Dubai International to make bid for Liverpool FC

[AFII]

Milky...

DIC would get us better sponsorship deals and a better price for the name of the new stadium. They have contacts all over the world.

That means that the club will be worth more.

I doubt very much that Hicks can get as good sponsorship deals as DIC.

Another point is that DIC would probably buy out the loan and place it in another bank with lower interest.

That again means that Hicks will himself save even more money.

[AFII]

In a situation like that DIC won't invets money to make Hicks rich, Hicks will have to invest his "share" or owe DIC that money with interest. It is not as easy as sitting back watching DIC do the business and then asking them for a premium afterwards.

The invest thing was maybe a little bit over the top but it would be better for Hicks but as you say, they would probably not do that.

It's 100% or nothing for them.

I only pointed it out.

[Rashid]

So what do we do with Yossi?

Dubai don't recognise the state of Israel.

Bonding sessions for all - except you Yossi


Marina Hyde
Thursday January 24, 2008
The Guardian

On Monday night in Riyadh, Manchester United lost 3-2 to a Saudi Arabian side in a "warm weather training" testimonial which apparently confirmed them as the most fashionable club in the galaxy. Meanwhile, 3,000 miles away at Anfield, Liverpool supporters were unfurling a banner reading "Yanks out, Dubai in", and later that evening Yossi Benayoun scored the first goal in the home side's draw with Aston Villa.

Many Liverpool supporters clearly believe that Dubai International Capital is the sugar daddy in shining armour who will rescue their club from the clutches of its wicked stepmonster Tom Hicks. But as this column suggested last week, others should feel immensely sceptical that being bought by the investment arm of the Dubai government will guarantee a happy ending.


Still, perhaps we should start somewhere we might all agree, and turn our thoughts to the future of "warm-weather training". Is the phrase destined to become one of the most euphemistic in football?

After all, should Liverpool end up in the hands of DIC, it is more than safe to assume that the club will spend these sojourns in Dubai, in the manner of all the other clubs already persuaded to take free trips to the emirate by way of a loss leader. Anyone wishing to take a putter to John Arne Riise will likely be obliged to do it against a backdrop of man-made archipelagoes as opposed to in the Algarve.

Anyone, that is, except a player such as Yossi Benayoun. This isn't to imply the midfielder has Bellamy tendencies, but he wouldn't be able to enjoy even a sun-kissed round of golf with Riise in Dubai, because he holds an Israeli passport. The United Arab Emirates do not recognise Israeli passports, and refuse entry to all those who hold them. Looking for a neat illustration of the political mire into which an increasingly foreign-annexed Premier League threatens to slip? Try the fact that Rafael Benítez's ability to pick his next squad for bonding could be contingent on West Bank disengagement.

Alas, any Liverpool trip to Dubai would not even represent the first time Benayoun was left behind. In 2006, when he was at West Ham, both he and fellow Israeli Yaniv Katan were unable to join the club for their warm-weather training in Dubai. Commenting wearily on how he felt about the situation, Katan said: "Sometimes the best thing is not to react." But all was not lost.

"We were keen to ensure that the benefit we believe the squad will gain from the break was enjoyed by all the players," blustered West Ham's then managing director, Paul Aldridge. "We therefore arranged a similar break for these two players in Spain."

Mmm ... ever so admirable as it was of them to make separate arrangements for their Jews, West Ham's stance could be regarded as faintly distasteful, for all their wittering about it being "a chance for the squad to bond". Are there not other warm places where a bonding session could include the entire squad?

There are, of course. Manchester United went to Saudi, as mentioned. Yet if it were just a questionable human rights records and a change of scene that was the lure, they need simply have nipped down the road to Thaksin Shinawatra's gaff and asked if they might have a kickabout at City's training ground.

That, though, would have meant missing out on a £1m-plus fee - which should keep the wolf away from Old Trafford's door - just as a different decision by Milan a couple of weeks ago would have seen the Italian church mice miss out on an all-expenses paid week in Dubai and the chance to play in something called the Emirates Challenge. Care about the score? Me neither.

No doubt we'd all pay a little more attention at some unspecified point in the future if the Gulf sunshine was beating down on a Premier League tie. Then again, you just know fearless league chief executive Richard Scudamore would fight tooth and nail to prevent such an eventuality should DIC land their prize and begin making tempting offers.

As my colleague David Conn reported yesterday, sources close to the Hicks and Gillett refinancing negotiations suggest the American businessmen's loan remains on track. So the pendulum swings between speculators who want to use Liverpool football club as a financial tool, and the arm of a state who would effectively use it as a loss leader to draw people (Benayoun etc excepted) and money into the emirate. It's one of those battles where it seems a shame to have to root for either side.

