Dubai International to make bid for Liverpool FC

[Johnny]

I think the problem lies in varying definitions of what it means to "work out OK".

I agree,but the arguement depends on predictions which is essentially why we`ve had 120 pages that have confirmed nothing.

[AFII]

And I tell you what I hate about this thread? It's the high and mighty attitude of the people willing to give the Americans a chance who think they are trail blazers of some sort and look down in a patronising and condascending tone at the "mindless sheep" who actually are just concerned about the future of the club under two proven bull****ters

The key word is proven. It's a fact that they are bull****ters. No speculation. The facts are there.

Hicks previous two holding companies went bankrupt.

[Alpha]

And I tell you what I hate about this thread? It's the high and mighty attitude of the people willing to give the Americans a chance who think they are trail blazers of some sort and look down in a patronising and condascending tone at the "mindless sheep" who actually are just concerned about the future of the club under two proven bull****ters

Whatever happens, we cannot lose sight of the fact that even if our financial future is under less risk than we fear, there is no justification for the deceit or the utter disregard for the club's values.

[Sir Bob]

I think the refinancing of the loan and whether it relates to Kop holdings or LFC is irelevant because its one and the same thing.

As an example, say the interest on the loan is repaid at £25m per year and we have a poor year and make £5m profit.

Does anyone seriously believe that G&H will say ok then thats £10m each from our own money.

Or will they say, right we are £20m short, season tickets up by 15% and by the way Fernando, pack your bags son, we've just sold you to Barca.

Answers on a postcard please.

[CAD]

Well I think your ****e beggars belief actually. What money does Gillett actually have to cover a shortfall of say £17m? The man has no liquidity. So do you think good old Uncle Tom will put in the full amount? Not a chance in hell.

If they think selling a top player will cover the repayments the club cannot make, and that the team can absorb the loss of that player and still finish in the top 4, they will do it without blinking. Has Hicks ever put in any money of his own in any of his leverage buy out ventures? I'd be interested to know, but I doubt he'll do it in this case.

The club is a great club with a loyal fanbase, but it will never in a month of Sundays be worth £1bn. Talk of £1bn is insane. And as for them making a £600m investment? Can I remind you they have not invested one penny. Not one penny has left their pocket and gone in the club

Get a grip and show a bit of respect for other posters. You may well be much more financially and commercially aware than I am, but it obviously doesnt stop you posting some aggressive and exaggerated ****e.

Respect. Like the respect those of us who hasn't changed our Avatar to some demagog ****e Arab Sheik LOA clone have gotten for stating the obvious: This is standard procedure.

Liquidity? If you have assets you have liquidity. He will just have to untie a little cash then. If he has pushed his portfolio to the max he will have to sell something. If that's not possible then Gillett will just have to sell his shares - won't he? Why should that concern us? Seriously? At the most a little bump on the road. Never something that could bring LFC to it's knees.

It really doesn't matter whether you or I think 1 bill£ is insane. That's the upside they are looking at in 5 years in their opinion. I think it's pretty much spot on when the stadium is in place. What do you think Glazer could sell Scum for right now? And in 5 years? That's the model they want to emulate. Will they succeed? **** knows. They will try though.

It really doesn't matter whether the 600 mill£ was paid in cash or if they were lend in a bank. As long as we are financed it's all good. The interest in this scenario really isn't that important because the stadium will require whom ever might own us to carry LFC until it's in place. We will need funding regardless. These loans are an investment in the future. What is the problem?

If they want a 1 billion£ exit they have to keep the club competitive. It's not about being financially and commercially aware it's about commonsense. If LFC fails to pay interest and the club debts exceeds RBS and W's accepted level of credit then G&H will have to bring cash. Either cash or sell the club. So what is the problem? Debt is the issue? Why?

Wait for the summer window and see what happens. Mascher will be signed. The stadium will be build. If not G&H have lost everything and LFC will be sold to whomever has the money and vision to take us to where ever we need to go as a club and as a business. Pure and simple.

The point is if they want to make money out of this situation, either directly or by selling it on, they have to keep LFC competitive. That means that there will be money for the windows in the future. It's commonsense.

[Johnny]

I think the refinancing of the loan and whether it relates to Kop holdings or LFC is irelevant because its one and the same thing.

