Dubai International to make bid for Liverpool FC

[Lecter]

but we need cl football to attract the better players.

Where are we going to find the money for better players?

[Morten_nogamst_Pedersen]

Where are we going to find the money for better players?

Maybe the yanks have understood that to make money, you have to spend money.

[Lecter]

Just had a chat with a banker friend of mine. He said that it would be highly irregular in this country for Kop investments to use assets from LFC to pay debt on a loan that they own.

Dont our current owners specialise in being "irregular"

Its highly "irregular" for an LFC owner to speak in public

Its highly "irregular" for an LFC owner to lie consistantly to the fans

Its highly "irregular" for an LFC owner to not attend ALL matches

[Lecter]

Maybe the yanks have understood that to make money, you have to spend money.

[carlton]

that LFC is gone mate, get used to it.

[tomasjj]

Yes

Its all smoke and mirrors financing imo to disguise the real facts

IF this is approved LFC will be in £350 million debt and will have to meet all repayments

If there is no difference, this just being a technicality and LFC representing the assets and being responsible in the end....it could have something to do with where money from an eventual takeover from DIC ends up...

[Lecter]

BBC website now saying that Hicks will announce new stadium plans at same time as re-financing package......groan.

PR and glitz to deflect attention

Watch my left hand, whilst I'm robbing your wallet with my right hand

[Rashid]

Lets hope half of our fan base don't fall for the new stadium PR bull**** that will follow.

[el matador]

BBC website now saying that Hicks will announce new stadium plans at same time as re-financing package......groan.

I own 3 limited companies and I can assure people that banks dont lend money to limited companies unless there is serious security covering that loan. The things they look at include and liquidity the business currently has, the current and future projected income, and most importantly the assets against which the loan can be secured in the worst case scenario.

With the new finance deal it has been reported that Liverpool football club will still be debt free as the £190m being secured against Kop Investments or Kop football limited.

That £190m will still be secured against the assets of the club - no matter who says what it is Liverpool FC that is in debt to this figure as banks dont lend money without security otherwise 6 months down the line what's to stop hicks and gillett filing for bankrupcy on behalf of Kop Investments and wiping off the £190m debt overnight. It is only a technicality which says that the club itself is not in debt - but it is - there is no question about that. In addition, the banks have asked for personal guarantees from hicks and gillett which means they dont think there would be enough equity in the business if things were to go tits up.

It raises another interesting point in that as the club is effectively owned by the bank do they get involved with the buying and selling of the players, as that affects the asset base upon which they have secured the club. Will every transfer have to ratified by both RBS and Wachovia ? Do Hicks and Gillett now have to report to both banks ?

[MascheredUp]

Interesting post by someone over on RAWK:

"Hate to repeat myself... the refinancing loan was agreed weeks ago, in principle. Only fine-tuning was needed.

And to anyone who wonders the assets of Kop Football Inc (or whatever they call it) allowing a big unsecured personal loan... 3 words, George W Bush.

I can, somewhat cheerily, report new facts received from my source today.

Firstly... the fact that the Americans have had to (for the FIRST time) put up their own assets... is highly, highly significant. Other players are responsible for this, which marks a complete turnabout in their stance. This allows a bargaining with other interested parties

Second, the deal will be fanfared tomorrow or Friday.

Third, and most importantly, I am informed the placement of a new deal with the bankers makes the sale of the Club to a 3rd party a seriously more attractive proposition I don't understand these things... but my source most certainly does) "

[CAD]

A few thoughts.

The hate for G&H is irrational. They might not be able to take us where we wanna go in a Russian mafia oligarch way but who the hell expected that anyway? People need to understand that RBS or Wachovia (or anybody else for that matter) would never allow G&H to put more debt on LFC than the club can carry. It's simply not the way things work. Debt is a natural part of business. The only way debt would become a problem is if the day to day operation resulted in heavy losses and accumulated debts. Why would G&H want that for LFC?

