when Moores and Parry could have just sold to DIC last year.TAKEOVER COMPLETE - H & G Finally Jibbed!
by Woollyback » Tue Feb 26, 2008 6:31 pm
BBC news are now reporting that Hicks HAS been in talks with DIC despite his denials, although they understand that DIC in fact have NOT been given access to the club's books. the saga continues....
b*ll*c*ks and s*i*e
-
Woollyback - >> LFC Elite Member <<
- Posts: 12401
- Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:11 pm
- Location: Manchester
by account deleted by request » Tue Feb 26, 2008 6:32 pm
Hicks 'in talks about Reds sale'
Talks between Liverpool co-owner Tom Hicks and Dubai International Capital about selling his share in the club are continuing, BBC Sport understands.
Hicks has again strenuously denied renewed claims that he plans to sell his 50% holding in the club.
But the American is believed to have held talks with DIC although they are not believed to have been given access to the club's accounts.
DIC may also try to buy out Hicks's partner George Gillett's 50% stake.
BBC Sport
Seems to me Hicks couldn't lie straight in bed.
Talks between Liverpool co-owner Tom Hicks and Dubai International Capital about selling his share in the club are continuing, BBC Sport understands.
Hicks has again strenuously denied renewed claims that he plans to sell his 50% holding in the club.
But the American is believed to have held talks with DIC although they are not believed to have been given access to the club's accounts.
DIC may also try to buy out Hicks's partner George Gillett's 50% stake.
BBC Sport
Seems to me Hicks couldn't lie straight in bed.
- account deleted by request
- Posts: 20690
- Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 5:11 am
by tubby » Tue Feb 26, 2008 6:50 pm
Im sure its all just a smokescreen. Its not like Hicks is going to come out and say "yaaaa im talking with DIC" only weeks after saying on 5live that he wanted to stay ect...
4000 posts yeehahaaaa
4000 posts yeehahaaaa
Last edited by tubby on Tue Feb 26, 2008 6:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
tubby - >> LFC Elite Member <<
- Posts: 22442
- Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 2:05 pm
by account deleted by request » Tue Feb 26, 2008 7:06 pm
bavlondon wrote:Im sure its all just a smokescreen. Its not like Hicks is going to come out and say "yaaaa im talking with DIC" only weeks after saying on 5live that he wanted to stay ect...
4000 posts yeehahaaaa
Nice one BAV. 3999 quality posts and one bad one - you disagreed with one of my posts once
- account deleted by request
- Posts: 20690
- Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 5:11 am
by account deleted by request » Tue Feb 26, 2008 7:38 pm
Originally Posted by Sinos
Posted by Seamus on Rawk
These are some relevant principles.
1. GG can agree in principle to sell to DIC (or anybody else) with the proviso that he offers his 50% holding to Hicks at the same price.
2. In order to allow DIC to make a firm offer for his 50% he has to give them access to the books to do due diligence. He does not need Hick's permission to do that. But the club accountants would have to be certain that they had been given proper, legal authorization from the board of directors to cooperate with DIC. Presumably they would get this at least from the majority of the board composed of the GG directors, Moores and Parry.
3. Hicks cannot gain control by buying 1% or some other minority portion of CC's holding. The right to match the DIC offer does not include the right to break up the GG 50% into smaller pieces. In any case, the 50% is in the form of a single share that is indivisible. To make it divisible into shares of smaller denomination would require a resolution of the board of directors.
4. If DIC were to gain 50% ownership they would need the approval of the board of directors for any major proposal. If they gained the support of Moore's and Parry they might be able to vote down Hick's opposition on certain issues. However, this would not apply to any proposal that would clash with the terms of the financing that is already in place in so far as it still includes Hick's guarantees. And this may include any proposal by DIC to "lend" the club money for transfers in the way Moore's used to do.
5. The 50-50 arrangement was always a desperate measure GG took to seal the deal quickly. There is no satisfactory mechanism for resolving disputes between shareholders. This would also be the case in a 50-50 DIC-Hicks arrangement.
6. My speculation is that DIC will have to offer Hick's a good price for his shares and some additional reward such as participation in one of his investment funds. Hicks can drag the matter on for about a year. But once the clock starts ticking down on the refinancing in 18 months, his bargaining position weakens drastically. DIC could refuse to renew the joint financing or the financing for the stadium leaving Hicks to thrash about for his own financing and that would be difficult if he was seen to be in a stalemate with DIC.
