Liverpool FC Forum

Rimetto_ wrote:from BBC website

the thing that sticks out for me is the BUT in this sentence.

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.

Surely if you where offering to pay 450m for something and have taken months sorting out the deal you're perfectly within your right to ask the people selling to give an answer by a certain date? ?

especially when someone else is trying to guzump your offer?

Bullying come on rick you've been watching to much big brother

Ciggy wrote: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.

Leonmc0708 wrote:

Rimetto_ wrote:from BBC website

the thing that sticks out for me is the BUT in this sentence.

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.

Surely if you where offering to pay 450m for something and have taken months sorting out the deal you're perfectly within your right to ask the people selling to give an answer by a certain date? ?

especially when someone else is trying to guzump your offer?

Bullying come on rick you've been watching to much big brother

surely if you are selling somethign for £450m which is an institiution, idolised by thousands and very important decision you are entitled to listen to all suitors ?

Ciggy wrote:

Leonmc0708 wrote:That is intresting Ciggy my dear.....

Hmmmmm very.

Hicks purchased from an investment group that included then-Texas Governor George W. Bush

No wonder the Arabs got p.issed off

DALLAS -- The race for the most-prized free agent in baseball history is over.

Alex Rodriguez agreed to a 10-year, $252 million deal with the Texas Rangers. It is the largest contract in sports history.

The numbers are staggering, but ESPN.com's Jayson Stark says believe it -- Alex Rodriguez is a Ranger and the details of the deal are remarkable.

"Alex is the player we believe will allow this franchise to fulfill its dream of continuing on its path to becoming a World Series champion," Rangers owner Tom Hicks said at a news conference Monday evening.

Hicks paid $250 million to buy the entire franchise three years ago from the group headed by George W. Bush and Rusty Rose.

"The Rangers are serious about winning," Texas general manager Doug Melvin said. "I know know expectations will be high. We're ready for that challenge."

Rodriguez will receive $21 million per season from 2001 through 2004, $25 million in 2005 and 2006, and then $27 million per for the remaining four seasons. After seven years, there is a mutual out clause in the contract that gives A-Rod the right to be a free agent again at age 32.

There is also a clause in the final two years that guarantees Rodriguez will be the highest-paid player in the game. He also gets a $10 million signing bonus that is to be paid out in one-year, $1 million installments.

"This amount of money spread out over 10 years could probably buy three franchises or so at the bottom end of market value," said Sandy Alderson, an executive vice president in the commissioner's office.

The deal, at its minimum level, is exactly double the previous record for a sports contract: a $126 million, six-year agreement in October 1997 between forward Kevin Garnett and the NBA's Minnesota Timberwolves.

"At first they were talking about $200 million -- $250 (million) came out of nowhere," said Rodriguez's new teammate, Rafael Palmeiro. "It's just incredible."

The previous high for a baseball player was set just Saturday: a $121 million, eight-year contract between left-hander Mike Hampton and the Colorado Rockies.

Until then, baseball's largest deal had been a $116.5 million, nine-year contract agreed to in February by Ken Griffey Jr. and the Cincinnati Reds when Seattle traded the center fielder last February.

"Tom (Hicks, the team owner) wants to win and win badly," Rangers manager Johnny Oates said. "At our monthly meeting in August, Alex was a player he very much wanted in our organization."

http://espn.go.com/mlb/news/2000/1210/937273.html

Well, if this rumour is true that is much more worrying.  Not because of the George Bush connections, mind, but because of this whole Alex Rodriguez nonsense (a good player but not worth that kind of cash).  If that's Hicks' attitude and he's involved at Liverpool are we going to see 50 million pound bids for the likes of Kaka or Messi?  Yikes! 

jeffiroquai wrote:Hicks is a numpty!!  He is the kind of tw@t that would have gone over the moon to bring in Beckham or someone of his ilk.  While he is generally not afraid to throw up big cash on free agents, he usually buys rubbish players.

Bad Bob wrote:

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.   

lol typical geography teacher answer there bob....And thanx for the geography lesson but I know where providence, boston, foxboro and the gillette all are...having played "soccer" over there...my point is he wanted to move it to 2 providence (as opposed to half way there......)