Liverpool FC Forum

by **EddieC** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 8:42 pm

I'd just like to say that, unless we have any posters on here who sit on the board, none of us know anything about the proposed deal.

I'll give you a couple of quotes, and this is just from the last page:

Anyway I feel compelled to drop a post as to how girly the Liverpool board has become.

This is in reference to the fact that LFC issued a statement when you feel they should've kept there mouth shut. Would you rather they didn't issue a statement? Or maybe you'd rather they didn't look at all the options & just rushed blindly into the deal, I suppose it's not anything that valuable they're selling is it? As far as I'm concerned, if DIC were willing to pull out of a deal cos of a few more days, they weren't the right investors. They WERE trying to bully us into accepting their offer without looking at the others.

Moores is just trying to get more money for himself out of the deal, and Rick Parry is a joke

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm sure Steve Morgan's offer would've made Moores the most personal profit. WW, even for you this is bad. It's even too wanky to go in your world of W*nk.

I dunno do I trust Parry/Moores at all now

Just fuck right off chap. Moores & Parry knock back an offer & that makes you decide you don't trust them? I suppose you would be happier if they just rushed into the first deal that made them a pound note? Well, if they did, we'd probably be stuck right now with a Thai owner who doesn't have a pot to p!ss in. Get a fucking clue, Moores & Parry have never done anything to stitch this club, and I'm sure they're not about to start now. Have a bit of faith, Moores has always said he will do the deal that's right for the club. He rejects one deal that looks promising & everyones on his back? Have you ever considered that it might, just might, have NOT been the right deal for the club. Their willingness to pull out like that suggests so.

Woof & Bob, I'd just like to specify, my rant isn't aimed at you in any way. At least someone's posting a bit of sense in this thread.

by **EddieC** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 8:43 pm

*EDIT*

Sorry, double post.

by **Pedro Maradona** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:03 pm

EddieC wrote:I'd just like to say that, unless we have any posters on here who sit on the board, none of us know anything about the proposed deal.

I'll give you a couple of quotes, and this is just from the last page:

Anyway I feel compelled to drop a post as to how girly the Liverpool board has become.

This is in reference to the fact that LFC issued a statement when you feel they should've kept there mouth shut. Would you rather they didn't issue a statement? Or maybe you'd rather they didn't look at all the options & just rushed blindly into the deal, I suppose it's not anything that valuable they're selling is it? As far as I'm concerned, if DIC were willing to pull out of a deal cos of a few more days, they weren't the right investors. They WERE trying to bully us into accepting their offer without looking at the others.

Moores is just trying to get more money for himself out of the deal, and Rick Parry is a joke

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm sure Steve Morgan's offer would've made Moores the most personal profit. WW, even for you this is bad. It's even too wanky to go in your world of W*nk.

I dunno do I trust Parry/Moores at all now

Just fuck right off chap. Moores & Parry knock back an offer & that makes you decide you don't trust them? I suppose you would be happier if they just rushed into the first deal that made them a pound note? Well, if they did, we'd probably be stuck right now with a Thai owner who doesn't have a pot to p!ss in. Get a fucking clue, Moores & Parry have never done anything to stitch this club, and I'm sure they're not about to start now. Have a bit of faith, Moores has always said he will do the deal that's right for the club. He rejects one deal that looks promising & everyones on his back? Have you ever considered that it might, just might, have NOT been the right deal for the club. Their willingness to pull out like that suggests so.

Woof & Bob, I'd just like to specify, my rant isn't aimed at you in any way. At least someone's posting a bit of sense in this thread.

the thai comment was me being ironic..... considering i said in the post earleir that im slow to have a go at moores until the full facts are known....i would have thought u might have picked up on that...... but hey I guess u obviously didnt...
Im not going to hide my opinion that this whole takeover bid the last number of years has been handled appallingly.....between the Thai prime minister, the morgan fiasco, the Kraft rumours, the DIC and the Gillett issue now. If the DIC offer was not good enough yesterday why was it being lauded by Parry as what the club where looking for a couple of weeks previously, What did DIC pull out of the bag in the last minute?