What we are witnessing is a direct result of almost 20 years of underachieving in leadership, vision and management. People need to come to terms with that. We will not become a force again over night.

It's not G&Hs fault that we failed to build a bigger stadium years ago. Is it?

It's not their fault that our brand has been mismanaged for many years. Is it?

It's not their fault that that the full potential of marketing has never been explored since the beginning of the PL.

It's not their fault that we subsequently and as a direct result of the above have had inferior sponserdeals compared to the clubs we consider our rivals.

That the unfortunate bans from Europe and tragic events such as Heysel and Hillsborough made the need for leadership and vision even more urgent and that the absence of it after 91 only made the consequences for LFC that more definitive in regards of being on the train rather than being on the platform watching it leave the station. Stagnation in any business is always a reflection of complacency in management.

Hicks and Gillett are not the answer from heaven. They are not the second coming. They have made mistakes and they certainly have violated the Liverpool way. But so did the previous owners. Bill Shankly said “Aim for the sky and you'll reach the ceiling. Aim for the ceiling and you'll stay on the floor". We have been reaching for the ceiling under Moores. Anybody who can't acknowledge that fact are clearly delusional.

"You can't build a cathedral in a day. A look at the club's history tells you these things take time." Gerard Houllier. The correct line would be: "You can't rebuild a cathedral in a day. A look at the club's history tells you these things take time." Gerard Houllier. You have to ask why we are in such a dire need to rebuild. Can you do that and then continue to place all blame on G&Hs shoulders?

We lost our very essence a long time ago:

"At Liverpool we never accept second best." Kenny Dalglish.

[Pacman]

I really am depressed by the whole situation.

[Lecter]

A few thoughts.

The hate for G&H is irrational. They might not be able to take us where we wanna go in a Russian mafia oligarch way but who the hell expected that anyway? People need to understand that RBS or Wachovia (or anybody else for that matter) would never allow G&H to put more debt on LFC than the club can carry. It's simply not the way things work. Debt is a natural part of business. The only way debt would become a problem is if the day to day operation resulted in heavy losses and accumulated debts. Why would G&H want that for LFC?

What we are witnessing is a direct result of almost 20 years of underachieving in leadership, vision and management. People need to come to terms with that. We will not become a force again over night.

It's not G&Hs fault that we failed to build a bigger stadium years ago. Is it?

It's not their fault that our brand has been mismanaged for many years. Is it?

It's not their fault that that the full potential of marketing has never been explored since the beginning of the PL.

It's not their fault that we subsequently and as a direct result of the above have had inferior sponserdeals compared to the clubs we consider our rivals.

That the unfortunate bans from Europe and tragic events such as Heysel and Hillsborough made the need for leadership and vision even more urgent and that the absence of it after 91 only made the consequences for LFC that more definitive in regards of being on the train rather than being on the platform watching it leave the station. Stagnation in any business is always a reflection of complacency in management.

Hicks and Gillett are not the answer from heaven. They are not the second coming. They have made mistakes and they certainly have violated the Liverpool way. But so did the previous owners. Bill Shankly said “Aim for the sky and you'll reach the ceiling. Aim for the ceiling and you'll stay on the floor". We have been reaching for the ceiling under Moores. Anybody who can't acknowledge that fact are clearly delusional.

"You can't build a cathedral in a day. A look at the club's history tells you these things take time." Gerard Houllier. The correct line would be: "You can't rebuild a cathedral in a day. A look at the club's history tells you these things take time." Gerard Houllier. You have to ask why we are in such a dire need to rebuild. Can you do that and then continue to place all blame on G&Hs shoulders?

We lost our very essence a long time ago:

"At Liverpool we never accept second best." Kenny Dalglish.

Time will tell

My feeling is the only way this initial loans repayments will be met is if one of 3 things happen

We increase our revenue / income
We reduce our spending
Our owners inject capital

Now the stadium is 3 or 4 years and another £300 million loan away from being built so until then there will be no significant increase in revenue

[el matador]

Interesting post by someone over on RAWK:

"Hate to repeat myself... the refinancing loan was agreed weeks ago, in principle. Only fine-tuning was needed.

