Liverpool FC Forum

by **Igor Zidane** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 12:33 pm

Spirit of Shankly call to Liverpool FC bank
Sep 5 2008 by Vicki Kellaway, Liverpool Echo

A FANS' group has written to a bank urging it to stop supporting Liverpool FC.

The Spirit of Shankly group has asked Royal Bank of Scotland and its shareholders to withdraw backing for the club because of the way it is run by owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett.

In an open letter, it accused the pair of issuing false promises to fans and claimed they had neither the “competence or ability” to achieve their business plan.

The letter said: “We urge the bank . . . to show it respects a great institution and cares about the people of Liverpool, by withdrawing its support to the current shareholders of Liverpool FC forthwith.”

Full transcript:

Open letter to the Chief Executive & shareholders of the RBS

We write as the concerned voice of a great many supporters of Liverpool Football Club. Many of our number are also customers of the Royal Bank of Scotland.

It has become apparent to a wide range of experts that the business model, set in place by the current owners of Liverpool Football Club, George Gillett and Tom Hicks, for taking forward this historic institution, and community pillar, is not a viable one.

The American consortium, substantially backed by the RBS, has continually issued false promises to the club’s supporters - it’s key constituency and ‘customer base’. We no longer have faith in their competence or ability to meet the commitments of their business plan, and we believe, that from a financial perspective, they are fundamentally harming the value of the club.

The value of the club going forward is inextricably linked to the success of its team on the pitch, and the revenues its accomplishments can yield. Key to these revenues is constant participation in the world’s premier football club tournament, the Champions League. These revenues, in normal circumstances, should never be taken for granted, as the vagaries of ‘the game’ dictate that relying on income from this tournament is an extremely risky strategy to pursue (witness the debacle at Leeds United over the last few years).

The Hicks and Gillett model has clearly been grounded in the club ultimately generating significant new revenues from the extra capacity provided by a new stadium for the club. At present they have no way to fund the development of such a stadium, despite having committed to doing so as far back as April 2007. By their own confession, only a week ago, the project of building a new stadium for LFC is now indefinitely on hold.

Therefore, what can the value of the club be going forward ? Reliance on ongoing Champions League qualification is a ludicrously risky anchor to any football club business plan, and has been further exposed as such, by this week’s developments at Manchester City, whereby a new ‘force’ has emerged in the world game, that, as things stand, will inevitably be to the detriment of Liverpool FC, and push it further down football’s revenue seeking ‘pecking order’.

That Hicks and Gillett are still in situ is largely down to the financial support they are receiving from the RBS, albeit tempered by widely reported 6 monthly re-evaluation stipulations that reflect that it is nervous as to the viability of their plan for LFC.

This ‘wait and see’ stance from the bank would be understandable if the world financial markets were sound, and prospects good. Yet prevailing conditions are the worst in many a financial expert’s living memory. Moreover, and crucially, the bank and the owners are aware that, there exists, in the market, a ready and willing buyer for Liverpool FC. A buyer, it must be stressed, who is prepared to pay above the market rate, and deliver to the existing shareholders a sizeable profit on an investment that is barely 18 months old, on a business that is increasingly proving itself to be barely solvent.

In procrastinating, the RBS is taking an unacceptable reputational and financial risk, not only to the Anfield constituency and Liverpool FC, but even, surely, to it’s own shareholders. Should the Dubai based offer disappear, then meltdown for the club, and in turn it’s value, is a very real prospect.

Ready alternative buyers are not in the market. If the owners remain at the helm, it is highly likely, as they have no prospect of generating the required investment, that the club will not build it’s new stadium, nor continue to qualify for it’s revenue ‘lifeline’, the Champioms league tournament. Its status in the world game will decline swiftly, and it’s turnover plummet. As a knock on consequence the Anfield area of Liverpool, will see it’s prospects of regeneration delayed, if not shelved, indefinitely.