The bottom line is that if DIC do make an offer for GG's shares which is accepted, then the club is in for continuing instability until the other shoe drops. It is in the interest of all parties to settle the issue of control. This could be achieved by a shareholder agreement with Hicks whereby he agrees to give DIC a deciding vote. But in the end, it will be the financially stronger of the two that will prevail.
May help people understand a few of the intricacies of the so called deal
Posted by Seamus on Rawk
These are some relevant principles.
1. GG can agree in principle to sell to DIC (or anybody else) with the proviso that he offers his 50% holding to Hicks at the same price.
2. In order to allow DIC to make a firm offer for his 50% he has to give them access to the books to do due diligence. He does not need Hick's permission to do that. But the club accountants would have to be certain that they had been given proper, legal authorization from the board of directors to cooperate with DIC. Presumably they would get this at least from the majority of the board composed of the GG directors, Moores and Parry.
3. Hicks cannot gain control by buying 1% or some other minority portion of CC's holding. The right to match the DIC offer does not include the right to break up the GG 50% into smaller pieces. In any case, the 50% is in the form of a single share that is indivisible. To make it divisible into shares of smaller denomination would require a resolution of the board of directors.
4. If DIC were to gain 50% ownership they would need the approval of the board of directors for any major proposal. If they gained the support of Moore's and Parry they might be able to vote down Hick's opposition on certain issues. However, this would not apply to any proposal that would clash with the terms of the financing that is already in place in so far as it still includes Hick's guarantees. And this may include any proposal by DIC to "lend" the club money for transfers in the way Moore's used to do.
5. The 50-50 arrangement was always a desperate measure GG took to seal the deal quickly. There is no satisfactory mechanism for resolving disputes between shareholders. This would also be the case in a 50-50 DIC-Hicks arrangement.
6. My speculation is that DIC will have to offer Hick's a good price for his shares and some additional reward such as participation in one of his investment funds. Hicks can drag the matter on for about a year. But once the clock starts ticking down on the refinancing in 18 months, his bargaining position weakens drastically. DIC could refuse to renew the joint financing or the financing for the stadium leaving Hicks to thrash about for his own financing and that would be difficult if he was seen to be in a stalemate with DIC.
The bottom line is that if DIC do make an offer for GG's shares which is accepted, then the club is in for continuing instability until the other shoe drops. It is in the interest of all parties to settle the issue of control. This could be achieved by a shareholder agreement with Hicks whereby he agrees to give DIC a deciding vote. But in the end, it will be the financially stronger of the two that will prevail.
May help people understand a few of the intricacies of the so called deal
- account deleted by request
- Posts: 20690
- Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 5:11 am
by The Manhattan Project » Tue Feb 26, 2008 9:52 pm
The Arabs can't wait to get their DIC stuck in.
china syndrome 80512640 reactor meltdown fusion element
no uniquely indefinable one 5918 identification unknown 113
source transmission 421 general panic hysteria 02 outbreak
foreign mutation 001505 maximum code destruction nuclear
reflection 01044 power plutonium helix atomic energy wave
no uniquely indefinable one 5918 identification unknown 113
source transmission 421 general panic hysteria 02 outbreak
foreign mutation 001505 maximum code destruction nuclear
reflection 01044 power plutonium helix atomic energy wave
-
The Manhattan Project - >> LFC Elite Member <<
- Posts: 5416
- Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 7:22 am
- Location: Reactor Number Four
by dawson99 » Tue Feb 26, 2008 9:54 pm
got to admit i want them to take over, but my 'I love DIC' tshirt is not helping me meet the women, altho i have had a lot of drinks brought for me by certain others lately!
0118 999 881 999 119 7253
-
dawson99 - >> LFC Elite Member <<
- Posts: 25377
- Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2004 12:56 pm
- Location: in the mo fo hood y'all
by NANNY RED » Tue Feb 26, 2008 10:42 pm
dawson99 wrote:got to admit i want them to take over, but my 'I love DIC' tshirt is not helping me meet the women, altho i have had a lot of drinks brought for me by certain others lately!
pmsl Daws you would of been alright with that t shirt on Sat night my daughter went to G.A.Y and yes she is straight Daws you wouldnt have spent a penny mate
HE WHO BETRAYS WILL ALWAYS WALK ALONE
-
NANNY RED - >> LFC Elite Member <<
- Posts: 13334
- Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 12:45 pm
by The Manhattan Project » Tue Feb 26, 2008 11:02 pm
Manhattan got kicked out of a gay club recently.
I think I offended them when I wore leather, a cap, and a big black moustache.
