Dubai International to make bid for Liverpool FC

[MattB]

What I mean is that if his plan involves that the club will go down the drain to make as big profit as he can then he will follow that plan.

If there is a way of buying something, running it into the ground and selling on for a massive profit, I'd like to know what it is.

You should see my car

[Rowan]

I don't think we will spend £45m net the next two years if G&H stays. It will be a lot selling before buying.

AF, I don't really object to a sell to buy arguement per se in our current situation. I believe we have a lot of players who can only be classed as disposable, or at least below the necessary standard and if I was an owner, regardless of G+H/ DIC Fans utd then I would be saying to Rafa "ok you want a striker.Well you have 4 in the first team squad on (I would imagine) high wages. You need to get some of them shipped out before you bring in replacements."

However i do appreciate the point you are trying to make and if the point was if you want to spend £10 mil then you must make £10 then I would be worried. We don't need like for like we need better but we still need to sell.

[AFII]

AF, I don't really object to a sell to buy arguement per se in our current situation. I believe we have a lot of players who can only be classed as disposable, or at least below the necessary standard and if I was an owner, regardless of G+H/ DIC Fans utd then I would be saying to Rafa "ok you want a striker.Well you have 4 in the first team squad on (I would imagine) high wages. You need to get some of them shipped out before you bring in replacements."

However i do appreciate the point you are trying to make and if the point was if you want to spend £10 mil then you must make £10 then I would be worried. We don't need like for like we need better but we still need to sell.

That's my point. I think Rafa's(if he stays)transfer budget will be more or less zero. I may get my wish that I want more of our young players to get a chance but not in the way I wanted it.

That they get a chance because we can't compete in the transfer market.

[1 True Red]

That's my point. I think Rafa's(if he stays)transfer budget will be more or less zero. I may get my wish that I want more of our young players to get a chance but not in the way I wanted it.

That they get a chance because we can't compete in the transfer market.

Thats why i want the fookin yanks out asap, wether its us the fans, dic or someone else that takes over from those two clowns, it can't possibly get any worse can it eh

[Fowler_God]

The hypocrisy in this thread from some people is shocking. (naming no names)

On one hand they say 'wait and see' until the summer is over what Hicks and Gillette do, yet with the same breath think Rafa should be sacked because we dont currently occupy a champions league place!

The fact about Hicks and Gillette is that we have already 'waited and seen' for a year now. Its not like they bought the club last week and we are shouting them out of town already.
We have seen for ourselves how they operate. They promise things (substantial transfer funds, stadiums being built straight away, manager support) and deliver nothing.

A year ago when Moores was running the club we had a debt of £45m, annual transfer budget of around £20-25mill and a stadium that was on the drawing board. We also had the dignity of being run in a way which was 'the Liverpool way'

Now we have a club with a debt of £300m (which ever way you want to sugar coat it, its £300m), annual transfer budget of £20-25mill (paid for by a loan) and a stadium on the drawing board. We also have all dignity stripped from the club and the managers position being whored about.

[Alpha]

The hypocrisy in this thread from some people is shocking. (naming no names)

On one hand they say 'wait and see' until the summer is over what Hicks and Gillette do, yet with the same breath think Rafa should be sacked because we dont currently occupy a champions league place!

The fact about Hicks and Gillette is that we have already 'waited and seen' for a year now. Its not like they bought the club last week and we are shouting them out of town already.
We have seen for ourselves how they operate. They promise things (substantial transfer funds, stadiums being built straight away, manager support) and deliver nothing.

A year ago when Moores was running the club we had a debt of £45m, annual transfer budget of around £20-25mill and a stadium that was on the drawing board. We also had the dignity of being run in a way which was 'the Liverpool way'

Now we have a club with a debt of £300m (which ever way you want to sugar coat it, its £300m), annual transfer budget of £20-25mill (paid for by a loan) and a stadium on the drawing board. We also have all dignity stripped from the club and the managers position being whored about.

The actions of Gillett and Hicks have split our club from the top downwards.

To those who want to "wait and see", I would like to know how, given the bitter opposition Hicks and Gillett face, this club will ever return to anything close to normal as long as they remain in control? to "wait and see" is futile because even if we win number 19 next year, it won't change the fact they bought the club under false pretences and there will always be an element who consider that to be unforgivable.

Whether you believe the Americans are deceitful *******s or just misunderstood businessmen doesn't matter. What does matter is that, intentionally or not, they are the root of our instability and that is why they must go at whatever cost.

[Neil Young]

Do you really think Hicks care that much if it will be more unrest?

The ONLY thing he cares about is to make as big profit he can before he sell us. If the club goes down the drain at the same won't matter a little bit for him.

Yes. That's it. Anyone who thinks Hicks gives a sh*t about anything else is kidding themselves.



