Liverpool FC Forum

by **Igor Zidane** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:05 pm

s@int wrote:S@int - Hi Mr Parry, I am interested in buying Liverpool fc.
Parry - I am afraid you will have to answer certain questions so that we know you are the right type of owner
S@int - Thats ok I understand, fire away
Parry - How much are you willing to pay
S@int £5001 per share
Parry - Congratulations you have just bought yourself a football club
S@int - Dont you want to know about my previous history? I did go bankrupt a few years ago.
Parry - Your not bankrupt now are you ? You did say £5001 per share didn't you?
S@int - Yes but I would have to raise the money from loans and to pay it back I would have to raise ticket prices and maybe sell a couple of star players.
Parry - £5001 per share?
S@int - Yes but...
Parry - sold to the gentleman with an asterisk in his name!

Saint you old synic you , the liverpool echo has devoted a few pages to this fiasco and i 'd suggest you read it if you can. I don't know how to provide a link mate ,but if you can get a hold of the articals have i look see and see what you think

by **parchpea** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:10 pm

The Gillett character seems a wheeler dealer in business. He takes gambles, goes bankrupt but bounces back. Word is he will have to borrow the cash to invest in Liverpool FC and claw it back long term.

One thing with DIC is that they definately had the cash and an endless supply. They are surely a much safer partner on that basis than Gillett. He may offer a bob or two more per share but hes lending the cash and gambling with his bid. DIC was nailed on on the cash front.

The new investor may be a pawn to play off against Gillett. He doesnt appear to have the finance and his bid is focused around his love for the club. I doubt that will give him a chance in a deal of this magnitude.

It will be very interesting to see why they took a chance with DIC and how we ended up in this position after months of negotiation.

Right now I am still very unsure that our board are doing the right thing, but hope and pray for all our sakes that they make the correct decision.

by **woof woof !** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:16 pm

jymbojetset wrote:http://icliverpool.icnetwork.co.uk/0500liverpoolfc/0100news/tm_headline=gillett%2D-the-perfect-choice-for-reds-orbest-a-club-can-get%2D%26method=full%26objectid=18560409%26siteid=50061-name_page.html

For all the people who are jumping up and down (myslef included) wondering what is going on, this article gives a different outlook.

maybe I'm dyslectic, what does it say ?

by **Bad Bob** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:26 pm

Pedro Maradona wrote:
SouthCoastShankly wrote:
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??

thats your opinion and your entitled to it, but hey if u want to support a franchise away with u mate....
These are my twopence worth for what its worth, I have big issue with the environment where gillett has made his money on sports ie. the dolphins, the globetrotters, and the canadiens.... this guy Gillett is coming from an sports enviroment that give so little thought to the supporters that they moves "franchises" from one US city to another i.e. in baseball the brooklyn dodgers were relocated to Los angeles, in american football there are also similar relocations aswell houston oilers i think being one example. Even Robert Kraft the owner of the New England patriots (who incidently was being touted as a possible buyer of Liverpol last year when Moores and Parry were out on a "factfinding mission in New England") threatened to move the patriots out of the environs of Boston, MA to Providence in Rhode Island if the political authorities didnt back his plans to build the Gillette stadium at Foxboro where there old stadium was located. Needless to say they backed down in the end. (if any American...and i hope they dont ... was to buy Liverpool id hope it would be Kraft as he has a proven track record turning one of the weakest teams in the NFL into a regular superbowl winning side. and He is very very highly regarded as a business man) Now im not trying to say these relocation issues would happen in england but are these the kind of guys u want owning Liverpool Football Cub???
I have no love of the Dubai consortium bid but if i had to choose them or gillett id be going with the ones who have their own cash to buy the club rather than the bloke getting loans to do so.
Ive never been a big fan of David Moores and im slow to have a go at the man until the full facts are out but he is a Liverpool fan through and through something im sure Gillett isnt.
And you say about America being a source of revenue, im not so sure about that, the league is shocking, beckham is being bankrolled by adidas (they sponsor all MLS sides) so dont be fulled into thinking that its getting better there when the like of him are going there. It has a very large grassroots player base already but despite this the games gets no coverage in comparison to the major US sports. they had a world cup there in 94, a poor league there since, the occasional player comes through there and ends up in europe so the game is already popular enough but it will never break the major US sports where the money and the media attention are focused so the idea of the US being a merchandisers dream is imo well off the mark......Again these are simply my thoughts on what is a very important isssue.....
God, remember it wasnt that long ago wen we were nearly bought by that dude from Thailand...... I dunno do I trust Parry/Moores at all now....)

