Financial situation, doom & gloom reports etc

[kurtangle01]

I hope that they won't sell off a few players to get the cash they need but everything is a possibility right now.

Whilst that's a possibiltiy, as player sales is a source of revenue for any club, it's also counter productive. If they sold players it could possibly weaken their investment in both the short and the long term.

I'm sure that any players sold would also be run past the manager so I wouldn't go worrying about players like Stevie, Carra, Xabi, Pepe or Torres.

[Fiddy]

When they smell blood they wind the situation up over and over again to get everyone going. Truth doesn't come into it.

You look around some of the forums (not just here but on the other sites too) and it's like a pack of french schoolgirls when one of them sees the madonna in a field - all fainting fits and mass hysteria. What's everyone going to do when nothing dramatic happens and it's business as usual in the new year?

Also makes me laugh how clueless people try and make themselves sound knowledgeable by talking about 'revenue streams' and the economy and 'sub prime' etc...suddenly everyone's a ****ing banker

[sonsofthedesert]

Posted in the other thread but worth posting here as well:

Liverpool FC owners pledge: We will not sell club
Dec 26 2007 by David Bartlett, Liverpool Daily Post


LIVERPOOL FC owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett have told friends they have no “interest whatsoever” in selling their shares in the club.

They made their stance plain to friends and business associates after it was reported at the weekend that Dubai International Capital, who were bid rivals at the time Hicks and Gillett bought the club, were poised to take over because the Americans were allegedly having problems re-financing the debt taken out to buy Liverpool.

Last night, a source familiar with the situation said the report, which also claimed Rafael Benitez had been given until the end of the season before he was fired, was “utter nonsense”.

The source said that, early next month,Hicks and Gillett hoped to refinance the debt when they bought Liverpool in February.

They are also going to finalise their stadium design choice “between two world-class alternatives” before Saturday, January 12, said the source.

It comes after Hicks and Gillett were forced to scrap a futuristic stadium design because costs had soared.

The pair are also playing down the reported rise in stadium costs. It had been reported that the cost of the stadium had risen to £450m from £300m.

The source said stadium project costs crept up from a low £300m figure to mid-£300m number. It was only after that the owners told the architects to “value engineer” the scheme back down to the £300m mark. Last night, a source told the Daily Post: “Hicks and Gillett expect to close their new financ- ing in early January, and to finalise their stadium design choice between two world-class alternatives before January 12.Š

“They have no interest whatsoever in selling any shares, and Rafa and the owners have smoothed over a minor miscom- munication that the media blew way out of proportion.”

Dallas architects HKS, who were behind the spec- tacular proposals revealed in July, have been told to make their plan cheaper and probably less impres- sive. That stadium had the capacity to be expanded to 76,000.

And Manchester-based AFL, which was behind a previous proposal rejected by Hicks and Gillett because it was “obsolete”, was told to improve on its scheme for Stanley Park.

Both revised plans would have a capacity of around 70,000.

It is understood Hicks and Gillett are expected to re-finance the £220m loan used to buy the club.

The new £350m loan with the Royal Bank of Scotland would include £60m to get work on the new stadium started and £25m to cover the cost of last summer’s signings.

Despite this, stadium plans are apparently proceeding according to a revised schedule (that would see the new ground open in time for the 2011/12 season) in terms of the planning, design and initial construction.

Daily Post

[AFII]

The source said that, early next month,Hicks and Gillett hoped to refinance the debt when they bought Liverpool in February.

How can they be sure that they won't sell up when they have not yet refinanced the debts?

They only hope to do it according to the article but nothing is done yet.

[sonsofthedesert]

How can they be sure that they won't sell up when they have not yet refinanced the debts?

They only hope to do it according to the article but nothing is done yet.

Haven't most of the papers said that either the loan is until feb 2009 or can be extended to Feb 2009. I don't think it is as tight a 1 or 2 papers have suggested.

[AFII]

Haven't most of the papers said that either the loan is until feb 2009 or can be extended to Feb 2009. I don't think it is as tight a 1 or 2 papers have suggested.

I think the key point is that they must come up with £40m in cash as security.

[Skillz]

Anyone got an idea who the source could be.

[Jayesh87]

Anyone got an idea who the source could be.

Foster Gillett

[Rashid]

They don't want to extend the loan to 2009 as the interests rates have rocketed on it one would assume hence the urgency in getting it sorted. Whatever they do they will have lied about not purchasing us the "Glazer" way.

[sonsofthedesert]

They don't want to extend the loan to 2009 as the interests rates have rocketed on it one would assume hence the urgency in getting it sorted. Whatever they do they will have lied about not purchasing us the "Glazer" way.

If true then yes they will have lied, but I can't help but think that circumstances would have caused this.

[Skillz]

Foster Gillett

Probably right.

In fact i should not have needed to ask.

[Rashid]

If true then yes they will have lied, but I can't help but think that circumstances would have caused this.

The purchase debt was taken out for a year with the option of two. We should not kid ourselves in this, they had every intention of refinancing this on the club when they initially took it out.

[sonsofthedesert]

The purchase debt was taken out for a year with the option of two. We should not kid ourselves in this, they had every intention of refinancing this on the club when they initially took it out.

That's your opinion though and not fact.

[AFII]

They don't want to extend the loan to 2009 as the interests rates have rocketed on it one would assume hence the urgency in getting it sorted. Whatever they do they will have lied about not purchasing us the "Glazer" way.

but the bank now want a £40m cash security or else they won't get that new loan against the club.

The problem for them is that it looks like they don't have or want to risk £40m in cash.

[Rashid]

That's your opinion though and not fact.

Why get such a short term loan then when they would have got better rates going for say a 5 year initial term? Guys like them would have known in February the way the market was going and that rates would not be reducing in the next few months...