I doubt anything, i would wager it was Gillett gazzumping the DIC bid that kicked the whole thing off, and for what?? another 8 million quid?? the price of an average premiership player these days??
granted its all speculation at the moment but do you honestly think it looks very good? In none of my posts have I had a go at Moores or Parry but I like other Liverpool supporters would like to know whats going on, maybe we will find out in the next few days....

by **GunGod** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:55 pm

EddieC wrote:I'd just like to say that, unless we have any posters on here who sit on the board, none of us know anything about the proposed deal.

I'll give you a couple of quotes, and this is just from the last page:

Anyway I feel compelled to drop a post as to how girly the Liverpool board has become.

This is in reference to the fact that LFC issued a statement when you feel they should've kept there mouth shut. Would you rather they didn't issue a statement? Or maybe you'd rather they didn't look at all the options & just rushed blindly into the deal, I suppose it's not anything that valuable they're selling is it? As far as I'm concerned, if DIC were willing to pull out of a deal cos of a few more days, they weren't the right investors. They WERE trying to bully us into accepting their offer without looking at the others.

Mate, I don't think you have read my post in its entirety and I'm trying not to be too hard on you.

As I've said in my initial post, the business side of things (DIC issuing a 12hrs deadline and LFC rejecting it) there are no rights or wrongs to it. Both parties are entitled to weigh their options carefully.

What I meant by girly, is that you don't come out crying to the media and badmouthing the other party after a failed deal. Especially when the other party seems to have conducted itself in the right spirit and manner.

Make an annoucement by all means (read initial post for example), but certainly not one that sullies the reputation of the other.

by **Kash_Mountain** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:03 pm

Sorry if this has been covered but Who' the irish fellow that is interested in buying Liverpool FC. He has a box (seating area) at the club and is considered to be a serious bidder.

by **mighty mo** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:06 pm

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

tom hicks got alot of stick for giving Alex rodriguez "Arod" that huge 10 year $252 million contract, he outbidded every other rival team by $100 million.the contract stifled the team that they ended up trading him to the new york yankees in 2004 after "3 last place finishes"with Arod, even since that trade rangers still havent recovered on and off the field because they pay half of his yearly salary because they were so desperate to get rid of $25 million he is owed every year it has harmed team rebuilding. the rangers suck in MLB, because of tom hicks ownership, he has a history of throwing stupid contracts at overinflated prices, and rangers haven't made the playoffs under his tenureship since 1998. if this guy is involved with liverpool i would be worried.

by **Reg** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:33 pm

EddieC wrote:I'd just like to say that, unless we have any posters on here who sit on the board, none of us know anything about the proposed deal.

I'll give you a couple of quotes, and this is just from the last page:

Anyway I feel compelled to drop a post as to how girly the Liverpool board has become.

This is in reference to the fact that LFC issued a statement when you feel they should've kept there mouth shut. Would you rather they didn't issue a statement? Or maybe you'd rather they didn't look at all the options & just rushed blindly into the deal, I suppose it's not anything that valuable they're selling is it? As far as I'm concerned, if DIC were willing to pull out of a deal cos of a few more days, they weren't the right investors. They WERE trying to bully us into accepting their offer without looking at the others.

Moores is just trying to get more money for himself out of the deal, and Rick Parry is a joke

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm sure Steve Morgan's offer would've made Moores the most personal profit. WW, even for you this is bad. It's even too wanky to go in your world of W*nk.

I dunno do I trust Parry/Moores at all now

Just fuck right off chap. Moores & Parry knock back an offer & that makes you decide you don't trust them? I suppose you would be happier if they just rushed into the first deal that made them a pound note? Well, if they did, we'd probably be stuck right now with a Thai owner who doesn't have a pot to p!ss in. Get a fucking clue, Moores & Parry have never done anything to stitch this club, and I'm sure they're not about to start now. Have a bit of faith, Moores has always said he will do the deal that's right for the club. He rejects one deal that looks promising & everyones on his back? Have you ever considered that it might, just might, have NOT been the right deal for the club. Their willingness to pull out like that suggests so.

