DIC have pulled out (continued)

[Dhav]

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.

All I was saying is you have to take DIC's supposed comments with a pinch of salt given we dont know the source.

DIC seem to be very single minded and conduct business in a particular way. It seems for them it was not an issue of competition, it was one of trust. I can see their point - if all the time the club was saying what an ideal partner DIC were, then all of a sudden a higher bid comes along and they want to give it serious consideration, especially after they already dismissed a bid from the same person, it makes you wonder what is motivating the target company doesn't it? Personally I agree that if they really wanted the club they would stick it out, but likewise I can understand why they would feel affronted and didnt want to be messed around.

I take your point about the due diligence, indeed I can imagine they did have teams of lawyers and accountants working round the clock. If they did in a week I could be persuaded, but 3 days is still preposterously short. I mean can you imagine the massive amount of work and co-ordination required? solicitors and professional advisers liaising so as not to duplicate information requests, reverting to the client for instructions on replies to enquiries received, accountants investigations reviewing audited accounts of the company for the last few years, accountants reports etc.

[Dhav]

so we be led blindly by you instead?

Of course not. I dont know why you're being so hostile. You seem to have the wrong impression of me - I'm not that arrogant and I'm not trying to take some kind of high ground here.

All I am saying is that there are many questions about this whole situation that I for one would want answered before I am willing to accept that Parry and Moores have chosen the right way forward for the club.

[shelly]

DIC seem to be very single minded and conduct business in a particular way. It seems for them it was not an issue of competition, it was one of trust. I can see their point - if all the time the club was saying what an ideal partner DIC were, then all of a sudden a higher bid comes along and they want to give it serious consideration, especially after they already dismissed a bid from the same person, it makes you wonder what is motivating the target company doesn't it? Personally I agree that if they really wanted the club they would stick it out, but likewise I can understand why they would feel affronted and didnt want to be messed around.

To some extent I think you've put your finger on the problem there. I think some of the problems comes from cultural misunderstandings. Let me give you an example, once a prominent American professor that my dad knew was giving a talk in Japan, and he was extremely upset by the "lack of interest" shown to him. When asked what happened, he said, those "damn chaps, they all were asleep throughout my presentation" It turned out that the audience all had their hands folded in their laps and were nodding probably with their eyes hooded, so he assumed they were asleep. What he did not realize was that it was their way of showing him a hell of a lot of respect.

While DIC is a large business company most of their decisions are taken from "on high" by someone to whom honour is extremely important. If they perceive a slight in their honour, they are bound to react. And their perception of honour is very likely to be different from yours or mine. It's sounds obvious, but a lot of people don't consider this.

Right now the general reaction is that DIC and their representatives should carry themselves with dignity and not throw their rattles out of the pram with their petulant and sour grape reaction... that's one way of looking at it. Maybe to them, they might simply be defending their honour or justifying their failure to acquire what seems like a really juicy asset? Or simply expressing their disappointment?

I don't think we should be so quick to judge either side... or Gillett/Hicks for that matter. It was only a few days ago when people were calling Gillett a spoiler for trying launch another bid. And now he's the best thing since sliced bread? Not bloody likely is it? More like, maybe he really really wants our club for whatever reason...

I know one thing... I don't think Moores/Parry are completely blameless in this whole investment fiasco and DIC's withdrawal, but I know I trust them to do what's best for LFC... I don't believe they are doing this for their own gain. Remember, ultimately DIC would have kept them on board, would the Americans?

[Red_Polo]

Good post. I feel there has been a [LedZeppelin]Communication Breakdown[/LedZeppelin] somewhere along the line.

[AFII]

I believe the reason to why DIC is so angry is that they had got a promise from Moores that we wouldn't consider any other bid until they had finished due dilligence and made their official bid. More or less everything points to that this is the case. At least if you believe that DIC got exclusive right to look at our books.

Moores didn't held his promise and DIC walked away.

This would also explain why DIC took their time looking at our books because they thought that they had nothing to worry about until they made their official bid.

That's what I believe happened.

[marcus50bucks]

Post by someone on another site. I can honestly say I can't disagree with this at all. It sounds alot more plausible than the stuff I have read on various site in the last few days


I would have more sympathy for him if it wasn't for the fact that one of the main reasons the fans were so sure that the DIC bid was the right one is that the club and Davey boy himself have spent at least the last month telling us just that.

I've read a great deal about this situation from a number of different sources over the last few days. If you look at all the information and try to collate it into a cohesive whole, it seems reasonably certain that the club (i.e. Moores, Parry et al) didn't feel DIC would have a major problem with them "considering" the bid from Gillett because they were largely paying lip service to it whilst fully intending to go ahead with the DIC deal. Even when the Gillett bid was discussed at the board meeting, there was no need for this to turn into a major crisis - I mean, what else were they going to do once the bid had been made? DIC seem to have become unsure of our intentions and not only did the board not address their concerns, they don't even seem to have been aware of them.