Utter tosh. Just because some North American sports owners have threatened too--and succeeded in--moving teams about, doesn't mean Gillett's going to. Indeed, the first thing he promised when he arrived in Montreal was that the team was going nowhere, because that was what other, less scrupulous owners, were doing in the NHL at the time.

Look, I've no idea whether, financially, this guy is right for Liverpool. It does sound like he'll have to borrow a lot cash to make this all happen and that's worrying to be certain.

BUT I'm here to say that his track record with the Canadiens has been very, very good and that, to me, suggests that he's going to respect Liverpool's traditions and not monkey about with our club. I'll say it again, the Canadiens are the Liverpool FC of the NHL--a historic team with unparalleled success and a long, long tradition of being a family rather than a corporation. There was a huge uproar when Gillett put in a bid...much a long the lines of what's been posted in this thread. But, you know what? By all accounts, he's done the right thing in Montreal: he's brought in great hockey people and let them run the team, he's stumped up the cash to let them do their jobs properly and he's stayed the f.uck out of the way. So, as far as I'm concerned, we can question his financial credentials all we want but I think it's churlish to question his respect for and commitment to running a venerated, family-oriented sports club because he's already shown he can do it and do it well.

by **Rimetto_** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:27 pm

i think the thing that i'm worried about is that DIC actually care about the club but we have heard nothing about the Yanks knowledge of our club or passion for football in general.

these sentences from the DIC statement sums up for me why we should have gone with them

Sameer Al Ansari added: "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.

"As businessmen, we move on. As fans, we hope that the new owners would share the same vision as we had for LFC and, of course, in realising the new stadium that is so badly needed to ensure the club can continue to compete at the highest level in the Premiership and Europe." [I]

by **stmichael** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:31 pm

NHL is a whole different kettle of nicked cod though. You can finish mid-table but win the Championship. All that matters is getting into the playoffs. They have accomplished that quite regulary since Gillett has been there. He's left the managerial/coaching system alone, rspected the nature of the club (ie- it still retains a French-Canadian flavour.

As for the amont of debt I won't get into that agrument as it's really a never-ending flow of terms and concepts I neither choose or wish to understand. In fact, it is right up there with Constitutional Law, the internal two-stroke combustion engine in snowmobiles and how an aeroplane actually flies. If I knew and comprehended it would give me something else to stew over.

Accounting is like statistics; empirical evidence of equal value can be spun in favour of bipolar viewpoints.

by **account deleted by request** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:31 pm

Igor Zidane wrote:
s@int wrote:S@int - Hi Mr Parry, I am interested in buying Liverpool fc.
Parry - I am afraid you will have to answer certain questions so that we know you are the right type of owner
S@int - Thats ok I understand, fire away
Parry - How much are you willing to pay
S@int £5001 per share
Parry - Congratulations you have just bought yourself a football club
S@int - Dont you want to know about my previous history? I did go bankrupt a few years ago.
Parry - Your not bankrupt now are you ? You did say £5001 per share didn't you?
S@int - Yes but I would have to raise the money from loans and to pay it back I would have to raise ticket prices and maybe sell a couple of star players.
Parry - £5001 per share?
S@int - Yes but...
Parry - sold to the gentleman with an asterisk in his name!

Saint you old synic you , the liverpool echo has devoted a few pages to this fiasco and i 'd suggest you read it if you can. I don't know how to provide a link mate ,but if you can get a hold of the articals have i look see and see what you think

I don't know the truth of what and why, only what I have read (most of which is probably cr@p anyway) and the likelyhood of my ever getting the truth is slim to say the least.All one can do is try to make a judgement off the known facts ,which apart from DIC pulling out are few enough.

DIC "appeared" to be the perfect match. Lots of money, good record of investment in sport and lots of money (so much I mentioned it twice)

Gillett "appears" to be not so perfect a match, an ex- bankrupt and noted business "gambler" who doesnt seem to have that much money and would need to borrow to fund his buyout. Also has a good record of investment in sport. Also "linked" with Morgan and previous ground share rumours.

