Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DIC have pulled out

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 83
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 11 51 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 71 83 template Next
    #901
    Originally posted by Pacman View Post
    Or LFC ****ed DIC over and Gillet is ther only other option.

    ****ed them over? Why would they do that?
    Originally posted by Gordon Brown
    (1995)
    "A weak currency is the sign of a weak economy,which is the sign of a weak government"

    Comment

      #902
      Moores and Parry look amateur because they had basically accepted the DIC deal and Gillet came along at the last minute with a revised offer.

      I think they've acted professionally by considering the offer, but insisting it should be done quickly.

      It would have amateur, if not totally unprofessional, NOT to consider Gillets bid.
      Quote of the year :

      "With monkey me, dogface dishwasher bitch and chimp the ****ing champ you. We are turning into a raving party here arent we"

      Comment

        #903
        Originally posted by Pacman View Post
        Don't believe that Disco.

        A DIC rep has just been on 5 live and he said our board were amateurish in how we conducted business.

        No chance of a u-turn.
        To be fair, how long more would they have had to deal with Parry and Moores?
        They didnt have to leave them in control. And i wonder if Gilette will give them a say in future.
        Bill shankly to Tommy Smith after he'd turned up for training with a bandaged knee:
        'Take that poof bandage off, and what do you mean YOUR knee, it's LIVERPOOL'S knee !'

        "Sorry, boss, I should have kept my legs together," said Lawrence. "No, Tommy, your mother should have kept her legs together!," replied Shankly.

        * After Tommy Lawrence had let in a fluke goal between his legs

        Comment

          #904
          Originally posted by disco View Post
          I don't believe DIC have 100% walked away - I reckon they are just playing hard ball with Liverpool.

          The only other alternative is that, for whatever reasons, the Gillet offer was far more attractive, DIC know this and aren't prepared to up their offer, and have walked away to save face.

          You don't just walk away after months of work without a very good reason, so either they haven't walked away (my opinion) or they've been all but told that their bid won't win.
          I see where you're coming from but in the echo it says once you pull out of a takecover you cant come back for 6 months. As D.I.C did not make a firm offer I am not sure if this refers to them.

          Comment

            #905
            Originally posted by Pacman View Post
            Or LFC ****ed DIC over and Gillet is ther only other option.

            That's how I see it.

            At least Moores and Parry will probably be out if Gillett takes over the club. We need businessmen at the club.
            Just believe and you never know what will happen.

            According to Benitez it's important not simply to go out to win but to go out prepared to win, which means players have to put in the same level of work on a daily basis. Anything else is unacceptable.

            Comment

              #906
              Originally posted by exmouth red View Post

              It is believed DIC, owned by Sheikh Mohammed, felt club chair- man David Moores was playing the two competing sides off against each other and behaved "dishonourably".
              Yes, how dishonourable of Moores to act in the best interests of the share holders by allowing a fair competition.
              Jeebus, where do these hacks get off?
              Originally posted by Gordon Brown
              (1995)
              "A weak currency is the sign of a weak economy,which is the sign of a weak government"

              Comment

                #907
                Originally posted by Pacman View Post
                Don't believe that Disco.

                A DIC rep has just been on 5 live and he said our board were amateurish in how we conducted business.

                No chance of a u-turn.
                This was clear from their statements yesterday IMO. Even if they do come back now, there is no way they'll keep on Parry and Moores after this, which as we know is what these two clowns really want.

                Let's see how Parry spins this now. We've been told all along that this was the deal to take us to the next level yet with all the reports are putting the blame squarely on the board's shoulders for blowing it.
                White liquid in a bottle = Milk

                Purslow = C*nt

                Comment

                  #908
                  Originally posted by disco View Post
                  In which case, Gillet has won and DIC have sour grapes.
                  Maybe.

                  Or, Gillette's won and LFC have lost.

                  Comment

                    #909
                    Originally posted by disco View Post
                    I don't believe DIC have 100% walked away - I reckon they are just playing hard ball with Liverpool.

                    The only other alternative is that, for whatever reasons, the Gillet offer was far more attractive, DIC know this and aren't prepared to up their offer, and have walked away to save face.

                    You don't just walk away after months of work without a very good reason, so either they haven't walked away (my opinion) or they've been all but told that their bid won't win.
                    They have not walked away completely yet
                    In Rafa I Trust

                    Comment

                      #910
                      Originally posted by Pacman View Post
                      Or LFC ****ed DIC over and Gillet is ther only other option.

                      If you have two virtually identical bids (i.e. plans for stadium and future spending plans) then surely you have to go with the higher bid.

                      They are representing Shareholders, NOT us.
                      Quote of the year :

                      "With monkey me, dogface dishwasher bitch and chimp the ****ing champ you. We are turning into a raving party here arent we"

                      Comment

                        #911
                        Originally posted by Red Chilli View Post
                        Yes, how dishonourable of Moores to act in the best interests of the share holders by allowing a fair competition.
                        Jeebus, where do these hacks get off?
                        It is dishonourable if, as reported, Moores agreed to the deal with DIC in principle
                        White liquid in a bottle = Milk

                        Purslow = C*nt

                        Comment

                          #912
                          Originally posted by disco View Post
                          Moores and Parry look amateur because they had basically accepted the DIC deal and Gillet came along at the last minute with a revised offer.

                          I think they've acted professionally by considering the offer, but insisting it should be done quickly.

                          It would have amateur, if not totally unprofessional, NOT to consider Gillets bid.
                          Quite right. And would the shareholders not have grounds to complain under the law if Moores acted in a manner which was not in the best interests of the shareholders?
                          Originally posted by Gordon Brown
                          (1995)
                          "A weak currency is the sign of a weak economy,which is the sign of a weak government"

                          Comment

                            #913
                            Originally posted by Dhavlos View Post
                            It is dishonourable if, as reported, Moores agreed to the deal with DIC in principle
                            It's not Dhavlos, Moores has a duty in law to act in the best interests of the shareholders. It would be dishonourable and potentially illegal to not consider Gillett's bid.
                            He may have preferred DIC which is why he agreed in principle to deal with them for his shares, but he had a duty to act in the best interests of the rest of the shareholders.
                            Originally posted by Gordon Brown
                            (1995)
                            "A weak currency is the sign of a weak economy,which is the sign of a weak government"

                            Comment

                              #914
                              Originally posted by Red Chilli View Post
                              Quite right. And would the shareholders not have grounds to complain under the law if Moores acted in a manner which was not in the best interests of the shareholders?
                              I believe this is true. Not just Moores, but the board as a whole.

                              Gillette coming in has no doubt screwed everything up.

                              Either way, it seems from what has been said, the Board have been dithering and been rather duplicitous and unclear with DIC.
                              White liquid in a bottle = Milk

                              Purslow = C*nt

                              Comment

                                #915
                                Originally posted by Pacman View Post
                                A DIC rep has just been on 5 live and he said our board were amateurish in how we conducted business.
                                That's not the first time in recent history that that has been said. Will they ever learn?

                                Comment

                                Previous 1 11 51 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 71 83 template Next
                                Working...
                                X