We, the supporters of Britain’s most successful football club, and one of the top 3 best supported clubs in the world, would ask those in the positions of the highest authority at the RBS :

‘How can you justify artifically propping up such a clearly unsound business plan, and jeopardise the future, not only of such an historic football club and it’s worldwide legion of supporters, but also set back, possibly for decades, the prospects of the people of Anfield, Liverpool 4, for whom the criminally long-overdue regeneration of their locality is intrinsically linked to the development of a major new stadium for Liverpool FC’.

We find the RBS stance indefensible in the face of the weight of the evidence, and in the light of the fact that, in Sheik Mohammed’s consortium’s bid, a ready solution exists. We urge the bank, in the strongest terms to show it respects a great institution, and cares about the people of Liverpool, by withdrawing it’s support to the current shareholders of Liverpool FC, forthwith, and persuading them to accept the offer on the table from the Dubai based group.

The spirit Of shankly -Liverpool supporters union.

by **Igor Zidane** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 12:37 pm

HY Manchester City?Sep 5 2008 by David Prentice, Liverpool Echo

According to Dr Sulaiman Al Fahim, the man fronting the Abu Dhabi takover at Eastlands, it’s: “Big exposure for the group and for the city (Abu Dhabi). We want to create Abu Dhabi as the capital of sport and culture in the Middle East to attract all the important events.”

Dubai is almost next door to Abu Dhabi, while Amanda Staveley brokered the City deal.

They are two telling factors which should convince Liverpool fans not to worry about DIC’s ongoing battle to take over the Reds.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport....1682048

by **inglis5** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 12:59 pm

Igor Zidane wrote:Spirit of Shankly call to Liverpool FC bank
Sep 5 2008 by Vicki Kellaway, Liverpool Echo

A FANS' group has written to a bank urging it to stop supporting Liverpool FC.

The Spirit of Shankly group has asked Royal Bank of Scotland and its shareholders to withdraw backing for the club because of the way it is run by owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett.

In an open letter, it accused the pair of issuing false promises to fans and claimed they had neither the “competence or ability” to achieve their business plan.

The letter said: “We urge the bank . . . to show it respects a great institution and cares about the people of Liverpool, by withdrawing its support to the current shareholders of Liverpool FC forthwith.”

Full transcript:

Open letter to the Chief Executive & shareholders of the RBS

We write as the concerned voice of a great many supporters of Liverpool Football Club. Many of our number are also customers of the Royal Bank of Scotland.

It has become apparent to a wide range of experts that the business model, set in place by the current owners of Liverpool Football Club, George Gillett and Tom Hicks, for taking forward this historic institution, and community pillar, is not a viable one.

The American consortium, substantially backed by the RBS, has continually issued false promises to the club’s supporters - it’s key constituency and ‘customer base’. We no longer have faith in their competence or ability to meet the commitments of their business plan, and we believe, that from a financial perspective, they are fundamentally harming the value of the club.

The value of the club going forward is inextricably linked to the success of its team on the pitch, and the revenues its accomplishments can yield. Key to these revenues is constant participation in the world’s premier football club tournament, the Champions League. These revenues, in normal circumstances, should never be taken for granted, as the vagaries of ‘the game’ dictate that relying on income from this tournament is an extremely risky strategy to pursue (witness the debacle at Leeds United over the last few years).

The Hicks and Gillett model has clearly been grounded in the club ultimately generating significant new revenues from the extra capacity provided by a new stadium for the club. At present they have no way to fund the development of such a stadium, despite having committed to doing so as far back as April 2007. By their own confession, only a week ago, the project of building a new stadium for LFC is now indefinitely on hold.

Therefore, what can the value of the club be going forward ? Reliance on ongoing Champions League qualification is a ludicrously risky anchor to any football club business plan, and has been further exposed as such, by this week’s developments at Manchester City, whereby a new ‘force’ has emerged in the world game, that, as things stand, will inevitably be to the detriment of Liverpool FC, and push it further down football’s revenue seeking ‘pecking order’.

That Hicks and Gillett are still in situ is largely down to the financial support they are receiving from the RBS, albeit tempered by widely reported 6 monthly re-evaluation stipulations that reflect that it is nervous as to the viability of their plan for LFC.

