Liverpool FC Forum

by **nobybob** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 10:01 pm

hishhish wrote:i will not be at the ground but I would say you have to be careful with this one. Firstly, Hicks is a business man. Currently he is an angry, business man. If he really believed he could make a good investment on LFC, then he must have calculated the risk. In his mind, financial risks, delays, even angry fans must have been calculated. The way I see it, the only way to make this investment undesirable is to make it too risky. Either the finances have to be too exorbitant for him, which from what I am hearing is not the issue, since it seems they have scaled down the stadium, divided the amounts required etc. Secondly, the delays have already happened and that has not deterred him, and finally comes the issue of angry fans.
That can go both ways. If the really angry fans appear a minority that is useless and actually could increase his anger and obnoxiousness. But if a large percentage of fans can MAINTAIN a stance for a long enough time, that would ultimately make him realize the risk is too high. Therefore any action that doesn't include a large percentage of fans will not work. So, asking fans to not watch the game, would not work, since the fan base is too large. Any show of lack of support to the team would also be unacceptable to the majority of the fans.
I think a minute (or 2 one for Gillette and one for Hicks) of silence or some show of fan unity would be a good message. Also, the idea of placards held up in all areas of the stadium would send a message, or I like the idea of not using the concessions. BUT, it has to be constant and widespread. Is there enough time to organize any of these things and spread the word?

Also, I would add the ideas of the questions to those two is good, but how to get that message to them during the game, with the TV cameras there.

Sure just quick read through this forum shows at the mo the fans views are split on the action required to remove the parasites. but i feel hicks has made one vital miscalculation ! we are not like your typical American baseball fan here this is LIVERPOOL and the longer they remain in charge and the more bull they come out with , that's when we will see the fans opinions coming together. We will start to speak with one voice and act as one, then your in trouble Mr hicks. Because then a large percentage of fans WILL be able to maintain a stance long enough to hit you right in the pocket were it hurts, then you'll soon fu.k off

by **Bad Bob** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 10:15 pm

s@int wrote:I have just sent you the questions

Informal survey using the same questions now under way in its own thread...

by **Woollyback** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 10:20 pm

so hicks is denying that his stake in the club is for sale, and is telling us that he & his family intend to be with lfc for the long term?

well based on the fact that everything he's told us up to now has been a complete pack of lies then tbh i'm jumping for joy cos it means that his stake IS for sale and he has no intention whatsoever of being with lfc for the long run

get him the f.uck out of our club before he does permanent damage. get gillett out too, if he hasn't got the cojones to stand up to that fat c0ck hicks then he's no use to us

i'd love to see rafa nonchalantly slam the door shut at anfield as hicks fecks off out with his bags and a one way ticket to texas

by **account deleted by request** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 10:23 pm

Bad Bob wrote:
s@int wrote:I have just sent you the questions

Informal survey using the same questions now under way in its own thread...

Thanks Bob, I will publish the results of TLW poll when they are known, hopefully Ciggy , Leon or anyone who's a member could do the same for RAWK?

With any luck we wont have to as they will be in some of the newspapers.

by **account deleted by request** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 10:26 pm

sorry about the language

by **NANNY RED** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 10:29 pm

Woollyback wrote:i'd love to see rafa nonchalantly slam the door shut at anfield as hicks fecks off out with his bags and a one way ticket to texas

by **zarababe** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:02 pm

Ciggy wrote:Rafa revolts

By seeing through the bluster of the club's new owners, writes Dion Fanning, Rafael Benitez could be Liverpool's real saviour

http://www.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/rafa-revolts-1269774.html

It was a good week for Rafael Benitez. And, as a result, it was a good week for Liverpool Football Club. Last week, Rafael Benitez's warnings about the men who employ him and run the club were, at least partly, grasped by all.

Benitez has been misjudged, underestimated and written off by many who shape opinion on English football. He doesn't play the media game, but he understands it. Last week, the football world recognised what Benitez was the first to comprehend about Tom Hicks and George Gillett: that they posed a serious threat to his desire to manage a football club properly and, as a result, they threatened the existence of the club as it has been run for 50 years.

Benitez avoids : he doesn't indulge in it and he is not influenced by it. Last May after Liverpool lost a European Cup final they would have won if he had been allowed to sign the players he had identified the previous summer, Benitez called on the new owners to act. "We talk and talk but we never finish," Benitez, downcast and depressed, remarked in Athens. Tom Hicks' private response was swift: he wanted to fire the manager.