He's also not necessarily in it for the long haul so the idea that he's going to invest time and money in the club in order to maximise potential profit at some unspecified point in the distant future is also equally fanciful.

[MattB]

Yes. That's it. Anyone who thinks Hicks gives a sh*t about anything else is kidding themselves.



He's also not necessarily in it for the long haul so the idea that he's going to invest time and money in the club in order to maximise potential profit at some unspecified point in the distant future is also equally fanciful.

I don't think anyone could dispute that. However, equally, he is not going to do anything to deliberately minimise the value of his investments either.

As far as he is concerned, brand loyalty not winning are vital to getting his return - in selling the club on he would essentially be selling us and our willingness to put money in the coffers both directly (gate, merchandise etc) and indirectly (TV money, sponsorship etc). Ultimately, that is about winning over hearts and minds with stuff like stadium/mascherano etc.

Judging by some of the comments on a variety of forums, it appears to be working

[tomasjj]

That is a fair point.

it is also borrowed money

[Neil Young]

I don't think anyone could dispute that. However, equally, he is not going to do anything to deliberately minimise the value of his investments either.

As far as he is concerned, brand loyalty not winning are vital to getting his return - in selling the club on he would essentially be selling us and our willingness to put money in the coffers both directly (gate, merchandise etc) and indirectly (TV money, sponsorship etc). Ultimately, that is about winning over hearts and minds with stuff like stadium/mascherano etc.

Judging by some of the comments on a variety of forums, it appears to be working

I'd like to think you're right but that's not really how it works IMO.

Sometimes it's more profitable to break up a company than to keep it going. It's perfectly possible that could happen to LFC.

As for the supporters, everyone knows enough of us will carry on spending no matter what. Remember what Douglas Hall and Fat Freddie said about Newcastle fans? It is nothing like brand loyalty to Weetabix or any other commodity.

[MattB]

I'd like to think you're right but that's not really how it works IMO.

Sometimes it's more profitable to break up a company than to keep it going. It's perfectly possible that could happen to LFC. It is nothing like brand loyalty to Weetabix or any other commodity.

As for the supporters, everyone knows enough of us will carry on spending no matter what. Remember what Douglas Hall and Fat Freddie said about Newcastle fans?

As far as breaking it up goes - the debt on the club and Krock Holdings is greater than its total asset value, so I doubt that would stack up. And loyalty to a football club is 100 times stronger than to a breakfast cereal brand - don't see many weetabix forums out there

[Neil Young]

As far as breaking it up goes - the debt on the club and Krock Holdings is greater than its total asset value, so I doubt that would stack up. And loyalty to a football club is 100 times stronger than to a breakfast cereal brand - don't see many weetabix forums out there

I know it's nothing like brand loyalty to anything else - that was precisely my point. Hicks can f*ck the club over (just like he has every other franchise he's owned) and we'll keep coming back for more.

[MattB]

I know it's nothing like brand loyalty to anything else - that was precisely my point. Hicks can f*ck the club over (just like he has every other franchise he's owned) and we'll keep coming back for more.

We will, but will his precious 'untapped Asian market?' Massive generalisation i know, but i'd argue that a winning team gets more important to loyalty the further away you get (geographically)

[Neil Young]

We will, but will his precious 'untapped Asian market?' Massive generalisation i know, but i'd argue that a winning team gets more important to loyalty the further away you get (geographically)

How much money do Man United make in Asia? It's about TV rights rather than merchandise there.

Besides this is all speculation. The point is that capitalists like Hicks don't get rich by being sentimental about their investments. If they can make a quick guaranteed profit they often will, even if that means sacrificing the chance of greater profit in the future. And they don't care what they leave behind when they walk away.

I'm not saying it will happen but I think it's a strong possibility. All it takes is a couple of bad decisions - like firing Rafa and replacing him with someone inept and taking out a massive loan which the club can't service.

[MattB]

How much money do Man United make in Asia? It's about TV rights rather than merchandise there.

Besides this is all speculation. The point is that capitalists like Hicks don't get rich by being sentimental about their investments. If they can make a quick guaranteed profit they often will, even if that means sacrificing the chance of greater profit in the future. And they don't care what they leave behind when they walk away.

I'm not saying it will happen but I think it's a strong possibility. All it takes is a couple of bad decisions - like firing Rafa and replacing him with someone inept and taking out a massive loan which the club can't service.

I think we are pretty much arguing the same point, and I don't disagree with anything you just said. Worth bearing in mind though that the value of the club is largely dictated by the size of its fan base - that is what we sell to sponsors and it is what TV companies buy, and then sell to advertisers. My gut feeling is that Hicks believes he can increase the value of the club on that basis, without necessarily winning stuff. That is where I think he is wrong over the long term, which might suggest that those rumours of stadium plans and refinancing being designed to increase the value on the short term, and therefore being part of a short term exit strategy, are not far from the truth.

**** it. Who know's?