Wachovia Bank US reply to my letter about our owners

[Dhav]

with parry I could understand - but not david moores.

I know some people blame him for what's happening but I geniunely believe that he didnt look to fill his own pockets and that he took parry's advice on this matter and opted for G+T.

He is like us - a genuine fan of the club and must be absolutely gutted over the current situation.

You might well be right. I've never been one to doubt Moores' love and commitment to the club, but like it or not, by taking the higher offer he was always going to be open to accusations of lining his pockets (selling to the yanks as opposed to DIC was worth an extra £8m to him I think it has been said). I personally agree with you that he would have happily accepted a lower bid if the prchaser was a more suitable owner for the club. He is one person, more than any other who understood and upheld the Liverpool way of doing things, and so current events must be hurting him bad.

As for that snake Parry, I don't trust him at all. He was a minor shareholder I believe, and so not only did he manage to keep his job with the yanks taking over, he also got a higher premium on his shares plus got a bonus on the successful completion of the transaction. I wouldn't be surprised if he improperly advised Moores. He strikes me as someone who'll do anything to save his own skin.

SUrely if RP and DM had done their homework properly they would have realised what kind of a person Hicks was, and how he would be an unsuitable owner of Liverpool?

[Dhav]

I think major shareholders told him to look at G&H bid. Once they did that he was oblidged to or risk being sued for the difference. So he had a look and DIC took their bat and ball and went home. Suddenly Moores is left with one bid so he took, rightly or wrongly at the time, their bid because he needed to let it go.

He would be very pissed off IMO.

I would be very interested to know the specifics of this situation and exactly what the extent of the responsibility to the shareholders was. I studied this stuff on a theoretical level a few years ago. Unfortunately my only corproate finance experience has been working on facility agreements and conducting due diligence, and not working specifically on the mechanics of takeovers, so I've long since forgotten it. I might dig out my old textbooks when I get home and have a look.

Anyway, like you say I am certain there is a responsibility on the board to act in the best interests of all shareholders, and thus consider the higher bid. As for DIC throwing the toys out the pram, I am certain there is more to this than meets the eye. DIC would have had legal advice and would have known that the club was under a legal obligation to consider the offer and that therefore the club's hands were tied. I don't think that they walked specifically because the club considered the offer, there must be more to it than just this IMO.

One thing I am sure of is that they jumped into the Americans' bed with their eyes closed, basically because it was the only offer on the table.

[MindGuerrillas]

Anyway, like you say I am certain there is a responsibility on the board to act in the best interests of all shareholders, and thus consider the higher bid. As for DIC throwing the toys out the pram, I am certain there is more to this than meets the eye. DIC would have had legal advice and would have known that the club was under a legal obligation to consider the offer and that therefore the club's hands were tied. I don't think that they walked specifically because the club considered the offer, there must be more to it than just this IMO.

I agree. I really don't think that DIC walked just because the club listened to another offer. As you say they would have been well aware of the responsibilities the board had to listen to it. I think what made them go was more the fact that Moores and Parry didn't inform them of the new offer despite promising to keep them informed of any developments. They only found out through the press and then when they tried to contact the club about it they were ignored. I can't really blame them for walking away if the club treated them like this. Imagine if you'd agreed a price on a house and the deal was practically done and then the owner went off and negotiated with someone else without informing you and then refused to talk. You might throw the toys about too.

[Shaggy]

****ing hell are you for real??? you were a c*** of the highest order during the houllier days and nothings changed. You still have a bunch of merry followers I see.

ps, when I visit gilbraltor later this year I think I should hello, should I just ask amongst the monkeys for you?

Er…….I think this is a disastrous case of mistaken identity.

[AFII]

I think we know the answer to that mate, it was the higher premium on the price of the shares and the fact they both got to keep their jobs, in one guise or another. Worked out nicely for them/

Moores also had a deadline to meet and had only a couple of weeks left before he had to sell up or the club wouldn't have got the money from the City and EU for the stadium project.

G&H were the only bidders left and that meant that he more or less had no other choice than to sell to them.

[AFII]

I agree. I really don't think that DIC walked just because the club listened to another offer. As you say they would have been well aware of the responsibilities the board had to listen to it. I think what made them go was more the fact that Moores and Parry didn't inform them of the new offer despite promising to keep them informed of any developments. They only found out through the press and then when they tried to contact the club about it they were ignored. I can't really blame them for walking away if the club treated them like this. Imagine if you'd agreed a price on a house and the deal was practically done and then the owner went off and negotiated with someone else without informing you and then refused to talk. You might throw the toys about too.

The rumour is that it was the Sheikh who decided that DIC should get out of the deal.