It was the first sign of American edginess. Benitez had strayed a little too close to the truth. In TV interviews before the final, Gillett and Hicks appeared consummate PR men. Gillett produced some dollars, then some euros to illustrate his point that they would be backing the manager. When the manager looked for more than the few quid in their pocket, they wanted him sacked.

Last November, Benitez's private frustrations turned to a public explosion when he responded to a private message from Hicks and Gillett by stating publicly that he was "concentrating on coaching and training the team". Hicks would later refer to it as a pout. Friends of Benitez had warned before the manager's outburst that Benitez was "going to send a message to the world".

The world has taken some time understanding it but last week they finally did. The Liverpool Echo's Tony Barrett, in the interview which revealed the plan to appoint Jurgen Klinsmann, managed to expose the thinking of Tom Hicks and perhaps saved the club from itself or at least its owners. Benitez was wise to them last year when they refused to consider signing Kaka Kaladze and told him to concentrate on coaching. They weren't losing confidence in a manager; they were struggling to find money. If they stay and Benitez goes, there is no evidence that any successor, even Jose Mourinho, will have more money. Liverpool will be an impoverished Newcastle United and that's very poor indeed.

Last week Mark Lawrenson wrote that when Benitez gently chided the Americans for their lack of knowledge of the European transfer market, he did not go far enough. Lawrenson suggested he could have said they know nothing about football.

Hicks' comments were a stunning abandonment of the traditions he had promised to uphold. They were also self-serving and cunning. The only reason Hicks and Gillett were meeting Klinsmann last November was not, as Hicks suggested, because they were frightened Benitez would leave but because they wanted to fire him. And the only reason they wanted to fire him was because Benitez had rumbled them: they had no money and their plans for the club were dangerous.

There had been warning signs. In an interview with the American press, Hicks remarked that against Manchester United in December, Liverpool had "played tight". They did not, he claimed, play like they believed they could win. Either he had learned fast or someone was in his ear. Either way, it told of an owner thinking he knew more than he did.

The feud between Benitez and Hicks has been compared to the situation at Tottenham when the club lost faith with a manager but this is a different narrative and a different club. The distinction is not that Martin Jol won nothing while Benitez has claimed the European and FA Cups. Hicks and Gillett have abandoned Liverpool's values and they have no plan B. If their ideas for saddling the club with debt are approved and they move on to dismiss the manager in May, as Benitez expects them to do, then the club itself will be in jeopardy and a manager will be just a patsy.

Benitez is the son of a Madrid hotel owner and as a child he presumably spent many hours watching guests drawn from the business community talking . Hicks and Gillett are a new kind of businessmen, but an old-fashioned type of speculator. They are rich guys with no money who have provided one service during their 12 months in England and that is to offer an illustration of how capitalism works in the 21st century. They may soon depart with a profit of between £75m and £150m for their paper investment. Rich pickings.

But the sale of at least Hicks' share is essential if Liverpool are to survive and, if they do go, the club have Benitez to thank for exposing, firstly in May and again in November, that these were men with neither the money nor the ambition for the club he manages.

Tomorrow evening, there will be the most public display of disaffection yet from Liverpool supporters. Last November, they marched to support Benitez, now they will voice their opposition to the owners. The supporters have decided they too must adjust to the new world. Liverpool fans have always signed up to the belief that things are done "in-house". Managers were rarely booed; dissatisfaction with the board was usually kept quiet. But they too have changed.

A senior Liverpool figure during their days as England's pre-eminent club surveyed the mess last week and ruefully commented, "How can they do business like that?" Now the 'Reclaim the Kop' group is planning mass protest with chants directed at the owners and Foster Gillett, George's son, who is supposed to be the Americans' presence at the club.

Rick Parry and David Moores had the bright idea to appoint co-managers in 1998 when they gave Gerard Houllier (a man so well versed in that he could work for Hicks) and Roy Evans joint authority. Nine years on, they promoted even more dangerous lunacy when they let DIC drift out of the picture. Instead, Moores agreed to sell the club to Hicks and Gillett and Parry pushed the deal. At the time a former player, hugely respected at Anfield, was moved to ask the simple question: "How can there be two owners?"

Gillett may this week look for another partner or he may agree to back Hicks in a refinancing deal which places enormous debt on Liverpool -- something they promised not to do when they took over. If DIC come in, they will be treated as saviours, a role they were not necessarily cast in when they first agreed a deal to buy the club and their long-term commitment was questioned.

