DIC latest - the largely wild speculation thread

[Vermilion]

To be fair it's the showboating bitch Staveley that has been all over the press, briefing, leaking, making assertions that aren't true, interviewing to enhance her personal profile in the media.

Imagine putting an amateur like her up against someone as hard core as Hicks. She failed us.

Could it not be Hicks who released the letter etc, to make Stavely/Dic look bad, ready for today. Dic did after all deny leaking any letter. Just a thought.

Hicks is after all a cheating deceitful prick. He would know how fans would feel if he knocked back Dic, could be he was just preparing the ground.

[NICKZS]

the 90 days would/should start from when gillet informs hicks and kop holdings of his wishes to sell, thus allowing hicks 90 days to make an exceptable offer ftom that date.

Is the veto option the same as this though? Or is it a separate condition?

This is a ****ing mess of a situation.

[MrMichael]

to be honest MrMichael. Some of the comments on here and no doubt some of the emails that will be sent to Hicks are an embarrassment to our club.

Perhaps we should just see what happens in the coming weeks before lowering ourselves any further.

Just a little bit of dignity is never a bad thing. Walk through the storm with your head held high and all that.

[Kev_81]

Is the veto option the same as this though? Or is it a separate condition?

This is a ****ing mess of a situation.

If DIC made a offer for Gillet's shares in writing then i'm sure Hicks now knows what he needs, Gillet was holding out for as much as possible last week, if the offer was only informal then couldn't DIC offer Gillet really silly money that Hicks could not match and just wait ?

[pezzzer]

Could it be that the 90 days begin when Hicks use his veto to block a sale?

proberbly mate, that would be hicks's option when he is informed by kop holdings of gg's wish to sell.

he can choose to do nothing, as there not his shares or he can use his veto and start the 90 day period.

[mersey86]

Just a little bit of dignity is never a bad thing. Walk through the storm with your head held high and all that.

I always do that at times like these. Then people might think its raindrops on my face rather than think I'm crying like a girl.

[Vermilion]

If DIC made a offer for Gillet's shares in writing then i'm sure Hicks now knows what he needs, Gillet was holding out for as much as possible last week, if the offer was only informal then couldn't DIC offer Gillet really silly money that Hicks could not match and just wait ?

I know what you mean, or hope, but if there was ANY way for Dic to this easier surely they would have, that makes me think Hicks is watertight in all this fiasco,
he knows it too, & i also believe Dic do too, otherwise why not just use all their 'power' & business 'expertise' to just MAKE him sell, or force him to accept them as parteners. Its BAD.

[NICKZS]

If DIC made a offer for Gillet's shares in writing then i'm sure Hicks now knows what he needs, Gillet was holding out for as much as possible last week, if the offer was only informal then couldn't DIC offer Gillet really silly money that Hicks could not match and just wait ?

Unfortunately, I don't know. What really interests me are the actual details of the veto; is it an unequivocal choice of either shareholder to decline the other's sale depending on whether they believe the buyer is suitable? Or does it link to the period of exclusivity, whereby Hicks can veto the deal on the basis that he still wants more time to weight up his options/see if he can raise the necessary capital to purchase Gillett's shares within that time-frame?

It's quite depressing when you are awaiting tomorrow not only because of a key European tie, but to see whether there is any news in the Echo regarding the situation with the club's owners. An absolute mess.

[dww]

Two things dont make sense with his statement.

Why would he have a problem with decisions being made by committee? Isnt that the same as a board of directors? Isn't that what we have now? Does this suggest that Hicks doesnt want one as with the current and potential future members he wont get to get his decisions through. He wants to be number 1 and key decision maker.

In his experience of sports it doesnt work? This surprises me because he hasnt been ultra successful in anything on the sports front to know if that is the case, he goes through Hicks Holdings and so wouldnt be subject to a committee. If he looks at footy in general the decisions are usually makde by a group of people rather than one. Barca are incredibly successful through making decision via committee.

I hope this is more BS from Hicks, he is severely disliked, even I feel by those who feel he has done nothing wrong on a team funding front. The time is ripe for those involved in the proceedings to help increase the heat on Hicks. ie Gillett to say he wants to sell to DIC if that is the case and why, Moores if he feels he has messed up and Parry as well.