At the end of the day its not our decision, all we can do is speculate and await events.

by **Redman in wales** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:32 pm

s@int wrote:S@int - Hi Mr Parry, I am interested in buying Liverpool fc.
Parry - I am afraid you will have to answer certain questions so that we know you are the right type of owner
S@int - Thats ok I understand, fire away
Parry - How much are you willing to pay
S@int £5001 per share
Parry - Congratulations you have just bought yourself a football club
S@int - Dont you want to know about my previous history? I did go bankrupt a few years ago.
Parry - Your not bankrupt now are you ? You did say £5001 per share didn't you?
S@int - Yes but I would have to raise the money from loans and to pay it back I would have to raise ticket prices and maybe sell a couple of star players.
Parry - £5001 per share?
S@int - Yes but...
Parry - sold to the gentleman with an asterisk in his name!

Redman: hello mr parry did you say the deal with saint was done?
Parry: £5001 per share
Redman: £5002 per share AND I promise (you can't see if I've got my fingers crossed can you?) I will give you a new SOCCER pitch
Parry: I'm sorry S@int I want to look at redmans offer......

:eyebrow

by **account deleted by request** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:36 pm

That's it I am pulling out immediately

by **Pedro Maradona** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:37 pm

Bad Bob wrote:
Pedro Maradona wrote:
SouthCoastShankly wrote:
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??

thats your opinion and your entitled to it, but hey if u want to support a franchise away with u mate....
These are my twopence worth for what its worth, I have big issue with the environment where gillett has made his money on sports ie. the dolphins, the globetrotters, and the canadiens.... this guy Gillett is coming from an sports enviroment that give so little thought to the supporters that they moves "franchises" from one US city to another i.e. in baseball the brooklyn dodgers were relocated to Los angeles, in american football there are also similar relocations aswell houston oilers i think being one example. Even Robert Kraft the owner of the New England patriots (who incidently was being touted as a possible buyer of Liverpol last year when Moores and Parry were out on a "factfinding mission in New England") threatened to move the patriots out of the environs of Boston, MA to Providence in Rhode Island if the political authorities didnt back his plans to build the Gillette stadium at Foxboro where there old stadium was located. Needless to say they backed down in the end. (if any American...and i hope they dont ... was to buy Liverpool id hope it would be Kraft as he has a proven track record turning one of the weakest teams in the NFL into a regular superbowl winning side. and He is very very highly regarded as a business man) Now im not trying to say these relocation issues would happen in england but are these the kind of guys u want owning Liverpool Football Cub???
I have no love of the Dubai consortium bid but if i had to choose them or gillett id be going with the ones who have their own cash to buy the club rather than the bloke getting loans to do so.
Ive never been a big fan of David Moores and im slow to have a go at the man until the full facts are out but he is a Liverpool fan through and through something im sure Gillett isnt.
And you say about America being a source of revenue, im not so sure about that, the league is shocking, beckham is being bankrolled by adidas (they sponsor all MLS sides) so dont be fulled into thinking that its getting better there when the like of him are going there. It has a very large grassroots player base already but despite this the games gets no coverage in comparison to the major US sports. they had a world cup there in 94, a poor league there since, the occasional player comes through there and ends up in europe so the game is already popular enough but it will never break the major US sports where the money and the media attention are focused so the idea of the US being a merchandisers dream is imo well off the mark......Again these are simply my thoughts on what is a very important isssue.....
God, remember it wasnt that long ago wen we were nearly bought by that dude from Thailand...... I dunno do I trust Parry/Moores at all now....)

Utter tosh. Just because some North American sports owners have threatened too--and succeeded in--moving teams about, doesn't mean Gillett's going to. Indeed, the first thing he promised when he arrived in Montreal was that the team was going nowhere, because that was what other, less scrupulous owners, were doing in the NHL at the time.

Look, I've no idea whether, financially, this guy is right for Liverpool. It does sound like he'll have to borrow a lot cash to make this all happen and that's worrying to be certain.

BUT I'm here to say that his track record with the Canadiens has been very, very good and that, to me, suggests that he's going to respect Liverpool's traditions and not monkey about with our club. I'll say it again, the Canadiens are the Liverpool FC of the NHL--a historic team with unparalleled success and a long, long tradition of being a family rather than a corporation. There was a huge uproar when Gillett put in a bid...much a long the lines of what's been posted in this thread. But, you know what? By all accounts, he's done the right thing in Montreal: he's brought in great hockey people and let them run the team, he's stumped up the cash to let them do their jobs properly and he's stayed the f.uck out of the way. So, as far as I'm concerned, we can question his financial credentials all we want but I think it's churlish to question his respect for and commitment to running a venerated, family-oriented sports club because he's already shown he can do it and do it well.