Now they are all Liverpool have got. Benitez and Parry are said to have put their differences behind them and both are united in opposing the plans of Hicks and the determination to place the debt on the club. These men who arrived eager and bright-eyed, who talked about the club's heritage and promised to learn the values of the institution they were buying and respect it, are now displaying their ignorance.

Liverpool handed over their club to men who knew nothing about football and knew a lot about bluff and bluster. Benitez realised their new frontier was a mirage in the desert. He did what he had to do. His future and the future of the club is now beyond his control.

This, it must be repeated, is not a story of a chairman losing faith in a manager. This is not Tottenham Hotspur or Chelsea. This is a manager losing faith with his owners, seeing through their promises, their false starts and computer-generated images. When the history of these days is written, last week may be viewed as the real Rafa-lution.

My god we dont half owe Rafa for exposing these two cretins.

You really do love us and the club.

Thank you.

Fantastic article - and smells of what Benitez will do for this 'cloob'
luv him respect him and so on - but now well HE IS LEGEND !

84 +pages on .. lets see where this will end !

by **zarababe** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:32 pm

Rafael Benitez is confident of remaining as Liverpool manager, despite the ongoing uncertainty surrounding his position. from Sky sports

But Benitez is defiant that he is not feeling the strain, and has revealed he expects to stay on as Liverpool boss for at least another year.

"I know you might ask. I will not say anything but I have a lot of confidence that I will be sitting in this chair in a year's time," he said in the Daily Star Sunday.

"I have two-and-a-half years of my contract [left].

"I'm really pleased to be here and I have a lot of confidence I will be here in the future.

DIC reports

"My relationship with the players is really good. A lot of them have asked 'What's going on?' My Answer to them is to keep going."

WHo said it don't affect he players - cos it does :angry:

Poor old Rafa contending with the press, trying to keep his team focused - what a f.ckin farce :no

by **zarababe** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:52 pm

Liverpool takeover: £500m bid 'on the table'

Duncan Castles and Paul Wilson
Sunday January 20, 2008
The Observer

Liverpool's owners face a decision this week over their continued presence at Anfield. Observer Sport understands that Tom Hicks and George Gillett Jr have now received a formal offer of about £500million for their shares in the club.
The offer - which would allow the Americans to pay off the borrowing with which they purchased Liverpool last February and to net personal profits of £75m each - has been lodged by Dubai International Capital, an Arab investment group that has long targeted Liverpool.

The takeover bid arrives at a particularly difficult moment for Hicks and Gillett, who have drawn the ire of Liverpool supporters for entering into a public dispute with Rafa Benítez over transfer funding and Hicks' admission that they talked to Jürgen Klinsmann about replacing the manager. A sizeable contingent of supporters has called for the Americans to leave the club, with a further protest arranged for tomorrow's meeting with Aston Villa.
While the manager spent much of a press conference fending off questions about anything other than football, he reiterated his belief that he will stay at the club. 'I have a lot of confidence in the future and that I will be involved in it,' Benítez said. 'The most important thing here is the club and the players know that. The key is to keep winning, then everyone is happy.' But the prospects of both the Spaniard and his American employers remain in doubt.

Hicks and Gillett have encountered problems refinancing the £350m of debt they incurred in taking over the club, a loan that is due to expire at the end of next month. In an attempt to generate additional funds for the development of a new stadium, the pair have sought to transfer borrowings for which they are personally responsible on to the club.

While the Royal Bank of Scotland has indicated that it expects the refinancing deal to be concluded this week, senior club figures are concerned about the implications of a new loan. According to City sources, the arrangement fee could be as high as £40m, with annual interest payments of up to £30m depending on the percentage of personal equity injected into the deal by the Americans.

Hicks and Gillett are understood to be in disagreement over the best way to progress. Hicks, the wealthier of the two, has consistently stated that their shares are not for sale and expressed confidence that the refinancing package would be successfully concluded. Gillett has remained in the background, but is thought to be receptive to DIC's offer. A spokesman for Hicks said: 'Any suggestion Hicks and Gillett are contemplating a sale of the club or any portion of it is categorically untrue.'

While DIC sources say it is 'too close to call' whether their current bid will be accepted, the group believes the Americans will sell eventually and DIC will continue to pursue their interest in the club even if the refinancing package is approved.

DIC is ultimately controlled by Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, who has an estimated wealth of £7billion. Chief executive Sameer Al Ansari is a Liverpool fan. If successful, the group would invest heavily in the team and infrastructure, constructing the stadium required to achieve levels of match-day income comparable with Arsenal and Manchester United.