This ‘wait and see’ stance from the bank would be understandable if the world financial markets were sound, and prospects good. Yet prevailing conditions are the worst in many a financial expert’s living memory. Moreover, and crucially, the bank and the owners are aware that, there exists, in the market, a ready and willing buyer for Liverpool FC. A buyer, it must be stressed, who is prepared to pay above the market rate, and deliver to the existing shareholders a sizeable profit on an investment that is barely 18 months old, on a business that is increasingly proving itself to be barely solvent.

In procrastinating, the RBS is taking an unacceptable reputational and financial risk, not only to the Anfield constituency and Liverpool FC, but even, surely, to it’s own shareholders. Should the Dubai based offer disappear, then meltdown for the club, and in turn it’s value, is a very real prospect.

Ready alternative buyers are not in the market. If the owners remain at the helm, it is highly likely, as they have no prospect of generating the required investment, that the club will not build it’s new stadium, nor continue to qualify for it’s revenue ‘lifeline’, the Champioms league tournament. Its status in the world game will decline swiftly, and it’s turnover plummet. As a knock on consequence the Anfield area of Liverpool, will see it’s prospects of regeneration delayed, if not shelved, indefinitely.

We, the supporters of Britain’s most successful football club, and one of the top 3 best supported clubs in the world, would ask those in the positions of the highest authority at the RBS :

‘How can you justify artifically propping up such a clearly unsound business plan, and jeopardise the future, not only of such an historic football club and it’s worldwide legion of supporters, but also set back, possibly for decades, the prospects of the people of Anfield, Liverpool 4, for whom the criminally long-overdue regeneration of their locality is intrinsically linked to the development of a major new stadium for Liverpool FC’.

We find the RBS stance indefensible in the face of the weight of the evidence, and in the light of the fact that, in Sheik Mohammed’s consortium’s bid, a ready solution exists. We urge the bank, in the strongest terms to show it respects a great institution, and cares about the people of Liverpool, by withdrawing it’s support to the current shareholders of Liverpool FC, forthwith, and persuading them to accept the offer on the table from the Dubai based group.

The spirit Of shankly -Liverpool supporters union.

Amen, you gotta love SOS.

Fingers crossed that the right people read this...

by **LegBarnes** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 1:01 pm

bavlondon wrote:
Anfield rapper wrote:
Number 9 wrote:
Ciggy wrote:5th richest man in the world imagine he takes over Newcastle
We better pack it all in

Imagine he buys Everton!
That would be a hell of a lot worse

I'd take up golf and never talk of football again.

If I didnt have a concience I would honestly jump on a plane and do something stupid like hunt down, kidnapp and torture family members of G&H until they sell the club. How the did we get into this mess. I notice David Moores has been quiet of late. Hes probably living it large somwehere in the fecking Costa Del Sol.

I think he is planing a trip into space my sources tell me, "This is only place you can't hear angry scousers".

by **Igor Zidane** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 1:10 pm

Feckin didn't you just know it?

Minister: We’ll back talks on shared Everton and Liverpool stadium
Sep 5 2008 by Kevin Core, Liverpool Echo

Minister: We’ll back talks on shared stadium

THE government has offered to broker talks between Liverpool FC and Everton FC about building a shared stadium.

Sport secretary Andy Burnham MP, a lifelong Evertonian, made the pledge to mediate discussions while visiting young footballers in the city yesterday.

He spoke out after Liverpool’s announcement of a significant delay in its stadium plans for Stanley Park and the decision to hold a time-consuming public inquiry into Everton’s relocation to Kirkby.

Both Liverpool and Everton say a shared stadium is not on their agenda.

Mr Burnham said: “Obviously the situation has changed for both clubs, but it is for them to decide what represents the best way forward.

“Whatever they decide, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport would be available to help facilitate discussions and help the clubs explore the various routes.

“Obviously it is a continually moving situation and it is not right for me to express my preference either way.”

The Leigh MP, who is originally from Newton-le-Willows and went to school in St Helens, also reiterated his strong support of Share Liverpool’s plan for Reds fans to unite and buy the Anfield club.