As an example, say the interest on the loan is repaid at £25m per year and we have a poor year and make £5m profit.

Does anyone seriously believe that G&H will say ok then thats £10m each from our own money.

Or will they say, right we are £20m short, season tickets up by 15% and by the way Fernando, pack your bags son, we've just sold you to Barca.

Answers on a postcard please.

there is a quote about 5 pages back saying that G+H have said that they will pick up the tab on extra payments the club owes.You must have read it.

[vantage]

CAD, I guess the crux of the matter for most people is this.....

They have put nothing in, except loans, which the club will need to service, and yet when offered (potentially, allegedly) a profit on their purchase they refuse to sell quoting very wildly optimistic figures.

To many here, that is simply unacceptable. Mr Parry has a lot to answer for.

[CAD]

there is a quote about 5 pages back saying that G+H have said that they will pick up the tab on extra payments the club owes.You must have read it.

The paranoia is out of bounds.

It's not about whether they want to pick up the tab or not. They just have to. If they don't they will be forced to sell shares. Or they would just lose part of the assets they have put up. The drama is ridiculous. If they shaft the club they shaft themselves.

[Alpha]

There`s nothing high and mighty about asking for some sense.You may all be right but why go nut`s until you can prove that G+H are here to **** us over.They have put us in debt which may **** the club which in turn would **** their investment.We need investment in the team to secure CL qualification to secure financial reward which will help pay their loans.In America all the teams make the same money from the Leagues and Tv deals.losing teams make as much as winning teams if the fans keep going to the games and buying merchandise.It`s not the same here,sucess on the field secures future bonuses.the Yanks MUST invest in the team to secure money from The TV deals and cup winning.They have said as much.

It's obvious that by the time anybody can prove G&H are here to **** us, it will be too late.

The main reason why the Yanks have to go isn't because they did or didn't deceive us, or because they did or didn't disrespect Rafa, or because they did or didn't saddle the club with debt, or because they did or didn't uphold the club's values.

The reason why they have to go is because whatever they did or didn't do, in doing or not doing it, they have managed to split the support for the first time in our history. This thread is one of many examples of reds who are at eachothers throats and such is the depth of feeling, I don't see how that will ever improve until G&H sell up and **** off into the sunset.

Whatever the financial circumstance, how long can this club survive such disharmony?

[Dhav]

Respect. Like the respect those of us who hasn't changed our Avatar to some demagog ****e Arab Sheik LOA clone have gotten for stating the obvious: This is standard procedure.

Liquidity? If you have assets you have liquidity. He will just have to untie a little cash then. If he has pushed his portfolio to the max he will have to sell something. If that's not possible then Gillett will just have to sell his shares - won't he? Why should that concern us? Seriously? At the most a little bump on the road. Never something that could bring LFC to it's knees.

It really doesn't matter whether you or I think 1 bill£ is insane. That's the upside they are looking at in 5 years in their opinion. I think it's pretty much spot on when the stadium is in place. What do you think Glazer could sell Scum for right now? And in 5 years? That's the model they want to emulate. Will they succeed? **** knows. They will try though.

It really doesn't matter whether the 600 mill£ was paid in cash or if they were lend in a bank. As long as we are financed it's all good. The interest in this scenario really isn't that important because the stadium will require whom ever might own us to carry LFC until it's in place. We will need funding regardless. These loans are an investment in the future. What is the problem?

If they want a 1 billion£ exit they have to keep the club competitive. It's not about being financially and commercially aware it's about commonsense. If LFC fails to pay interest and the club debts exceeds RBS and W's accepted level of credit then G&H will have to bring cash. Either cash or sell the club. So what is the problem? Debt is the issue? Why?

Wait for the summer window and see what happens. Mascher will be signed. The stadium will be build. If not G&H have lost everything and LFC will be sold to whomever has the money and vision to take us to where ever we need to go as a club and as a business. Pure and simple.

The point is if they want to make money out of this situation, either directly or by selling it on, they have to keep LFC competitive. That means that there will be money for the windows in the future. It's commonsense.

Well I have concerns that 18 months down the line they'll struggle to arrange a second tranche of lending to complete the stadium, especially if the cub underperforms both on and off the pitch. Who knows what the stadium costs will be by then (may soar, cost of materials etc).