I am not saying he would relocate!! the point i am making is this is the business enviroment he is from... read what i actually said i dont think that relocation is an issue !why not compare them with the globetrotters while ur at it!!!!!
and besides..... :censored:

the canadiens i dont give too shits about them or there game or their history! stop comparing Liverpool Football Club with them! i dont wont some glazier type character buying them! I dont want my club to do a Leeds....thats all....

by **woof woof !** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:43 pm

Bad Bob wrote:Look, I've no idea whether, financially, this guy is right for Liverpool. It does sound like he'll have to borrow a lot cash to make this all happen and that's worrying to be certain.

BUT I'm here to say that his track record with the Canadiens has been very, very good and that, to me, suggests that he's going to respect Liverpool's traditions and not monkey about with our club. I'll say it again, the Canadiens are the Liverpool FC of the NHL--a historic team with unparalleled success and a long, long tradition of being a family rather than a corporation. There was a huge uproar when Gillett put in a bid...much a long the lines of what's been posted in this thread. But, you know what? By all accounts, he's done the right thing in Montreal: he's brought in great hockey people and let them run the team, he's stumped up the cash to let them do their jobs properly and he's stayed the f.uck out of the way. So, as far as I'm concerned, we can question his financial credentials all we want but I think it's churlish to question his respect for and commitment to running a venerated, family-oriented sports club because he's already shown he can do it and do it well.

Thanks for the input Bob . Must admit I know sod all about the guy , my prime reservation was the ground share idea . Although I read that it is no longer an issue it does show a lack of understanding on Gillettes behalf as to what the identity of Liverpool the football club as opposed to Liverpool the city is all about .Plus lets face it , can we really trust a guy who calls Football , Soccer

The Arab guys on the other hand apart from being business men had amongst their ranks many ardent LFC fans . I think some of them are probably as gutted as some of us are that their bid has been called off .

by **Bad Bob** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:56 pm

Pedro Maradona wrote:
Bad Bob wrote:
Pedro Maradona wrote:
SouthCoastShankly wrote:
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??

thats your opinion and your entitled to it, but hey if u want to support a franchise away with u mate....
These are my twopence worth for what its worth, I have big issue with the environment where gillett has made his money on sports ie. the dolphins, the globetrotters, and the canadiens.... this guy Gillett is coming from an sports enviroment that give so little thought to the supporters that they moves "franchises" from one US city to another i.e. in baseball the brooklyn dodgers were relocated to Los angeles, in american football there are also similar relocations aswell houston oilers i think being one example. Even Robert Kraft the owner of the New England patriots (who incidently was being touted as a possible buyer of Liverpol last year when Moores and Parry were out on a "factfinding mission in New England") threatened to move the patriots out of the environs of Boston, MA to Providence in Rhode Island if the political authorities didnt back his plans to build the Gillette stadium at Foxboro where there old stadium was located. Needless to say they backed down in the end. (if any American...and i hope they dont ... was to buy Liverpool id hope it would be Kraft as he has a proven track record turning one of the weakest teams in the NFL into a regular superbowl winning side. and He is very very highly regarded as a business man) Now im not trying to say these relocation issues would happen in england but are these the kind of guys u want owning Liverpool Football Cub???
I have no love of the Dubai consortium bid but if i had to choose them or gillett id be going with the ones who have their own cash to buy the club rather than the bloke getting loans to do so.
Ive never been a big fan of David Moores and im slow to have a go at the man until the full facts are out but he is a Liverpool fan through and through something im sure Gillett isnt.
And you say about America being a source of revenue, im not so sure about that, the league is shocking, beckham is being bankrolled by adidas (they sponsor all MLS sides) so dont be fulled into thinking that its getting better there when the like of him are going there. It has a very large grassroots player base already but despite this the games gets no coverage in comparison to the major US sports. they had a world cup there in 94, a poor league there since, the occasional player comes through there and ends up in europe so the game is already popular enough but it will never break the major US sports where the money and the media attention are focused so the idea of the US being a merchandisers dream is imo well off the mark......Again these are simply my thoughts on what is a very important isssue.....
God, remember it wasnt that long ago wen we were nearly bought by that dude from Thailand...... I dunno do I trust Parry/Moores at all now....)

Utter tosh. Just because some North American sports owners have threatened too--and succeeded in--moving teams about, doesn't mean Gillett's going to. Indeed, the first thing he promised when he arrived in Montreal was that the team was going nowhere, because that was what other, less scrupulous owners, were doing in the NHL at the time.