He said: “It is a challenge, but the long-term goal of fans who want to buy clubs is to make them democratic and not for sale.

“In my view, that is what a football club should be and I would definitely lend my support to that principle.”

Speaking at Anfield sport and community centre, Breckside Park, he praised the two clubs for becoming the first Premier League sides to collaborate in supporting the Kickz initiative.

The project gives young people in deprived areas the chance to attend three nights of sport a week at 25 specially-designated sites.

Mr Burnham added: “Two clubs of this size working together in the community is something you do not see every day.

“In the first year of Kickz, many players have been picked up by clubs and . . . that is a tangible result.”

Not opposed to stadium

THE leader of Sefton council said the authority was “bounced” into making a decision on Everton’s Kirkby plans.

Cllr Tony Robertson was critical of the short space of time councillors had to react to the proposal and said it was “sad” people accused Sefton of being opposed to the stadium or Kirkby’s regeneration.

He said the council had never expressed a view about Everton’s stadium and where it should be - and the issue was the linked Tesco-led shopping district, which councillors were told would have an effect on shopping areas from Aintree to Southport.

Cllr Robertson said: “With so little time to react, we were bounced into having to react to something when clearly compromise could have been reached.”

kevin.core@liverpool.com

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpo....1681826

by **Reg** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 1:26 pm

Be jaysas this is becoming UNBEARABLE.

H&G - take the money and fook off.
Arabs - dont look at EFC or NUFC as all you´re gonna do is inflate the value of LFC.
Shared stadium? Only if it is 90,000 and painted RED.

I hate this thread, I really, really do. Surely Moores can quietly say to H&G 'enough is enough, sell and go' ?

by **shakey** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 1:44 pm

Brilliant post Ciggy

But fek this is like being on a bad rollercoaster ride :sniffle

by **ste123lfc** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 2:05 pm

Where's Lakes with his latest installment from Merrill Lynch. Come on Hicks F*ck off you Texan Tw*t

by **tubby** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 2:18 pm

There is no way we will have a shared stadium. Who cares if the minister says so. Hicks distanced himself from it twice now sothere is no way he would go back on it.

by **inglis5** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 2:22 pm

bavlondon wrote:There is no way we will have a shared stadium. Who cares if the minister says so. Hicks distanced himself from it twice now sothere is no way he would go back on it.

Are you being sarcastic Bav?

Hick's doesn't really strike me as a man with any sort of integrity when it comes to this football club.

by **Number 9** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 2:23 pm

bavlondon wrote:There is no way we will have a shared stadium. Who cares if the minister says so. Hicks distanced himself from it twice now sothere is no way he would go back on it.

Yeah man of his word that he is! :no

No way he would go back on it my @rsehole......If he's still here and the opportunity arises for a shared stadium and it suits him financially,he'll bite their arms off for it!

The kunts have went back on their word before and will do it again,thats why they need to fu,ck off!

by **Ciggy** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 2:30 pm

What a fabulous letter from SoS.

by **Igor Zidane** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 2:40 pm

Ciggy wrote:What a fabulous letter from SoS.

Agreed Lynds , hopefully we start upping the anti now and H+G start getting pressure to sell from all sides.

by **Ciggy** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 2:51 pm

Igor Zidane wrote:
Ciggy wrote:What a fabulous letter from SoS.

Agreed Lynds , hopefully we start upping the anti now and H+G start getting pressure to sell from all sides.

I expect a statement on the Offal today saying we are not selling bla bla bla.

by **Igor Zidane** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 2:52 pm

Ciggy wrote:
Igor Zidane wrote:
Ciggy wrote:What a fabulous letter from SoS.

Agreed Lynds , hopefully we start upping the anti now and H+G start getting pressure to sell from all sides.

I expect a statement on the Offal today saying we are not selling bla bla bla.

I know lynds ,me too . I would have thought we would have had one by now though , it's been a few day's since all this kicked off again.

Liverpool FC Forum

TAKEOVER COMPLETE - H & G Finally Jibbed!

Who is online