[Dhav]

I agree. I really don't think that DIC walked just because the club listened to another offer. As you say they would have been well aware of the responsibilities the board had to listen to it. I think what made them go was more the fact that Moores and Parry didn't inform them of the new offer despite promising to keep them informed of any developments. They only found out through the press and then when they tried to contact the club about it they were ignored. I can't really blame them for walking away if the club treated them like this. Imagine if you'd agreed a price on a house and the deal was practically done and then the owner went off and negotiated with someone else without informing you and then refused to talk. You might throw the toys about too.

Yes, I think this is it, a breakdown of trust/communication. In my current job we've had minor dealings with Arabs on the opposite side of transactions, and (not meaning to tar them all with the same brush) one thing I noticed was they got extremely impatient and nervous if there was an apparent delay in progress being made and/or if they weren't being kept in the loop, they seemed to want constant reassurances that the transaction was moving forward. Don't know if DIC was the same, but I can well imagine the club ****ing it up in this way, especially if Parry was in the middle of it.

[Dhav]

Moores also had a deadline to meet and had only a couple of weeks left before he had to sell up or the club wouldn't have got the money from the City and EU for the stadium project.

G&H were the only bidders left and that meant that he more or less had no other choice than to sell to them.

Yeah, but how much were those grants worth? £20m, £30m? Not worth rushing such a massive decision over, especially if Parry was convinced, as he constantly told us, that DIC were the right people to take us forward. Regardless, the speed with which the G&H deal was concluded leads me to suggest that the club did not do sufficient research in trying to ascertain whether these two planks were suitable custodians for our club, something which is now coming home to roost.

[Fierce]

As for that snake Parry, I don't trust him at all. He was a minor shareholder I believe, and so not only did he manage to keep his job with the yanks taking over, he also got a higher premium on his shares plus got a bonus on the successful completion of the transaction. I wouldn't be surprised if he improperly advised Moores. He strikes me as someone who'll do anything to save his own skin.

Woah I must have missed something. When did Parry go from being a bit crap at his job to being a snake who has deliberately ill advised his boss in order to line his own pockets??

Man, I really must keep up!

[AFII]

Yeah, but how much were those grants worth? £20m, £30m? Not worth rushing such a massive decision over, especially if Parry was convinced, as he constantly told us, that DIC were the right people to take us forward. Regardless, the speed with which the G&H deal was concluded leads me to suggest that the club did not do sufficient research in trying to ascertain whether these two planks were suitable custodians for our club, something which is now coming home to roost.

I could find out more evidence against G&H as good buyers in an hour or two searching the net than Parry did during his so called big check up.

[BobTheCharmer]

Er…….I think this is a disastrous case of mistaken identity.

ah well, story of my life its like the time I was convinced I'd pulled Claire Sweeney turns out I misheard and it was Claire Beeney hell she looked similar albeit with blond hair.

[Dhav]

Woah I must have missed something. When did Parry go from being a bit crap at his job to being a snake who has deliberately ill advised his boss in order to line his own pockets??

Man, I really must keep up!

Obviously I'm speculating. I'm just suspicious of how he was selling us the DIC deal as being the one to take us to the next level (knowing that he would lose his job if they took over) and then we ended up with the Americans, which meant not only did he get a higher premium on the few shares he owned, he got a bonus for the successful conclusion of the transaction, plus he was the only one in the boardroom post-completion to keep his job.

[Revo]

[QUOTE=BobTheCharmer;896403]****ing hell are you for real??? you were a c*** of the highest order during the houllier days and nothings changed. You still have a bunch of merry followers I see.

ps, when I visit gilbraltor later this year I think I should hello, should I just ask amongst the monkeys for you?[/QUOTE]



hahaha funny as **** that

[Morph]

ah well, story of my life its like the time I was convinced I'd pulled Claire Sweeney turns out I misheard and it was Claire Beeney hell she looked similar albeit with blond hair.

nothing like a good apology eh?

[Dhav]

I could find out more evidence against G&H as good buyers in an hour or two searching the net than Parry did during his so called big check up.

I'm willing to bet there was no substantive check-up. They rushed head-first into this deal. They saw the extra $$$ and the promise of being kept on at the club and that's probably all that mattered to them, or at least it was enough to dismiss any concerns. Parry might even have thought that seeing as he and Moores were being kept on that their influence might be enough to ensure the owners would do a good job of running the club and do so with the principles of the club at the fore. I'm willing to bet as well that after blowing the DIC deal, and previous accusations of being incompetent, that they jumped on this one to save a bit of a face.

Surely they must have known that these two wouldn't have the financial means to take the club forward, to buy it and not have to load it with huge debt? After all, neither was rich enough to buy the club on his own.