[vonk]

In a situation like that DIC won't invets money to make Hicks rich, Hicks will have to invest his "share" or owe DIC that money with interest. It is not as easy as sitting back watching DIC do the business and then asking them for a premium afterwards.

I, like many silent observers, appreciate you trying to get this info Rashid. And I hope you are right. Keep posting in good faith despite the unwarranted abuse. IF you turn out to be correct I'm sure they will be men enough to eat humble pie.

[Tom]

So what do we do with Yossi?

rotate him, we have possibilities don't we.

[dom9]

Milky...

DIC would get us better sponsorship deals and a better price for the name of the new stadium. They have contacts all over the world.

That means that the club will be worth more.

I doubt very much that Hicks can get as good sponsorship deals as DIC.

Another point is that DIC would probably buy out the loan and place it in another bank with lower interest.

That again means that Hicks will himself save even more money.

Please stop.

How on off earth can you come to any of those conclusions?

[rushscored4]

I read somewhere that if Gillet or Hicks want to sell their own share, they have to offer it to the other partner involved before offering it to outside bidders.Not sure if its correct or anything but if so its interesting.

A common clause in any 'Shareholders Agreement' of a private limited company is to offer the sale of company shares to the remaining shareholders before seeking an external buyer. This is particularly necessary on the death of a shareholder otherwise the spouse would usually get the shares rather than the business partner. I would be dumbfounded if Hicks and Gillett didn't have a 'Shareholders Agreement' in place alongside the usual Memorandum & Articles of Association.

And you lot thought I was just a pretty face...

[dom9]

A common clause in any 'Shareholders Agreement' of a private limited company is to offer the sale of company shares to the remaining shareholders before seeking an external buyer. This is particularly necessary on the death of a shareholder otherwise the spouse would usually get the shares rather than the business partner. I would be dumbfounded if Hicks and Gillett didn't have a 'Shareholders Agreement' in place alongside the usual Memorandum & Articles of Association.

And you lot thought I was just a pretty face...

Indeed.

It has been stated on numerous occasions on here that each has first option on the other one's shares.

[carrsim]

Carrism - I'm going to file that post. Unless something changes drastically over the next year or so, I can see exactly that happening. With the way things stand at present, I think you're spot on.

i just hope i'm wrong mate

[Vermilion]

Marvellous, & i was coming here to ask if there was anything in this Gillette name not mentioned thing, the above is ample reading. More to catch up on. Will this saga ever stop. It's turning into an Epic.

[Tom]

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/rangersfansagainsthicks/

As fans of the Texas Rangers, we, the undersigned, hereby petition Tom Hicks to sell the team.

We believe Tom Hicks has failed as an owner.

Hicks acquired a contender 10 years ago but his mis-management as owner and chief executive of the Rangers has left fans with a team that has placed 3rd or 4th in a 4-team division for 7 consecutive seasons, finishing with a record above .500 only once since its last division title in 1999, a season after Hicks took ownership but before his meddling ways could throw the team off track.

The team's 2007 performance shows continued decline with no hope in sight for a championship season.

As signers of this petition, we believe Tom Hicks is ruining the Texas Rangers.

Despite rising ticket, parking and concession prices, the team's salary, especially as compared to other team salaries, has disproportionately declined while the local market has rapidly grown.

The Rangers talent has been depleted under Hicks' tenure due to frequent changes amongst coaching, development and scouting personnel combined with bad trades, poor free agent signings, and bad decisions to not re-sign talented players or acquire better free agents. Hicks has left the Rangers void of the talent necessary to compete for a division title, much less a World Championship.

With all this and more in mind, we sign this petition to voice our displeasure with Tom Hicks as owner of the Texas Rangers and our insistence that he sell the team ASAP to an owner committed to winning.

[Dhav]

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/r...sagainsthicks/

Worrying. I think that proves his big words about "commitment to a winning team" are nonsensical. As long as the club is making money, he wont care if we're not winning or challenging for trophies.

[kurtangle01]

Tomorrows NOTW has a story on the back page about DIC still being interested. I assume it's from Bascombe.

[Rashid]

Yes it's from Chris B. Pretty much what he was saying last week. Nothing has changed.

[sonsofthedesert]

Tomorrows NOTW has a story on the back page about DIC still being interested. I assume it's from Bascombe.

Where have you seen the article, can you post it?