DIC have pulled out (continued)

[Pacman]

I understand what you are saying. I remember reading it and thinking, surely an Arab wouldn't say "our guys". Another thing that struck me as strange, and if a true quote is quite petty was saying the American investors "wouldn't know Liverpool from a hole in the ground". But then again, I'm probably reading too much into things.

But I do think one point they made is valid, namely that the new owners will increase the debt at possibly a higher interest rate.

In any case, I think DIC's anger is understandable, even if their comments are inappropriate. Even on the BBC website it says Moores met the Americans secretly earlier in the week - and probably without keeping DIC informed. If that is the case, then in the absence of any reassurances from Moores you wouldn't be surprised if DIC jumped to conclusions.

I am still of the belief that this Gillett bid was never Moores and Parry's first choice, until it became the only choice.

That's my main concern now.

If Gillet & Hicks bid was 1st choice and better for the club then great but if the DIC bid was better and because we got greedy and ****ed them about they walked never to return and we had to accept Gillets bid then I'll be mad.

Either way I guess we'll never know

[IrishPaul]

Ahh the voice of reason again. As someone else said on the other thread, several people have proved themselves rather numptyish by jumping to conclusions and using this 'mess' (as the media have presented it) as yet another excuse to jump on Moores & Parrys' backs when they still know next to ****-all about the situation...why did DIC take over a month to do what Gillet did in 3 days? And if rumours of their 12 hour ultimatum are true, screw them.

No matter what anyone says, now isn't the time to be judging anyone involved - we won't really know what would have been best for the club for another 3 years at least. I'm sure the patience of some will have run out by then though

Amen to that

[nbryan1764]

But isn't it funny the way this has ended in acrimony, recriminations and accusations? What does that tell you about the way our board conducts business?

not as much as it tells you about the way DIC conducts business I would say. Consider facts and nothing else:

DIC never made a formal offer yet they wanted us to have no consideration for any other bid (even though we had to be law)

When we did get another bid they threw their dummies out and said LFC had acted dishonourably

Every day since they release a new whinging press releas

Am I wrong here? Do you know something that is not in the public domain? Everything you have posted suggests that you are talking fact. My opinion is **** them. If they wanted us that badly they would have fought for us. What do they do if things dont go right for them then? What would have happened if, heaven forbid, we lost a few games? Dummies (and Rafa) out maybe?

[Dhav]

not as much as it tells you about the way DIC conducts business I would say. Consider facts and nothing else:

DIC never made a formal offer yet they wanted us to have no consideration for any other bid (even though we had to be law)

When we did get another bid they threw their dummies out and said LFC had acted dishonourably

Every day since they release a new whinging press releas

Am I wrong here? Do you know something that is not in the public domain? Everything you have posted suggests that you are talking fact. My opinion is **** them. If they wanted us that badly they would have fought for us. What do they do if things dont go right for them then? What would have happened if, heaven forbid, we lost a few games? Dummies (and Rafa) out maybe?

As far as I'm aware DIC's only official statement was that of Al-Ansari, which was extremely measured and restrained. Everything else that has come out since from DIC has been unofficial with no names attached to it, so how accurate and representative do you know for sure they are?

Why would they have fought for us? The club told them they were dealing with DIC exclusively and informally told them the deal would be rubber stamped. Everything DIC reportedly said subsequently suggests the club did not keep them in the loop that they were considering another offer. If this is true you can see why Al-Maktoum got pissed off by this. It seems DIC were to some extent misled.

All I know for sure is this, in my current job I have worked on a similar sized deal as this one, including throughout the due diligence process. The speed at which this Gillett deal has been virtually concluded is astounding. And to me it smacks of desperation.

[The Glove]

Desperation on who's part? If Gillett is desperate to own us, is that such a bad thing?

[Dhav]

Desperation on who's part? If Gillett is desperate to own us, is that such a bad thing?

Desperation on Gillett's part certainly, which I accept is not necessarily a bad thing (apart from all the corners I'm sure he's cut to get here), but also desperation on the club's part to accept. The speed at which they switched from DIC to Gillett in particular just has me wondering - did they pounce on it because it was the only bid left?

[The Glove]

It'd only be desperation on our part if DIC offered more and when they walked we lept in in with Gillett but thats not the case is it? Gillett has offered more so it certainly isnt desperation on our part.

[MORPHEUS]

For me the best comments so far - by a mile - are those of Steve Morgan. Yesterday I smelt a rat about the guy but not today. He says he was very surprised by the DIC announcement and thinks we are starting to look very foolish.