Look, I've no idea whether, financially, this guy is right for Liverpool. It does sound like he'll have to borrow a lot cash to make this all happen and that's worrying to be certain.

BUT I'm here to say that his track record with the Canadiens has been very, very good and that, to me, suggests that he's going to respect Liverpool's traditions and not monkey about with our club. I'll say it again, the Canadiens are the Liverpool FC of the NHL--a historic team with unparalleled success and a long, long tradition of being a family rather than a corporation. There was a huge uproar when Gillett put in a bid...much a long the lines of what's been posted in this thread. But, you know what? By all accounts, he's done the right thing in Montreal: he's brought in great hockey people and let them run the team, he's stumped up the cash to let them do their jobs properly and he's stayed the f.uck out of the way. So, as far as I'm concerned, we can question his financial credentials all we want but I think it's churlish to question his respect for and commitment to running a venerated, family-oriented sports club because he's already shown he can do it and do it well.

I am not saying he would relocate!! the point i am making is this is the business enviroment he is from... read what i actually said i dont think that relocation is an issue !why not compare them with the globetrotters while ur at it!!!!!
and besides..... the canadiens i dont give too shits about them or there game or their history! stop comparing Liverpool Football Club with them! i dont wont some glazier type character buying them! I dont want my club to do a Leeds....thats all....

No, you never said you thought Gillett would relocate LFC but you did use relocation as your evidence to imply that all American sports owners are mavericks who don't give a f.uck about the fans of the franchises they own because, hey, that's the business culture over there, isn't it?

That's precisely why I'm talking about the Canadiens because the parallels with Liverpool do offer something to this debate and because Gillett's track record with the Canadiens does provide quite a bit of insight about how he might approach running Liverpool. You seem intent on casting all American sports owners in the Glazer model but I'm here to say that that's a lazy comparison to make and reveals more about your biases than it does about Gillett's suitability as an investor for Liverpool Football Club.

Oh, and by the way, Foxboro is about as close to Providence, RI as it is to Boston so Kraft's threat wasn't quite as heavy-handed as you make it sound. :rasp

by **Bad Bob** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 6:09 pm

woof woof ! wrote:
Bad Bob wrote:Look, I've no idea whether, financially, this guy is right for Liverpool. It does sound like he'll have to borrow a lot cash to make this all happen and that's worrying to be certain.

BUT I'm here to say that his track record with the Canadiens has been very, very good and that, to me, suggests that he's going to respect Liverpool's traditions and not monkey about with our club. I'll say it again, the Canadiens are the Liverpool FC of the NHL--a historic team with unparalleled success and a long, long tradition of being a family rather than a corporation. There was a huge uproar when Gillett put in a bid...much a long the lines of what's been posted in this thread. But, you know what? By all accounts, he's done the right thing in Montreal: he's brought in great hockey people and let them run the team, he's stumped up the cash to let them do their jobs properly and he's stayed the f.uck out of the way. So, as far as I'm concerned, we can question his financial credentials all we want but I think it's churlish to question his respect for and commitment to running a venerated, family-oriented sports club because he's already shown he can do it and do it well.

Thanks for the input Bob . Must admit I know sod all about the guy , my prime reservation was the ground share idea . Although I read that it is no longer an issue it does show a lack of understanding on Gillettes behalf as to what the identity of Liverpool the football club as opposed to Liverpool the city is all about .Plus lets face it , can we really trust a guy who calls Football , Soccer

The Arab guys on the other hand apart from being business men had amongst their ranks many ardent LFC fans . I think some of them are probably as gutted as some of us are that their bid has been called off .

Yeah, Woof, I do share most people's reservations about Gillett's suitability. I guess I just take exception to this anti-Yank, Glazer Mark II argument given that he's already shown he can run a venerated sports club with good business sense and a respect for its long-standing traditions and loyal fan-base.

Now, coming from Wisconsin, he may "get" hockey and its traditions fairly easily, whereas the nuances of football ("soccer" bah! :angry:

) may escape him. Fair enough--if that proves to be the case I'll be the first to say he's not the man to take over the club. But, I wonder how much of our perception of him is based on "paper talk." Hell, Bascombe's piece in the Echo today implied that the whole groundshare idea was a false report. Do we know for sure that he ever did advocate it?

Personally, I'm in favour of what's best for the club and, as such, I am still undecided on Gillett. But, I think that some of the rubbish that's been chatted about him 'and his kind' in here is a tad ridiculous.

by **Rimetto_** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 6:32 pm

Reds put off by bullying tactics

Liverpool chief Rick Parry has revealed the club felt "bullied" into accepting a takeover proposal from the Dubai International Capital group.
DIC withdrew their bid on Wednesday after Liverpool asked for more time to consider a counter offer from American tycoon George Gillett.

