Dubai International to make bid for Liverpool FC

[jrd7]

So tomorrow they're going to announce their refinance deal and hide it behind some nice pictures of a stadium that, at present, we can't afford?

Yup.............seems fair enough, what's your point?

Moores' aim was to get the clubs debts paid off and put us a position to pay for the stadium and to be fair, he's sorted that out pretty smartly.

I'm not sure this was what we all had in mind but good old Rick and Dave managed to sort it out for us. Don't let semantics like ****loads more debt and nothing for players get in the way.

He's such a pro, that as well as sorting these miracles out for us, he's somehow managed to negotiate a tincy wincy little bit of cash for himself.

cost of previous debts £40 million, Cost of current ones and KOP debts - 350 million. Thinking we'll ever be challenging again...................priceless.

There are some things money can't buy, for everything else there's Moorestar card.

[rushscored4]

ok - lets take your formula

our net profit for last year were approx £15m (reportedly in the echo). If you use the PE ratio of 10 the club goodwill would be worth £150m.

then add the net value of the assets to that - do you think our net assets are worth only £40m ? Remember this has to include player net values, the stadium, land, the training facilities, and not the mention the value of the brand.

I was using those examples just to disprove your friend at the RBS's 'expert' opinion that the club would be worth nothing, mate. The standard formula I used wasn't to calculate the 'goodwill' but the overall value. Goodwill is almost impossible to value and includes loads of other factors.

In a private limited company like yours, for example, much of the value would depend on whether you as the principal would stay with the company after any sale. Many small businesses where the income is dependant upon one or two individuals would have a very low P/E ratio even if the business was very profitable.

[dawmdt]

They will still lump another 300 mil on us when they need to build the ****ing stadium.

This is what pisses me off this re financing is just so they can pay for buying the club. We are going to be close to half a billion quid in debt in the next few years.

Another hypothetical speculative scenario:

Kop Investments own the rights to a new stadium and the club.

Club sold to another party, contract of sale includes xxx number of years of requiring LFC to use "New Anfield" as their home stadium but probably gives them a perpetual right to if they choose.

Result: no stadium debt on the club, owners of stadium take nice income from LFC and anybody else they choose to rent the stadium and\or corporate conferencing etc facilities to. Also income from name rights, advertising (probably shared with LFC as arguably they bring in the punters not the stadium itself) catering outlets etc, LFC never actually own the stadium but for all purposes it's still our new home. This scenario isn't that an unlikely business scenario imo. No insider info or anything, just having fun (yes, I'm a geek ) guessing

[el matador]

I was using those examples just to disprove your friend at the RBS's 'expert' opinion that the club would be worth nothing, mate. The standard formula I used wasn't to calculate the 'goodwill' but the overall value. Goodwill is almost impossible to value and includes loads of other factors.

In a private limited company like yours, for example, much of the value would depend on whether you as the principal would stay with the company after any sale. Many small businesses where the income is dependant upon one or two individuals would have a very low P/E ratio even if the business was very profitable.

I agree that its difficult to calculate the true value of a company like liverpool. How can you calculate the intrinsic value of the actual brand Liverpool FC ?

As I posted earlier, I did make it clear that he hasnt worked on this re-finance deal, and he isnt allowed to approach anyone who is. If anyone is caught leaking out sensitive information - its bad news. He is only passing on what he has heard and its nothing really that we probably didnt know.

But he did say that our club is now more attractive to a potential takeover as the club is now burdened with debt and the sum of that debt is as much as or near to the value of the club. If hicks and gillett got into serious trouble they would have difficulty selling it for £50m let alone the £500m they want from DIC.

My ex works for Credit suisse Paris in mergers and acquisitions. I could always ask her

[Vermilion]

From what i've read the only reason the whole debt is not going on the club is down to Moores & Parry digging their heels in, but if they were ever forced out, the debt could then be dumped wholly on LFC. True or False.

[andyhanrahan]

in 2009 hicks will rebrand us as the Liverpool Red's ( no more f.c no more club identity we're a brand to him and his capitalist cronies)

[Morten_nogamst_Pedersen]

Liverpool.no has dug out this

Liverpool fans see Tom Hicks mucking up their way of life
By GIL LeBRETON
Star-Telegram Staff Writer

When he stood before the Liverpool home fans for the first time 12 months ago, Tom Hicks was showered with cheers and appreciation.

Little did Hicks know, it seems, that after that glorious day at Anfield, he was expected to drop from sight, leaving behind as his only visible presence his fat American checkbook.

This is the British way, and the learning curve is enormous.

British soccer isn't sport as much as it is passion, family and religion, all rolled into one.

"There is a big percentage of fans," Hicks acknowledged Tuesday, "for whom the football club is truly their life."

Hicks and partner George Gillett, owner of the NHL's Montreal Canadiens, purchased the British Premier League's Liverpool club in February, 2007, for a reported $432.9 million.

As John Thompson wrote in the Liverpool Echo that day, "What walked into Anfield yesterday looked, sounded, smelled and felt like very rich, very warm, very talented and very decent family people who love sport to their core and who see the chance to become -- in George Gillett's words -- custodians, rather than owners, of something unique and special which is a rare privilege for them."

Almost 12 months later, during Monday's 2-2 draw with Aston Villa, the same fans howled for Hicks' and Gillett's heads, calling them "liars."

Carrying banners -- like the one that read, "If it ain't broke, don't Hicks it" -- and chanting through much of the night, the Liverpool faithful called upon the North American owners to sell, sell, sell.