Read between the lines - he seems to be saying Moores and Parry have been both dishonourable and stupid. Of course we know that he and Moores are enemies - which reminds me of the time when Moores bawled his eyes out at the AGM when he, Parry and Houllier had fouled up, taking us into bad debt and down the table. I'm not sure about Morgan since his ground-share remarks especially - but by God he was angry then at Moores's refusal to go.

This week has been impossible to decipher. I took a decision to support Moores and Parry but the only way I can do that now is to ignore the past 3-4 years of fannying about, the courting of bent Thais, the new Stadium fiasco, this week's farce, and the words of DIC and Morgan.

[Dhav]

It'd only be desperation on our part if DIC offered more and when they walked we lept in in with Gillett but thats not the case is it? Gillett has offered more so it certainly isnt desperation on our part.

the DIC deal was on the table, we wanted to consider Gillett's bid, which DIC didn't like so they walked. Once the DIC bid was off the table we immediately accepted the Gillett bid. That's the way it seems - we only accepted the Gillett offer when it was the only one left.

If both bids were on the table at the same time, and the club preferred to accept Gillett's bid I would be more confident. But this isn't the case is it?

[tomasjj]

Morgan I will never trust.
I'd rather trust Parry and Moores into eternity.

[Dhav]

For me the best comments so far - by a mile - are those of Steve Morgan. Yesterday I smelt a rat about the guy but not today. He says he was very surprised by the DIC announcement and thinks we are starting to look very foolish.

Read between the lines - he seems to be saying Moores and Parry have been both dishonourable and stupid. Of course we know that he and Moores are enemies - which reminds me of the time when Moores bawled his eyes out at the AGM when he, Parry and Houllier had fouled up, taking us into bad debt and down the table. I'm not sure about Morgan since his ground-share remarks especially - but by God he was angry then at Moores's refusal to go.

This week has been impossible to decipher. I took a decision to support Moores and Parry but the only way I can do that now is to ignore the past 3-4 years of fannying about, the courting of bent Thais, the new Stadium fiasco, this week's farce, and the words of DIC and Morgan.

This site needs a few more posts like this which are more cynical and want questions answered rather than just being happy to blindly follow Parry and Moores simply because they are the lucky ones who are in control of the club.

[MORPHEUS]

Morgan I will never trust.
I'd rather trust Parry and Moores into eternity.

Let's hope you're right.

[nbryan1764]

As far as I'm aware DIC's only official statement was that of Al-Ansari, which was extremely measured and restrained. Everything else that has come out since from DIC has been unofficial with no names attached to it, so how accurate and representative do you know for sure they are?

Why would they have fought for us? The club told them they were dealing with DIC exclusively and informally told them the deal would be rubber stamped. Everything DIC reportedly said subsequently suggests the club did not keep them in the loop that they were considering another offer. If this is true you can see why Al-Maktoum got pissed off by this. It seems DIC were to some extent misled.

All I know for sure is this, in my current job I have worked on a similar sized deal as this one, including throughout the due diligence process. The speed at which this Gillett deal has been virtually concluded is astounding. And to me it smacks of desperation.

so its the press that are misrepresenting quotes? would they also be misrepresenting quotes that you seem to be quoting? such as dic would not have level of debt etc? did they misquote the DIC 7 year plan? Or is it simply convenient to claim misrepresentation for one side only?

Why would they fight for us? If you really wanted something and you had competition then you would fight for it, simple as that. Why wouldn't you I would say not why would you.

I agree on one point re:due dilligence. I am not thinking it smacks of desperation but it was done extremely quickly. This is somthing that I know about as it is part of my job. American;s in particular can have over extended due dilligence periods. However many companies have their own due dilligence models. Some want to know every little detail, others want to look at the big picture. I don;t think you can compare deal sizes as comanies are very very different. If they were told that they had a very short timespan they would possibly have had teams of lawyes and accountants working around the clock. In that instance I would say it was very achievable.

[nbryan1764]

This site needs a few more posts like this which are more cynical and want questions answered rather than just being happy to blindly follow Parry and Moores simply because they are the lucky ones who are in control of the club.

so we be led blindly by you instead?

[The Glove]

But, there is nothing to say we wouldnt have accepted Gilletts bid even if DIC hadnt have walked. It mustve been an attractive bid or we wouldnt have considered it would we?

We were told that under company Law, Gillett was allowed to bid. Now if that was the case why did DIC walk? If they had confidence in their bid and what Moores had said then they only had to stick round and they'd get us.

My guess is that Parry/Moores liked Gillets revised offer, told DIC that they would need to better it, they didnt and now we are where we are.