and trustworthy board we need to let them get on with it.
Some on here go on about how Man Utd were in uproar when the Glazers took over, and you're right there was a furore like never before and the fans were scared and angry.....those same fans now are singing loud and proud every week as their team sits atop the premier league.

What I am trying to say in a very long winded fashion is: Let's just wait and see before going off on one.

thats not true.....from what i hear there is a big possibility of ronaldo being sold for massive cash to clear the bank loans glazier owes on the utd deal......id hate to see a similar scenario evolving in the future with our star players

where u heard bout this

richard kurt, he writes in a utd fanzine and has a weekly article in an irish broadsheet newspaper for the last 5 years(steven kelly from RWA writes a similar Liverpool FC based article in the same paper). he is usually on the ball in what he writes....he was basing it on a question that david gill was asked during the week about a bid of 75 million euro by real madrid. Gill denied it saying Utd would definately not be selling ronaldo at any price. Gill was then asked if that was Glaziers position on the matter and he said that he was pretty sure that that would be Mr Glaziers position aswell......a slightly different answer to the first question...... so im not just posting it for the sake of posting it so i wouldnt be writing off as sh1t just because you havent heard about it....u patronising tw*t

by **The Manhattan Project** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 8:25 am

Don't be surprised if DIC come back into it.

I doubt they would have lost interest so quickly.

Although heck, if the American has a better deal, take it.

by **azriahmad** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:08 am

DIC has apparently granted everything Moores wanted, including a role post-takeover.

Suddenly, an American nobody who has been reported to be like Glazer who'd securitise the club's assets nto finance the take over comes and offer only slightly better and there is no story of what happens to Moores, i.e., any management involvement or role after the take-over. Then he stalls on DIC's offer.

Anybody, after having agreed on most of the important things, would do the same thing as DIC did by pulling out.

Blame it on greed on Moores' part, despite whatever he tries to say about it.

by **NiftyNeil** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:39 am

It certainly appears that the board have got greedy all of a sudden.

To say I'm disappointed is an understatement.

by **tubby** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:44 am

So I suppose that there is no chance of getting DIC back if the Gilette deals goes wrong.

Why havent the club made an announcment yet?

There either working hard to try and get things signed or are panicking.

by **azriahmad** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:02 am

If they panic and Moores and Parry, the 2 genises who are so clever that they don't know who to sell to when they have a firm offer which matched their terms, fail to clinch the Gillett deal to their personal satisfaction and we end up back at square one, blame it on the greed of Moores.

by **SouthCoastShankly** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:03 am

Pedro Maradona wrote:
Elchris wrote:
Pedro Maradona wrote:
RedorDead wrote:
Leonmc0708 wrote:A lot of people are going to feel very silly readign this thread i nteh next week or so.

Calm Down Calm Down

I think you are very right, people are just coming out with so much dross when the simple fact is that none of us know exactly what is happening. Personally speaking I think Moores and Parry have only ever acted in the best interests of our club, they have made mistakes but have never acted wrecklessly or been so wide of the mark that serious harm has come of it. A little trust is needed i think. Very few of us know what it takes to run a football club, our job is to SUPPORT the club through thick and thin and in situations like ours where we have an experienced and trustworthy board we need to let them get on with it.
Some on here go on about how Man Utd were in uproar when the Glazers took over, and you're right there was a furore like never before and the fans were scared and angry.....those same fans now are singing loud and proud every week as their team sits atop the premier league.

What I am trying to say in a very long winded fashion is: Let's just wait and see before going off on one.

thats not true.....from what i hear there is a big possibility of ronaldo being sold for massive cash to clear the bank loans glazier owes on the utd deal......id hate to see a similar scenario evolving in the future with our star players

where u heard bout this

richard kurt, he writes in a utd fanzine and has a weekly article in an irish broadsheet newspaper for the last 5 years(steven kelly from RWA writes a similar Liverpool FC based article in the same paper). he is usually on the ball in what he writes....he was basing it on a question that david gill was asked during the week about a bid of 75 million euro by real madrid. Gill denied it saying Utd would definately not be selling ronaldo at any price. Gill was then asked if that was Glaziers position on the matter and he said that he was pretty sure that that would be Mr Glaziers position aswell......a slightly different answer to the first question...... so im not just posting it for the sake of posting it so i wouldnt be writing off as sh1t just because you havent heard about it....u patronising tw*t

You need to dry your eyes mate.

You say Gillett knows nothing about LFC and "the football environment" but what does DIC know?

Like I said before the only contact to sport Sheik Mohammed has is racehorses. Shit arguement really! At the end of the day investors are investors, they provide money and are in it for the money. The manager, players and coaching staff make the team and provide success not the owners.

To quote the BBC article "DIC saw this as business enterprise but Gillett has told Liverpool that they are a sports franchise and they know how to run sports operations".