I think DIC wont stay around for much longer if they are treated like dirt, then again, I hope they are ready for the battle.

I agree with you about the low amount of successful sports experience that Hicks has but I do think there is something in what he is saying. In that you can't have two groups who have potentially divergent interests involved as main shareholders.

In the cases of places like Arsenal and Barcelona a larger group works as all are supporters first and are willing to back their judgments with money and are not expecting necessarily to see a return on it on any particular time scale (even if by good long term planning they have done). With DIC/Hicks both might have very different strategies and it will be extremely hard to get agreement to back the opposing parties which results in a deadlock and nothing good coming out of it.

I'm not so sure that DIC are the white knights everyone else seems to believe but if we are to be successfully run I think whether it be by Hicks or DIC we need to have only one of those two groups at the helm. I'd prefer DIC after the lies of Hicks and the fact that he seems to have no obvious plan to improve our debt situation which seems a big risk but in the end I just want to be run with a stable ownership and a firm idea of how to take us forward.

[Kev_81]

Hicks terminates talks with Dubai group interested in Liverpool stake
Posted 45m ago | Comment | Recommend E-mail | Save | Print |
By Rob Harris, Associated Press Writer

MANCHESTER, England — Liverpool co-owner Tom Hicks said Monday he had ended talks with Dubai International Capital, which has been negotiating to buy most of co-owner George Gillett's 50 percent stake.
"DIC made it clear that if they invested in the club, they would want it to be managed by committee," Hicks said in a statement.

DIC made no official comment, but a person close to the bid said the company is looking at weaknesses in Hicks' power of veto over Gillett's ability to sell. The person spoke of condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation.

Hicks, who also owns baseball's Texas Rangers and the NHL's Dallas Stars, has been trying to ensure DIC wouldn't use its financial muscle to force him out of Anfield. DIC insisted on being given an influential role at Anfield when negotiators met Monday with Casey Shilts, the chief operating officer at Hicks Sports Group, and Hicks' son, Mack.

"Based on my 13 years of successful experience as an owner of professional sports teams, and based in particular on the situation at Liverpool Football Club over the past year, it is clear to me that such a committee approach would not be in the best interest of Kop, of the club or of the club's loyal and passionate supporters," Hicks said. "Accordingly, I have decided to exercise my right under the Kop Football (Holdings) Limited partnership agreement to veto any sale of any portion of Kop and the club to DIC."

FIND MORE STORIES IN: Texas Rangers | Premier League | Champions League | Reds | Dallas Stars | Inter Milan | Tom Hicks | Mack | Anfield | Dubai International Capital | Liverpool Football Club | Kop
Kop Football, named after the section at Anfield favored by the most fervent fans, is the holding company headed by Hicks and Gillett.

"I and my colleagues and representatives will continue to explore a number of other options with regard to the ownership of Kop and the club aimed at achieving an appropriate ownership, financial and organizational structure for Kop and the club over the long term," Hicks said.

Hicks has been looking into buying Gillett's stake by raising private equity through investment banker JP Morgan Chase & Co., possibly by selling equity in the Hicks Sports Group.

Liverpool manager Rafa Benitez is confident players won't be distracted by the turmoil. Liverpool tries to become the fourth English team to reach the quarterfinals of the Champions League when it plays at Internazionale of Milan on Tuesday with a 2-0 lead from the first leg.

"My reaction to this news is to concentrate on my side scoring goals to beat Inter Milan," Benitez said. "We are thinking only about the game."

The Associated Press

Anyone got any straws

[pezzzer]

If DIC made a offer for Gillet's shares in writing then i'm sure Hicks now knows what he needs, Gillet was holding out for as much as possible last week, if the offer was only informal then couldn't DIC offer Gillet really silly money that Hicks could not match and just wait ?

yep and that is why they can afford to be a bit smug, hicks seethingly knows this

[StevieJ]

Just as we are demanding 'Hicks Out', maybe we should also be demanding DIC tell us how they intend to run the club. Some people are making educated guesses and others just speculating wildly as to what life would be like under DIC ownership, but I have not yet seen any kind of quote or evidence that indicates what their plans are.