I think I offended them when I wore leather, a cap, and a big black moustache.
china syndrome 80512640 reactor meltdown fusion element
no uniquely indefinable one 5918 identification unknown 113
source transmission 421 general panic hysteria 02 outbreak
foreign mutation 001505 maximum code destruction nuclear
reflection 01044 power plutonium helix atomic energy wave
no uniquely indefinable one 5918 identification unknown 113
source transmission 421 general panic hysteria 02 outbreak
foreign mutation 001505 maximum code destruction nuclear
reflection 01044 power plutonium helix atomic energy wave
-
The Manhattan Project - >> LFC Elite Member <<
- Posts: 5416
- Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 7:22 am
- Location: Reactor Number Four
by NANNY RED » Tue Feb 26, 2008 11:06 pm
I Love this vid it was posted on Rawk absolute cracker
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=6oDvvYnFz1Y
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=6oDvvYnFz1Y
HE WHO BETRAYS WILL ALWAYS WALK ALONE
-
NANNY RED - >> LFC Elite Member <<
- Posts: 13334
- Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 12:45 pm
by Igor Zidane » Tue Feb 26, 2008 11:14 pm
Latest from Oliver Kay
Tom Hicks in denial but Liverpool are braced for Dubai takeover
Oliver Kay
Discussions will continue between Tom Hicks and Dubai International Capital (DIC) over the coming weeks, despite the Liverpool co-chairman’s vehement insistence last night that he is not about to sell his stake in the club. The Arab investment group is expected to become a co-owner of the Merseyside club next month by purchasing the 50 per cent stake held by George Gillett Jr in the first phase of a takeover process that will test the strength of Hicks’s latest denials.
The Times reported yesterday that, although Hicks intends to retain some of his shares and some of his influence at the club for the immediate future, he and Gillett, his co-owner, are willing to grant DIC permission to examine Liverpool’s accounts with a view to launching a takeover bid next month. Hicks denied those reports yesterday, claiming that they had been “planted . . . by parties with their own self-interested agenda” and that he is “personally, professionally and financially committed to the club and its supporters”, but numerous sources insist that his partnership with Gillett is finished and that DIC will start the first phase of its takeover within weeks.
At least Hicks’s latest statement did not deny that discussions are taking place. DIC’s interest never went away after it was gazumped by Hicks and Gillett a shade more than 12 months ago and although DIC turned down the Americans’ invitation to buy a 15 per cent stake in the club after a meeting in October, discussions have taken place behind the scenes since the start of this year, particularly since January 25, when Hicks announced a £350 million refinancing deal that brought them stability in the immediate future but left their regime looking all but unsustainable in the longer term.
Gillett, who was the catalyst behind the initial takeover, with Hicks arriving on the scene late in the process, conceded some time ago that the joint partnership was not working because of numerous tensions that had arisen between them. Gillett, the owner of the Montreal Canadiens ice hockey team, has subsequently “all but disappeared”, according to sources, declining to put his name to Hicks’s frequent statements – even that relating to the refinancing deal - and making clear to DIC his willingness to sell his 50 per cent stake.
His son, Foster, who was initially dispatched to Merseyside as a “link man” between the owners and Rafael BenÍtez, the manager, has spent the past month in Montreal, apparently with no plans to return to Britain.
Hicks, who was originally seen as the silent partner in the protest, has proved to be anything but. Even if he and BenÍtez have tried to build bridges since their infamous falling-out in November – when Hicks, in a series of interviews, declared that it was “time for Rafa to quit talking and concentrate on coaching the players we have” – the Texan has made himself deeply unpopular at Anfield.
Tom Hicks Jr, his son, has at least shown willing to ingratiate himself with the locals, but his attempts to do so backfired on Saturday, when he was confronted by supporters in a pub near Anfield after the 3-2 victory over Middlesbrough in which Fernando Torres, the club’s record £26.5 million signing, had scored a hat-trick.
While Gillett is expected to sell up within weeks, Hicks is determined to retain the majority of his stake for the immediate future, but DIC is looking for – and hopes to obtain – guarantees that he will sell out completely at a later date. Hicks spoke to DIC officials on a trip to Dubai last week and then, more significantly, spoke to their financial advisers on Thursday and Friday. The two parties remain some way apart on various issues, not least on Hicks’s wish to be seen as the senior partner in any coalition, but a variety of sources – by no means all of them with self-interested agendas – continue to indicate that the Anfield investment saga is about to enter a new chapter.