The board didn't communicate effectively with DIC, leaving doubt as to their intentions. When you consider the size of Makhtoum's portfolio (and frankly, however large an amount of money £450m seems, it's very much at the small end of his business dealings) his perception that he was being asked to get involved in horse trading over the deal could have had far-reaching implications for his future business dealings.

It's blatantly obvious that the board didn't expect DIC to pull out following the Gillett bid, which shows a complete lack of understanding of DIC's expectations. Regardless of whether the club were willing to meet those expectations or not, to simply not realise that the course of action they were on would lead to the bid being pulled is either remarkable incompetence or a carefully calculated exit strategy. If the bid is gone anyway, I'd rather believe the second option; that the board having realised that Gillett's offer was better for the club, concocted a scheme to engineer DIC's withdrawal. I don't though.

The board simply don't seem to have realised that deals like this need a constant flow of dialogue between both parties to keep the wheels rolling freely. Considering how many times they've done the dance with potential investors, not to mention the fact that most of them are supposed to be businessmen in their own rights, that's pretty astonishing.

I can see no clearer parallel than the Gerrard transfer bombshell after the CL final. The player was ready to commit his long-term future to the club on the back of an historic European Cup win, the manager was keen to keep him, Moores loved him to bits and was deperate to keep him at the club, both for his value as a player and from a marketing perspective and yet somehow, despite this universal love-in, Gerrard ended up 24 hours from signing for Chelsea.

OK, part of that was down to Stevie being a bit of a drama queen, but it was a lack of communication that allowed the situation to develop into a full-blown crisis.

The board have said they don't want the fans to feel that the Gillett bid is second best. Well, I think the board are going to be disappointed, because it is second best. They know full well it is, which is exactly why they were going to sign a deal with DIC on Monday. DIC's withdrawal was an absolute bolt from the blue and has left them up **** creek without a paddle. In fact, they haven't even got a ****ing canoe - they're just sat slap bang in the middle of **** creek, scratching their heads and trying to make the best of a bad job.

The most succinct comment I've seen yet regarding this is Bascombe's quote that's in Dirk's sig: Whatever way you dress it up, signing an exclusivity agreement with a rival was hardly a ringing endorsement of the man who may now be entrusted with safeguarding the future of Liverpool Football Club.

The only thing that's likely to get my respect, not that I'm kidding myself that they give a hoot, is if the board have the guts to be open, leave aside all the pathetic spin, stop issuing ludicrous press statements* and tell the truth about what happened.

Trouble is, they won't because they'll look like small-timers. If they were going to fess up, they would have already done it, probably when the news first broke. The delay in issuing any statement at all and all the Comical Ali bull**** that's been flying around since is such a blatant attempt to buy time to come up with a convincing tale that it's not even funny.

Moores might have his heart in the right place, but I reckon he'd do better sticking to carrying the bags in future - that seems to be nearer his level.







*Moores "wasn't prepared to let LFC be "bullied" like that"? - last week DIC's offer was the best thing ever and verbally agreed, but because they actually want you to get your thumb out of your arse and seal the deal instead of stroking your chin and deciding whether you can screw a few million more out of them after a guy you've already ****ed off once has come back with a new credit card, they're bullies now? Even though their proposed bid is one that you've already said your'e happy with? Pull the other one Dave, it's got bells on.

[Mumsafan]

There's no way Moores would promise not to consider another bid. Get real.

[AFII]

There's no way Moores would promise not to consider another bid. Get real.

The DIC had a verbal agreement with Moores that he wouldn't consider any other bid until they made their official bid. Why do you think Moores tried to keep his meetings with Gillett and Hicks secret?

[Mumsafan]

My god, you're getting as bad as the paranoid chap in the other thread. It's business not a James Bond movie.

[Mattshark]

The DIC had a verbal agreement with Moores that he wouldn't consider any other bid until they made their official bid. Why do you think Moores tried to keep his meetings with Gillett and Hicks secret?

DIC acted like spoilt little brats, they can **** off.

[AFII]

DIC acted like spoilt little brats, they can **** off.

No one knows what really happened so I won't blame anyone, neither DIC or Moores/Parry.

The news about the sectret meeting has been in more or less every newspaper.

[Mumsafan]

No one knows what really happened so I won't blame anyone, neither DIC or Moores/Parry.

The news about the sectret meeting has been in more or less every newspaper.

And newspapers are full of **** so I think we can ignore them.,

[Dhav]

And newspapers are full of **** so I think we can ignore them.,

Yet we're going to believe DIC's "spoilt brat" comments that have appeared in the tabloid newspapers without any name or source attached to the quotes?

[Mumsafan]

I haven't said Im believing anything now have I?

[AFII]

And newspapers are full of **** so I think we can ignore them.,

I usually do that but when something is in more or less every newspaper then it can be some truth behind the story and Parry or Moores hasn't denied the meeting either.

I think we can be sure that DIC had a verbal agreement with Moores. That's my opinion anyway. They have said that many times and Moores or Parry hasn't denied it.