Hicks and Gillett purchased Liverpool for £174.1m, also taking on outstanding debts of £44.8m. The entire sum and subsequent spending was funded with borrowed monies and they are yet to invest any of their own capital in the club.

by **brookied** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:55 pm

hi all,
ife Long LFC fan here and rather than sitback and read i want to get the ball rolling on a massive online petition.
Go to the link below and you can sign this and if we get enough people here and i mean thousands we can advise the owners what we think.

This will not work without a huge amount of help from websites like yours.

I am asking you to help me get this petition to as many LFC fans as possible.

This link has been posted on BBC and i am writing to BBC Sports and Sky Sports editors to advise them to keep there eyes on this. Again if anough people sign these news outlets will reports it and Gillet and Hicks will have no option but to know what the fans think.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Petition to get Hicks and Gillet removed and get DIC to buy LFC

by **ruskiy playmaker** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:00 am

I really can't stand this much longer, I haven't been so frustrated and worried in a long time. Is Hicks playing around with DIC to get a better offer or is he actually planning on staying here?

by **TwelthMan** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:15 am

Seriously guys, we must cause as much fuss and agro as possible. Please email Hick's PR company at www.kekst.com and also email Alex Hicks (one of the sons) on facebook, just search alex hicks and he's the one in the UT Arlington network - let him know how much you want his pops to own our club. :cool:

I just can't believe anyone would want to be part of something when he is so disliked and unwanted - well let's make them realise just how unwanted they are until the day they sell us.

by **ConnO'var** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:26 am

TwelthMan wrote:Seriously guys, we must cause as much fuss and agro as possible. Please email Hick's PR company at www.kekst.com and also email Alex Hicks (one of the sons) on facebook, just search alex hicks and he's the one in the UT Arlington network - let him know how much you want his pops to own our club.

I just can't believe anyone would want to be part of something when he is so disliked and unwanted - well let's make them realise just how unwanted they are until the day they sell us.

No mate..... I'm as disgruntled as you are... but you got to draw the line somewhere.

Absolutely no reason to harrass members of his family with this. Our beef is with the current owner.... NOT his friends and family.

Make it clear that we are less than satisfied through the correct channels.... not through the Gatling gun approach.

by **TwelthMan** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:31 am

ConnO'var wrote:
TwelthMan wrote:Seriously guys, we must cause as much fuss and agro as possible. Please email Hick's PR company at www.kekst.com and also email Alex Hicks (one of the sons) on facebook, just search alex hicks and he's the one in the UT Arlington network - let him know how much you want his pops to own our club.

I just can't believe anyone would want to be part of something when he is so disliked and unwanted - well let's make them realise just how unwanted they are until the day they sell us.

No mate..... I'm as disgruntled as you are... but you got to draw the line somewhere.

Absolutely no reason to harrass members of his family with this. Our beef is with the current owner.... NOT his friends and family.

Make it clear that we are less than satisfied through the correct channels.... not through the Gatling gun approach.

It's not like I am saying we kidnapp anyone. Alex is a grown man and involved with this affair and i simply suggest we make our feelings shown. I don't suggest targetting just any friends or family. We must be more direct than sitting and hoping for the best. There is nothing illegal or (IMO) immoral about this

by **Kharhaz** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 2:13 am

TwelthMan wrote:
ConnO'var wrote:
TwelthMan wrote:Seriously guys, we must cause as much fuss and agro as possible. Please email Hick's PR company at www.kekst.com and also email Alex Hicks (one of the sons) on facebook, just search alex hicks and he's the one in the UT Arlington network - let him know how much you want his pops to own our club.

I just can't believe anyone would want to be part of something when he is so disliked and unwanted - well let's make them realise just how unwanted they are until the day they sell us.

No mate..... I'm as disgruntled as you are... but you got to draw the line somewhere.

Absolutely no reason to harrass members of his family with this. Our beef is with the current owner.... NOT his friends and family.

Make it clear that we are less than satisfied through the correct channels.... not through the Gatling gun approach.

It's not like I am saying we kidnapp anyone. Alex is a grown man and involved with this affair and i simply suggest we make our feelings shown. I don't suggest targetting just any friends or family. We must be more direct than sitting and hoping for the best. There is nothing illegal or (IMO) immoral about this

No your just saying we should harass his family and make there life miserable. I agree with Conno'var theres a line and that would be crossing it. Put the club first but by all means dont make it personal to the point that your the cause of unnecessary suffering.

Liverpool FC Forum

TAKEOVER COMPLETE - H & G Finally Jibbed!

Who is online