If Gillett is forced to sell an asset to cover repayments, what's to stop him selling a club rather than personal asset? or perhaps Hicks will buy his shares and heap even more debt on to the club

[Sir Bob]

there is a quote about 5 pages back saying that G+H have said that they will pick up the tab on extra payments the club owes.You must have read it.

Yes but do you honestly believe they would do that. In your wildest dreams can you see G&H putting in their own cash if we don't make enough cash. Do you seriously think they would let Rafa or whoever's boss by then spend money on players knowing it meant they would have to meet the shortfall themselves.

Do you seriously think given the choice of selling players to raise the shortfall or paying it themselves they would choose the latter.

There is absolutely zero chance of that happening. They are here to make cash not win trophies and dipping into their own funds to meet interest payments is not on their agenda in any way shape or form.

I'm truely baffled as to how anyone could think any differently on this issue.

[Sir Bob]

The paranoia is out of bounds.

It's not about whether they want to pick up the tab or not. They just have to. If they don't they will be forced to sell shares. Or they would just lose part of the assets they have put up. The drama is ridiculous. If they shaft the club they shaft themselves.

How do they shaft themselves?

They will put up ticket prices, sell players and give the manager sweet fa to spend. If that means missing out on CL footy they will take that hit rather than spend their own cash.

They know that no matter how we do on the pitch Anfield will be full, the TV cash still keeps rolling in. Sure losing the CL money would be a blow but not as much of a blow as paying millions from their own pocket. plus they know that even if players aren't sold and the manager is given funds to spend, this guarentees nothing. they could pay the shortfall themselves, not sell players, give Rafa money to spend and still not make CL footy. What then for G&H?

Theres not a snowballs chance in hell of themletting that happen.

[Dhav]

Yes but do you honestly believe they would do that. In your wildest dreams can you see G&H putting in their own cash if we don't make enough cash. Do you seriously think they would let Rafa or whoever's boss by then spend money on players knowing it meant they would have to meet the shortfall themselves.

Do you seriously think given the choice of selling players to raise the shortfall or paying it themselves they would choose the latter.

There is absolutely zero chance of that happening. They are here to make cash not win trophies and dipping into their own funds to meet interest payments is not on their agenda in any way shape or form.

I'm truely baffled as to how anyone could think any differently on this issue.

I'm stunned as to how anyone could even consider it a possibility that they'd stump up their own cash. On the one hand we're being told that Hicks is teh leverage buy out specialist, on the other we're being told that they'll be putting their own money in. Doesn't add up in my book

[Sir Bob]

I'm stunned as to how anyone could even consider it a possibility that they'd stump up their own cash. On the one hand we're being told that Hicks is teh leverage buy out specialist, on the other we're being told that they'll be putting their own money in. Doesn't add up in my book

Couldn't agree more mate.
There's absolutely no evidence from G&H's operations in the US with their sports 'franchises' that they would put their own cash in to meet the interest payments. There's more chance of getting Ronaldo & Rooney on a Bosman in the summer.

[CAD]

CAD, I guess the crux of the matter for most people is this.....

They have put nothing in, except loans, which the club will need to service, and yet when offered (potentially, allegedly) a profit on their purchase they refuse to sell quoting very wildly optimistic figures.

To many here, that is simply unacceptable. Mr Parry has a lot to answer for.

I know that some of you think you have info of value that is not being shared. What can I say? I don't have it. I guess I'm not in the Goldclub

I think Moores has a lot to answer for but fair enough.

The DIC speculation is just that. No one really knows what has been on the table. Let's say they offered 350. Hicks thinks that they are looking at a 300mill£ upside in 5 years time - why sell? Seriously, why? I wouldn't. Debt? You never use cash for something like this because whatever cash you might have can get a much much better return elsewhere. Being bankrolled is the only thing that makes sense. I think we can agree on that.

Putting up assets for a 245mill£ loan has no value? They seem to think that it has no value.

The point is that this missing stadium has made us attractive to sharks like G&H. The real value is in starting that stadium soon. That's the major concern. I have been harping on about that stadium since the Kraptalk days.

They will have to make funds available for Mascher and the summer window. And I'm sure they will. It's simply a must and it makes good business sense when it comes to protecting their investment.

They will be forced to bring cash later to protect their investment. If they can't they will be forced to sell in which case they might as well sell now.