"The DIC response to this was to give the club 12 hours to make a decision," Parry told the Liverpool Echo.

"But chairman David Moores was not prepared to have Liverpool bullied."

DIC opened talks with Liverpool late last year and were favourites to buy out the club in a deal worth around £450m.

However, Liverpool were intrigued by a rival bid from Gillett, whose offer is understood to give shareholders more for their holdings.

Moores himself was set to get £8m more in the Gillett deal, but Parry insists money was not behind the club's willingness to listen to the new offer.

"The price is not a factor in David's mind," said Parry. "He is not after cash for himself, absolutely not, but he felt compelled to consider the rival bid.

"We didn't want to rush into any decision, and we were aware DIC might walk away."

Gillett, who owns the National Hockey League side Montreal Canadiens, has impressed Liverpool with his proposals and the speed at which he completed due diligence - the process of investigation by potential investors - in three days.

The American has also stressed his experience in running successful sporting operations and is expected to make a new bid within the next few days.

Parry added: "Be assured the only thing David Moores is concerned about is the club being in the right hands for the future.

"You can be certain he has done his homework carefully and will make a decision in the best interests of the club."

Liverpool manager Rafael Benitez had met with DIC's representatives and approved of their plans.

But the Spaniard insists he is happy to leave the board to decide who is the best candidate to take the club forward.

"I have not talked with the new people but I know they have spoken to the chairman and Rick," said Benitez.

"When they talked with him (Gillett) first, they told me he knew about sport.

"If the board decide to change and hear different people, I have confidence in them. I trust them to make the right

by **Ciggy** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 6:33 pm

This will put the Cat among the pidgeons.

Dallas Morning News

Hicks to buy into Liverpool

11:08 AM CST on Thursday, February 1, 2007

By EVAN GRANT / The Dallas Morning News
egrant@dallasnews.com

In what may well set a precedent for North American sports franchise owners, Rangers and Stars boss Tom Hicks is entering into an agreement with Montreal Canadiens owner George Gillett Jr. to purchase one of the most storied teams in the British Premiership soccer league.
Also Online

Tell us: Good move by Hicks?

According to a source, Hicks has agreed to go half-and-half with Gillett on the $450 million purchase of Liverpool Football Club. Hicks' investment will rival the $250 million he paid for the Rangers when he purchased them in 1998. A formal announcement of the deal could be made early next week.

In a history that dates back to 1892, Liverpool has won 18 league championships and five European Cup. Liverpool, currently in third place in the Premiership standings, last captured the European Cup in 2005.

Hicks was in the United Kingdom this week and was expected back in the United States late Thursday.
MICHAEL MULVEY / DMN
Tom Hicks has owned the Stars since 1995, and the Rangers since 1998.

Hicks and Gillett were together at last week's NHL All-Star Game where, according to a source, the partnership idea picked up steam. Hicks and Gillett have also worked together on the Swift Company executive board.

It is believed to be, however, the first time two major sports owners have gone into partnership on another franchise.

Gillett's bid to take over the club has been well-documented. He was the underdog to Dubai International Capital, but, according to the British newspaper The Daily Telegraph, DIC withdrew its bid on Tuesday.

"We are very disappointed," Sameer Al Ansari, executive chairman and chief executive officer of DIC, told the Telegraph. "DIC is a serious investor with considerable resources at its disposal. At the same time, we are supporters ? of the game and of the club. We proposed a deal that would provide the club with the funds it needs on and off the pitch."

"We have a duty as directors to consider a very interesting bid from George Gillett," Liverpool chief executive Rick Parry told the Liverpool Echo.

"The DIC response to this was to give the club 12 hours to make a decision but the chairman was not prepared to have Liverpool Football Club bullied like that."

Hicks will join a growing number of U.S. sports owners investing in the British Premiership. Tampa Bay Buccaneers owner Malcolm Glazer purchased Manchester United, the Premiership's version of the New York Yankees. Cleveland Browns owner Randy Lerner invested in the Aston Villa franchise, a lower-echelon Premiership club. Revenues for the upper-level Premiership clubs, including Manchester United, Liverpool and Arsenal all are believed to be in line with those generated by NFL franchises.

Liverpool FC Forum

THE TAKEOVER THREAD - LIVERPOOL SOLD

Who is online