And to anyone who wonders the assets of Kop Football Inc (or whatever they call it) allowing a big unsecured personal loan... 3 words, George W Bush.

I can, somewhat cheerily, report new facts received from my source today.

Firstly... the fact that the Americans have had to (for the FIRST time) put up their own assets... is highly, highly significant. Other players are responsible for this, which marks a complete turnabout in their stance. This allows a bargaining with other interested parties

Second, the deal will be fanfared tomorrow or Friday.

Third, and most importantly, I am informed the placement of a new deal with the bankers makes the sale of the Club to a 3rd party a seriously more attractive proposition I don't understand these things... but my source most certainly does) "

Is correct - the way in which the money has been borrowed only allows for a short term fix as the money is taken out on a interest only basis - there will be no capital repayment on the initial £350m - all liverpool is paying is the interest on the £350m @ approximately 4.75 - 5% which works out at £16.625m to £17.5m per year.

The actual amount of £350m stands still and is untouched. At some stage the banks will want this money back and the current business model may not allow for capital repayments.

Its like having a mortgage on your house that is interest only - you can be paying it off for the rest of your life - but you still wont own the house and the initial amount still stands. Very short term model and whether RBS and Wachovia will want to give us 30years to pay it back I doubt very much. If someone comes in with a decent offer - RBS will pressure them to sell. Especially if our turnover falls due to fans demonstrations, recession, no CL qualification.

Gillett and Hicks are still in a ****hole of a mess - financially speaking.

[barnes10]

the yanks will sell as they can't realise their dream which is to turn lfc into a billion pound asset.

The reasons are simple, transfer fees to be champions and the financial climate we are in. they cannot spend to take us on to the next level and if they sack rafa, maintaining our level now is going to cost an arm and a leg with any replacement coach.

milking a club dry leaving them mid-table in an albeit highly lucrative league will be fairly profitable but won't get the yanks what they really want as football just isnt that predictable. their finances limit them to do everything by loans and they know they're taking on massive risks due to the competitive nature of football on the pitch as well as the fierce competition for players with the other top european clubs.

with the quoted personal guarantees in these newly released figures for the financing, the cost-benefit to them surely just isnt worth the risks. Their projected margins won't be massive and there's plenty of evidence around of big spending teams that just don't make it so what are the chances that a low spending team will fall by the wayside. pretty high if you ask me. plus if any of our players want out due to the direction the club is going, they basically can't do anything about it. they aren't an asset like a property is since if they want to leave, it will always lower their value.

anyway, that is my take on why there is much optimism about the takeover. Because owning LFC is not a wise move for the yanks given their finances. they cannot or are unwilling to do what it takes to compete.

who knows which way it'll go. only time will tell. but the yanks have a strong logical decision to sell. DIC, have to be committed to getting to the top otherwise what's the point for them picking up something that the yanks want shot of? is making mediocre profits by keeping a debt laden asset running in a very unreliable environment the goal of a Private Equity company? No its not. they buy low, make efficient and invest to maximise profits and then sell up. quite who they'd sell up to at that point is the key question but the difference with DIC is that keeping a highly prestigious, profitable and globally respected brand on the books is something they'd be willing to do. so selling up is only an option to them if the deal is right. so too is keeping us.

i'm also coming round to the view that its unfair to slaughter moores and parry even tho this is, in hindsight, an incredibly bad call on their part and, of course, hardly the first. incompetence isnt a crime, they are just our weak spot. they should go whatever happens and i do feel sorry for moores given his love for the club. to have this on his conscience will haunt him for the rest of his life no doubt. however a serious amateur decision was made and their eagerness to accept promises rather than hard evidence of invest for success is something that really does bewilder me. did they not look into their track records and relate that to running liverpool? for this they have to pay the price and go in shame.