According to the Liverpool Daily Post, "Such was the animosity towards the Americans at Monday night's game against Villa, it is hard to see -- due to security reasons -- how they can ever appear again in the Anfield directors' box."

As someone close to the situation described it, the Liverpool tabloids have created a feeding frenzy designed for Hicks to take the blame for the club's current disappointing, fifth-place performance.

Liverpool has an old, inadequate stadium, which Hicks and Gillett have pledged to replace. And when original architectural estimates came in $200 million more than expected, and the new owners sought additional financing, the newspapers fed fans' hysteria with stories of broken promises and massive debt.

There hasn't been anything seen in Britain like it since... well, since Tampa Bay Buccaneers owner Malcolm Glazer bought the storied Manchester United club in 2005.

In England, if I'm reading this correctly, Americans -- especially rich Texans -- are expected to pay cash for sports franchises and to purchase new stadiums with their American Express cards. To do anything less, British soccer fans feel, is to compromise the player purchasing power of the local football club.

In the United States, of course, what Hicks is doing is not at all unusual.

Jerry Jones borrowed liberally to purchase the Cowboys. San Francisco Giants owners built a waterfront stadium with private funds, then still had $126 million to spend on Barry Zito.

Owners going into debt and still signing free agents, we realize here in the States, are not mutually exclusive options.

The latest Liverpool headlines had a group of Dubai investors waiting in the wings for Hicks and Gillett to desperately sell.

Hicks has flatly denied it.

In fact, when asked Tuesday how much of the recent tabloid speculation was true, Hicks replied, "None of it."

Hicks admits that he didn't help things, though, when a disagreement last November with Liverpool manager (coach) Rafael "Rafa" Benitez turned into a public spat.

Benitez thought Hicks should be spending more money to buy players. Hicks more or less told Rafa to do a better job of coaching the ones he's got.

Fans sided with Benitez. They were inflamed further when Hicks admitted talking to Germany's Jurgen Klinsmann about the possibility of coaching Liverpool, should Benitez resign -- as he's threatened to do often, it seems, over the past 2 1/2 years.

Hicks called the talks with Klinsmann "an insurance policy." The Liverpool fans have made Rafa a martyr over the incident.

Hicks wouldn't discuss the latest rumors Tuesday, fearing that his words would only be turned around by the British press.

"It will all work itself out on Thursday," he told the Star-Telegram. "There are no problems."

A source close to the Liverpool situation said that it likely means that there will be an announcement Thursday that Hicks has secured financing for the revised new stadium. Hicks had asked both proposed architects to go back to their drafting boards and submit revised designs using more "value-engineering."

The new stadium -- the original plans were dazzling -- will allow an additional 30,000 Liverpool fans to see their beloved team.

The additional revenues would be used to pay off the stadium debt, as well as allow the club to compete with its Premier League rivals.

It isn't broken, in other words, but he is trying to "Hicks" his soccer team.

Somehow, that's been getting unfairly lost in the translation.

http://www.star-telegram.com/sports/story/426703.html

[Steve101]

We lost our very essence a long time ago:.................
you could be right there. Was it when John Smith (and more savagely Peter Robinson) were taking money from our club left right and centre? Didnt know that? must be the liverpool way then........................things are rarely as they seem, to quote someone somewhere.

[disco]

Liverpool.no has dug out this



http://www.star-telegram.com/sports/story/426703.html

Interesting balance brought by the article

Let's see what gets announced tomorrow and we can all unclench briefly and get our microscopes out.

I might even e-mail the thicks@hicks... address to get more details re. transfers if they don't go into that detail.

[rushscored4]

From what i've read the only reason the whole debt is not going on the club is down to Moores & Parry digging their heels in, but if they were ever forced out, the debt could then be dumped wholly on LFC. True or False.

As Directors of the company, Moores and Parry have probably got voting rights and could in theory veto a deal. However, it depends on the Memorandum and Articles of Association of the company as to how much power, if any, they have. I would imagine that the Co-Chairmen (Tom Hicks Snr and George Gillett) and other Directors (Tom Hicks Jnr and Foster Gillett) could out-vote Moores and Parry and remove them as Directors if necessary.

[disco]

One thing the article misses is Gillet saying that there would be no debt on the club....

.... unless of course he means now 'no debt for buying the club, but debt for buying the stadium' which is stretching the truth a bit....

[Morten_nogamst_Pedersen]

Interesting balance brought by the article

Let's see what gets announced tomorrow and we can all unclench briefly and get our microscopes out.

I might even e-mail the thicks@hicks... address to get more details re. transfers if they don't go into that detail.

Why don't you ask for a prebrefing right now. Get get our microscopes out tonite.

[machiavelli]

So tomorrow they're going to announce their refinance deal and hide it behind some nice pictures of a stadium that, at present, we can't afford?

yep

[disco]

As Directors of the company, Moores and Parry have probably got voting rights and could in theory veto a deal. However, it depends on the Memorandum and Articles of Association of the company as to how much power, if any, they have. I would imagine that the Co-Chairmen (Tom Hicks Snr and George Gillett) and other Directors (Tom Hicks Jnr and Foster Gillett) could out-vote Moores and Parry and remove them as Directors if necessary.

Agreed. But politically that would be suicide.

[disco]

Why don't you ask for a prebrefing right now. Get get our microscopes out tonite.

PaulCooper might have a hot-line through to his bum-chum Bradley, but I doubt I have his level of influence