Woof & Bob, I'd just like to specify, my rant isn't aimed at you in any way. At least someone's posting a bit of sense in this thread.

Well said matey. Too many freakin' Walter Mitty know-alls.

As Rick Parry said on Sky-Sports the board wasnt going to be bullied into a 12 hour decision deadline.

Walter Mitty and his friends last night were crying that we should sell to DIC becuase they are 'fans'.

What a load of shhhhite....

by **KOPMATT** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 11:12 pm

jeffiroquai wrote:
Ciggy wrote:
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.

Do you know him like?

Ciggy, I am a big baseball fan (Boston) and follow alot of the moves this guy makes. He is not the shrewdist judges of talent, but is not afraid to open up the wallet to bring in players.

Two sides of that coin. Heads, he is willing to pay for players. Tails, he has Houllier's eye for talent.

If you can combine his wallet with Gillet's lickening for putting smart operations guys in place for the team, then it could work out well.

God help us then! :help

by **DZed** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 11:51 pm

The DIC are fans. Parry said that Liverpool will not be bullied into making a decision in 12 hours? But that offer was on the table for more than 12 hours. The deal was infact practically done and a press release was even written for this Monday. However, the DIC felt betrayed because Gillett all of sudden became a serious consideration even though he hadn't expressed interest for over a year. Personally I would feel aggrieved if I had taken months of my time to carefully analyze finances of say a business or a car I was going to purchase and then days before I sealed the deal someone else comes along, hastely looks at the finances with less money and outbids me. So why not give an ultimatum? I would rather pull out than lose out and have egg on my face. And yeah we may not know the full extent of what has been offered. BUT we do know that Gillett's estimated worth of 500 million is not enough to build a stadium, pay our current debt of 80m off and supply us with significant transfer funds for the future. As most would say he is poor man's Malcom Glazer. The 450m DIC would have given us for starters would practically wipe Gillett out. He must also fund his other franchises with such little wealth. The DIC deal is dead and this Gillett does not look good in my opinion. I do not want a Gillett/Morgan deal if we are not financially secure for the future. Parry said that Liverpool cannot be bullied but seriously what is he supposed to say once a great deal falls through? We screwed up? I know Parry/Moore's have Liverpool's best interests at heart but I also feel they made mistake and now have to accept the alternative because funds are needed for the start of our stadium construction in March otherwise that will fall through. Finally, DIC were wrong for not being patient but at the same time they felt disrespected and this is traditionally something an Arab cannot stand for. Bottom line is I don't want an American non supporter to buy Liverpool while increasing our debt and then sell us off in 10 years. He has done this with other franchises and might do it again if he needed to starve off another bankruptcy. You cannot trust the guy! Sorry for being a little pessimistic, but I just want what's best for Liverpool.

by **Rush Job** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 12:08 am

Its pritty clear Gillett hasnt really got the finnances to pull this off on his own, whats the use of him borrowing money to right off the dept?
Last night there were rumors he would go in with Morgan, now its this flash harry spend a shet load and still finish bottom Hicks geezer.
When the club have spoke they have never mentioned anyone alse being in bed (oo er) with the yank, why? Surely they would have to check out this other person, surely they would mention it, why keep the fans in the dark? They know there is a sh*t load of worryed people wondering what the feck is going on.
Do they know? Or are they hoping over the next few days things will come to gether and then they can say they new this all along and this why they stalled DIC, im affraid with the lack of comment this is what im inclined to belive.I dont think they expected or wanted DIC to pull out or surely they would have had some kind of statement ready.
Fact is we need to start work on the new ground or risk losing more money, we need investment now so have very few options left thanks to Moores and Co`s dithering.
I like most am very confused and more than a little worryed, but if only in monetry terms its better if its not Gillett on his own.
I wouldnt expect anything official till after the game which is where the money men usualy meet up.
Plus they know they`ll get us in a good mood.

by **66-1112520797** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 2:16 am

The more I read this speculation, the more I feel the urge to steer clear of the septic tanks. There are more and more of them trying to buy their way into our game, and it doesnt sit right with me. They should stay over the otherside of the pond and stick to their sports.