They may want to ensure we are the best funded team in the league and use us to show off what Dubai stands for. Equally they may use a very similar model to Hicks with moderate investment in the playing staff but planning on making the big money from a sale a few years down the line once the stadium is built.

What if Hicks has convinced a number of other investors to join him, who combined would be prepared to spend just as much (or more) money as DIC, extended Rafa's contract and get the stadium built? What if he has learnt a few lessons from the last few months and really has decided that backing Rafa is his best policy? Hicks has certainly lied but mainly about his dealings with DIC. This may be easier to understand if you assume his position is one of trying to fend off a hostile takeover. I have not forgotten about the initial statements that got him into this mess, but his stance since then has been consistent regarding Rafa and he has always maintained he is not willing to sell or relinquish any control. In this I believe him. On anything else I would not.

The fact is that once DM sold out, we were always just a commodity to be traded and used to make money. GG & TH fell out over the running of the club and on how to finance it which led to some pretty serious problems. Had they been united in their strategy for the club we may still have been singing their praises.

[Sarb]

Just as we are demanding 'Hicks Out', maybe we should also be demanding DIC tell us how they intend to run the club. Some people are making educated guesses and others just speculating wildly as to what life would be like under DIC ownership, but I have not yet seen any kind of quote or evidence that indicates what their plans are.

They may want to ensure we are the best funded team in the league and use us to show off what Dubai stands for. Equally they may use a very similar model to Hicks with moderate investment in the playing staff but planning on making the big money from a sale a few years down the line once the stadium is built.

What if Hicks has convinced a number of other investors to join him, who combined would be prepared to spend just as much (or more) money as DIC, extended Rafa's contract and get the stadium built? What if he has learnt a few lessons from the last few months and really has decided that backing Rafa is his best policy? Hicks has certainly lied but mainly about his dealings with DIC. This may be easier to understand if you assume his position is one of trying to fend off a hostile takeover. I have not forgotten about the initial statements that got him into this mess, but his stance since then has been consistent regarding Rafa and he has always maintained he is not willing to sell or relinquish any control. In this I believe him. On anything else I would not.

The fact is that once DM sold out, we were always just a commodity to be traded and used to make money. GG & TH fell out over the running of the club and on how to finance it which led to some pretty serious problems. Had they been united in their strategy for the club we may still have been singing their praises.

He's lied about plenty more than that mate. Don't know where you've been. Personally (can't speak for others on this site) I don't want DIC because they are owned by the 5th richest person in the World.

The main reason for wanting a takeover was to take the team and the club to the top level (on the field and in marketing etc). However, the last year has been an absolute joke. They said they weren't following a Glazer model, yet their model is even worse than that.

The club is saddled with unbelievable amounts of debt it's shocking. DIC should be our owners now. So what if they took a long time over Due Diligence...it was better than doing it in a week or so like Gillett and then ****ing up after.

Al Ansari shone out because he was one of us. Comes to the games, was a Liverpool fan. Took time out to talk to Gerrard, Rafa and Carragher and explain their plans. Even Gerrard and Carra spoke highly of DIC

I'm sorry, but there is no comparison between Hicks and DIC. Hicks has ****ed up time and again and shown he doesn't care about the club. All this **** going on the evening before we play Inter is a joke and he shows how little he cares about the club.

The sooner Hicks gets out the better. I hope the Sheikh ****s him up big time now and doesn't even leave the cock with 51%. As the Yanks would say, smoke Hicks' motherf*cking boots

[Craig_H]

the 90 days would/should start from when gillet informs hicks and kop holdings of his wishes to sell, thus allowing hicks 90 days to make an exceptable offer ftom that date.

Fair play then, if that's true, it clears up the confusion.

[Craig_H]

I think we're missing a trick here...we have a scanned copy of a letter with Hicks' signature on it.

Surely some of you photoshop wizards should already be putting together a fake letter of agreement to sell, with....ding ding ding ding....Hicks' signature at the bottom...

This could be sorted within hours if you lot pulled your fingers out.