Tom Hicks in denial but Liverpool are braced for Dubai takeover
Oliver Kay
Discussions will continue between Tom Hicks and Dubai International Capital (DIC) over the coming weeks, despite the Liverpool co-chairman’s vehement insistence last night that he is not about to sell his stake in the club. The Arab investment group is expected to become a co-owner of the Merseyside club next month by purchasing the 50 per cent stake held by George Gillett Jr in the first phase of a takeover process that will test the strength of Hicks’s latest denials.
The Times reported yesterday that, although Hicks intends to retain some of his shares and some of his influence at the club for the immediate future, he and Gillett, his co-owner, are willing to grant DIC permission to examine Liverpool’s accounts with a view to launching a takeover bid next month. Hicks denied those reports yesterday, claiming that they had been “planted . . . by parties with their own self-interested agenda” and that he is “personally, professionally and financially committed to the club and its supporters”, but numerous sources insist that his partnership with Gillett is finished and that DIC will start the first phase of its takeover within weeks.
At least Hicks’s latest statement did not deny that discussions are taking place. DIC’s interest never went away after it was gazumped by Hicks and Gillett a shade more than 12 months ago and although DIC turned down the Americans’ invitation to buy a 15 per cent stake in the club after a meeting in October, discussions have taken place behind the scenes since the start of this year, particularly since January 25, when Hicks announced a £350 million refinancing deal that brought them stability in the immediate future but left their regime looking all but unsustainable in the longer term.
Gillett, who was the catalyst behind the initial takeover, with Hicks arriving on the scene late in the process, conceded some time ago that the joint partnership was not working because of numerous tensions that had arisen between them. Gillett, the owner of the Montreal Canadiens ice hockey team, has subsequently “all but disappeared”, according to sources, declining to put his name to Hicks’s frequent statements – even that relating to the refinancing deal - and making clear to DIC his willingness to sell his 50 per cent stake.
His son, Foster, who was initially dispatched to Merseyside as a “link man” between the owners and Rafael BenÍtez, the manager, has spent the past month in Montreal, apparently with no plans to return to Britain.
Hicks, who was originally seen as the silent partner in the protest, has proved to be anything but. Even if he and BenÍtez have tried to build bridges since their infamous falling-out in November – when Hicks, in a series of interviews, declared that it was “time for Rafa to quit talking and concentrate on coaching the players we have” – the Texan has made himself deeply unpopular at Anfield.
Tom Hicks Jr, his son, has at least shown willing to ingratiate himself with the locals, but his attempts to do so backfired on Saturday, when he was confronted by supporters in a pub near Anfield after the 3-2 victory over Middlesbrough in which Fernando Torres, the club’s record £26.5 million signing, had scored a hat-trick.
While Gillett is expected to sell up within weeks, Hicks is determined to retain the majority of his stake for the immediate future, but DIC is looking for – and hopes to obtain – guarantees that he will sell out completely at a later date. Hicks spoke to DIC officials on a trip to Dubai last week and then, more significantly, spoke to their financial advisers on Thursday and Friday. The two parties remain some way apart on various issues, not least on Hicks’s wish to be seen as the senior partner in any coalition, but a variety of sources – by no means all of them with self-interested agendas – continue to indicate that the Anfield investment saga is about to enter a new chapter.
UP THE PURPS !!!
https://www.colfc.co.uk/
https://www.colfc.co.uk/
- Igor Zidane
- >> LFC Elite Member <<
- Posts: 7796
- Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 4:23 pm
- Location: Liverpool
Return to Liverpool FC - General Discussion
-
- Related topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- Takeover -on again? - Talk of takeover surfaces again
1, 2by daddyo » Wed Sep 14, 2005 10:59 am - 26 Replies
- 4777 Views
- Last post by wrighty (not mark!)
Fri Sep 16, 2005 11:57 am
- Takeover -on again? - Talk of takeover surfaces again
-
- Another deal complete
1, 2
by A.B. » Sun Jan 14, 2007 1:47 am
- 25 Replies
- 5706 Views
- Last post by Noise Noise
Thu Jan 18, 2007 6:35 pm
- Another deal complete
-
- What a complete toe-rag ! - Ronnie whelan..
1, 2by bunglemark2 » Wed Sep 15, 2010 10:41 pm - 16 Replies
- 3971 Views
- Last post by neil
Sat Sep 18, 2010 7:50 pm
- What a complete toe-rag ! - Ronnie whelan..
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot] and 37 guests
-
- Advertisement