Call me anti-yank, I dont care. But 15 years down the line we're gonna have all that stupid razz-ma-tazz, cheer leaders at half time, majorettes at full time. Fat people with their southern fried accents in the stands cheering " kick a goal ". Instead of halfs we're going to have quarters, so Yanky t.v companies can get there ads in. Oh my god I can see it now. The game of football will be lost, and it will be come globaly known as Soccer.

by **Rush Job** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 2:49 am

Bamaga man wrote:The more I read this speculation, the more I feel the urge to steer clear of the sceptic tanks. There are more and more of them trying to buy their way into our game, and it doesnt sit right with me. They should stay over the otherside of the pond and stick to their sports.

Call me anti-yank, I dont care. But 15 years down the line we're gonna have all that stupid razz-ma-tazz, cheer leaders at half time, majorettes at full time. Fat people with their southern fried accents in the stands cheering " kick a goal ". Instead of halfs we're going to have quarters, so Yanky t.v companies can get there ads in. Oh my god I can see it now. The game of football will be lost, and it will be come globaly known as Soccer.

Did you mean septic tanks.

by **Rush Job** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 2:54 am

Rush Job wrote:
Bamaga man wrote:The more I read this speculation, the more I feel the urge to steer clear of the sceptic tanks. There are more and more of them trying to buy their way into our game, and it doesnt sit right with me. They should stay over the otherside of the pond and stick to their sports.

Call me anti-yank, I dont care. But 15 years down the line we're gonna have all that stupid razz-ma-tazz, cheer leaders at half time, majorettes at full time. Fat people with their southern fried accents in the stands cheering " kick a goal ". Instead of halfs we're going to have quarters, so Yanky t.v companies can get there ads in. Oh my god I can see it now. The game of football will be lost, and it will be come globaly known as Soccer.

Did you mean septic tanks.

Oh and yes you anti yank handjob.

by **66-1112520797** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 3:07 am

Rush Job wrote:
Bamaga man wrote:The more I read this speculation, the more I feel the urge to steer clear of the sceptic tanks. There are more and more of them trying to buy their way into our game, and it doesnt sit right with me. They should stay over the otherside of the pond and stick to their sports.

Call me anti-yank, I dont care. But 15 years down the line we're gonna have all that stupid razz-ma-tazz, cheer leaders at half time, majorettes at full time. Fat people with their southern fried accents in the stands cheering " kick a goal ". Instead of halfs we're going to have quarters, so Yanky t.v companies can get there ads in. Oh my god I can see it now. The game of football will be lost, and it will be come globaly known as Soccer.

Did you mean septic tanks.

My spelling for a 12 year old isnt that bad though is it ?

by **66-1112520797** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 3:37 am

Liverpool chief executive Rick Parry says the club will not be bullied into accepting a takeover offer.

Dubai International Capital pulled out of a deal to purchase Liverpool after the Reds board failed to accept their bid following a meeting on Tuesday.

Instead, Owner and chairman David Moores and board members decided to take more time to consider an improved offer from American George Gillett.

Parry has now suggested that DIC tried to 'bully' Liverpool into accepting their offer by giving them an ultimatum.

"We have a duty as directors to consider a very interesting bid from George Gillett," he 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."

Parry insists the decision to take a closer look at Gillett's offer was not down to money, with the Montreal Canadiens owner believed to have offered shareholders more for their holding in the club.

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

"We would also stress this is not a question of going for the second choice. David has always given George Gillett serious consideration while at the same time we didn't want to rush into any decision, and we were aware DIC might walk away.

"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."

Meanwhile, Parry has confirmed Gillett's outlined plans do not involve a ground share with Merseyside rivals Everton.

He added: "George Gillett has made it absolutely clear to us he will not be in favour of a ground share.

"There will be funding for the new stadium and a proper commitment to investment in the team."

Liverpool FC Forum

THE TAKEOVER THREAD - LIVERPOOL SOLD

Who is online