Dubai International to make bid for Liverpool FC

[kurtangle01]

Me too. Need to see numbers!

Fat chance. He wont even answer questions on the subject so what chance do we have of ever seeing the numbers involved?

[disco]

Fat chance. He wont even answer questions on the subject so what chance do we have of ever seeing the numbers involved?

Well, if we could get an idea of up to date (post new TV deal) revenue figures and even vague details of interest commitments, I could come up with somehting sensible...

[kurtangle01]

Well, if we could get an idea of up to date (post new TV deal) revenue figures and even vague details of interest commitments, I could come up with somehting sensible...

I'm not sure of the numbers involved with the new TV deal but surely it's not enough, along with gate receipts, to help us repay the interest and be competetive in the transfer market?

[disco]

I'm not sure of the numbers involved with the new TV deal but surely it's not enough, along with gate receipts, to help us repay the interest and be competetive in the transfer market?

Not unless they take a chuffing great loan out

[Tom]

Not unless they take a chuffing great loan out

That's the plan

[Steve101]

I heard the Tom Hicks interview on Radio 5 live on sunday morning and I could tell he wasnt telling the truth...............Really? Some clever *******s here isnt there?!!!!!!

[Tom]

No, just following the form.

[kop-al-74]

They sounded out Maureen.

That ain't no fact!

You often come on with these one liners like you know that it's fact.

[serenejim]

I heard the Tom Hicks interview on Radio 5 live on sunday morning and I could tell he wasnt telling the truth...............Really? Some clever *******s here isnt there?!!!!!!

As a senior Inland Revenue investigator (now retired ) for thirty years I learned vast amounts about dodgy businesses and businessmen. I've met literally hundreds of them. It took me nanoseconds to know when I was being lied to and how deep the bull**** pile was. I can unhesitatingly say that Hicks was not telling the whole truth about questions he answered and he was swerving away from directly answering questions where he knew the truth would be shall we say "inconvenient". If I could be arsed-and I presently can't-I could go through and analyse his answers and tell you what is truth, what is half truth, what is not true, what he is avoiding answering and how and why he is doing this.Bribe me sufficiently and I may.

[Alpha]

As a senior Inland Revenue investigator (now retired ) for thirty years I learned vast amounts about dodgy businesses and businessmen. I've met literally hundreds of them. It took me nanoseconds to know when I was being lied to and how deep the bull**** pile was. I can unhesitatingly say that Hicks was not telling the whole truth about questions he answered and he was swerving away from directly answering questions where he knew the truth would be shall we say "inconvenient". If I could be arsed-and I presently can't-I could go through and analyse his answers and tell you what is truth, what is half truth, what is not true, what he is avoiding answering and how and why he is doing this.Bribe me sufficiently and I may.

I'll give you one and and now.

And you can have the same again upon delivery.

[Ataturk]

As a senior Inland Revenue investigator (now retired ) for thirty years I learned vast amounts about dodgy businesses and businessmen. I've met literally hundreds of them. It took me nanoseconds to know when I was being lied to and how deep the bull**** pile was. I can unhesitatingly say that Hicks was not telling the whole truth about questions he answered and he was swerving away from directly answering questions where he knew the truth would be shall we say "inconvenient". If I could be arsed-and I presently can't-I could go through and analyse his answers and tell you what is truth, what is half truth, what is not true, what he is avoiding answering and how and why he is doing this.Bribe me sufficiently and I may.

i got the impression that once he had said what he wanted to say in that interview he wasnt interested in answering any further questions and responded to following questions with one word answers, yes, no, maybe, alright etc...

he didnt come across as being in the slightest bit sincere.

[jrd7]

I think the thing is I'm not as worried by the debt as some. It is how we run while servicing the debt that concerns me and their undermining of the manager. Arsenal had/have a load of debt as do United but they appear at least at face value to be managing it well.

Arsenal have really tightened the belts for the last few years and will now reap the benefits from here on in. That's what their 250 million loan was for. Our 200-300 million loan is for those ****ers to buy us. We've still got another 300 to find.
United already have had 70000+ crowds for years, and they over power our yearly earnings.

They were stitched up and are now paying for the Glazers to own them. Most of their profits are paying off £50mil yearly interest. A couple of non CL qual and they're ****ed - even with all the cash they are already earning, not projected earnings.

[AFII]

Arsenal only had the stadium to finance.

G&H have the club and the stadium. That is a massive difference.

[kurtangle01]

Not unless they take a chuffing great loan out

That's a major worry. If we go down that route...well, I don't even want to finish that sentence.

[dww]

Arsenal have really tightened the belts for the last few years and will now reap the benefits from here on in. That's what their 250 million loan was for. Our 200-300 million loan is for those ****ers to buy us. We've still got another 300 to find.
United already have had 70000+ crowds for years, and they over power our yearly earnings.

They were stitched up and are now paying for the Glazers to own them. Most of their profits are paying off £50mil yearly interest. A couple of non CL qual and they're ****ed - even with all the cash they are already earning, not projected earnings.

Arsenal only had the stadium to finance.

G&H have the club and the stadium. That is a massive difference.

The thing about the Arsenal thing is that the project cost ~£410m with loans being taken out for over £350m if people I have talked to are believed but with solid sources of incomes such as the Highbury housing project making it look less risky and making some of loans appear to not be 'on' Arsenal as it appears is the phrase these days (whether it was appears to be a matter of conjecture).

I haven't heard anyone talk about what is happening with the ground Anfield used to be on, any possibility of naming rights on a distinctive stadium for one of the worlds biggest teams or anything else.

Who ever took us on (including DIC) was always going to look to get the purchase cost back. Most companies feel that loans are the most cost effective way of doing this sort of thing as far as I can tell. Therefore I don't really see what else any one was expecting. It has always been a financial gamble and I think people are only now really realising this.

I'm no big fan of G&H but I do need to be persuaded that any one else would have taken us over on vastly different terms. I think there are valid questions about the way they presented things and questions of honesty and about their lack of understanding of football which are far more valid IMO than some of those being asked about the debt.

Although obviously if they are deceitful arseholes with no real plan for the club long term other than make a big fat stadium then any debt under their stewardship is too much debt.