I truly feel running with a sports franchise who are experienced keeping clubs financially successful and stable is the way forward. And in that sense the DIC offer was riskier than the Gillete bid. Gillete will bring sound business knowledge from a sporting market not some bloke (DIC) who has shares in The London Eye, Maddam Tussauds, Travelodge and owns a few racehorses.

Think also of the revenue available in the states, where arguably the market is most buoyant and has massive potential in the next few years, surely Gillete can tap into that market far easier that DIC??

by **Anfield rapper** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:13 am

Some people have been on saying how do we know whats gone on and we don't know anything about the deals. Well we do know a few things. This Glazer sorry Gillett is worth £500m (slightly more than Steve Morgan). He also owns other "sports franchises". So where is the money going to come from to finance our new stadium and new players? He has other sports franchises alot closer to him and they are all screeming for money.

by **inglis5** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:21 am

From the Guardian... a few more nuggets of information -

American takeover likely as Dubai group dumps Liverpool

· Maktoum pulls plug as Moores stalls deal
· Gillett £175m offer values club shares at £5,000 each

Dominic Fifield
Thursday February 1, 2007
The Guardian

Liverpool are on the verge of following Manchester United by slipping into the hands of an American billionaire after Dubai International Capital, dismayed at what it considers unacceptable procrastination by the Premiership club's board, decided to withdraw its takeover bid.
DIC, the state-owned private equity firm given exclusive rights to negotiate a takeover and scrutinise the club's books last month, announced yesterday it was "disappointed" but felt compelled to break off talks. The decision is understood to have been taken by Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum and imposed on DIC's chief executive, Sameer al Ansari, who had issued a 12-hour ultimatum to Liverpool to make a decision in its favour.

DIC were frustrated by the decision on Tuesday by Liverpool's chairman, David Moores, to examine a £175m counter bid by George Gillett Jr, owner of the Montreal Canadiens ice hockey team and formerly of the Harlem Globetrotters, at a board meeting at a Docklands hotel before the Premiership match at West Ham. That offer will now be pursued and is likely to be agreed within the next few days.
That will infuriate DIC. Al Ansari's group believed Moores had agreed in principle to its £155m package, which valued club shares at £4,500 each, with assurances that it would fund the £180m new stadium on Stanley Park and cover the club's £80m debts. However, relations became strained recently with Moores arguing with DIC officials at the recent home game with Chelsea.

The emergence of Gillett's bid, submitted last week, has offered Liverpool a convenient alternative, valuing the club at nearer £5,000 a share. Moores would stand to make some £8m more if he sold his 51.6% stake to the American with shareholders, including Granada and the building tycoon Steve Morgan, anxious to examine a better financial offer.

The feeling within Liverpool was that the offer from Gillett - whose initial interest, expressed last year, the board felt significantly undervalued the club - was moving ahead of DIC, with Moores impressed with the 69-year-old's focus and enthusiasm. One lingering fear over the American's designs on the club's new stadium were allayed when Liverpool received written assurances that Gillett - who amassed his fortune through the food industry - would not pursue the option of a shared arena with Everton.

Liverpool officials have insisted privately that DIC merely jumped before it was pushed. The validity of that argument rather overlooks the fact that the board were deeply shocked when informed the Dubai group was to withdraw its offer.

"Having completed due diligence, DIC submitted a comprehensive offer to the board," said the group in a statement. "The offer had been accepted in principle by majority shareholder David Moores but it appears that the Liverpool board and Mr Moores were then unable to approve these terms in order to allow DIC to make a formal offer to all shareholders."

"We are very disappointed," added Al Ansari, a long-standing supporter 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. As businessmen we move on."

Liverpool released their own statement last night in an attempt to reassure fans and shareholders that the takeover process had not been derailed by DIC's withdrawal. "The process of seeking new owners for the club is still under way and a decision on the future will be taken in the next few days," they said.

---------------

The 'jump before being pushed' bit is very interesting. The withdrawal by DIC would have been very odd had they had believed that their bid would ultimately have been succesful. As we are not privy to all of the negotiations we just need to trust (and hope) that Moores and Parry have done what's best for the club.... something they have said they were going to do from day one.

It's very frustrating being in the dark but hopefully all will become clear over the next few days.

by **KOPMATT** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:36 am

s@int wrote:

Yes it works great

Saint ure a genius!!!! many thanx for that!

by **FrankM** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 11:14 am

It would appear to me that Morgan and Granada had a big say in this decision.

Incidentally once they have withdrawn from the process DIC apparently could not make another offer for six months, which really gives Gillett the upper hand.

Rumours today are that DIC may now look at the barcodes as a possible alternative :veryangry

Liverpool FC Forum

THE TAKEOVER THREAD - LIVERPOOL SOLD

Who is online