DIC latest - the largely wild speculation thread

[kop-al-74]

Shouldn't Gillette feel as though he should at least come out and explain his view point?

[baz87]

I dont think Parry and Moores will come into it. But the quote which worries me is the bit about fixing it. I hope Bascombe has more on this and Barrett tomoz cause The way i read it was he has a new partner.

Parry and Moores play a bigger role than people think. As seen with the refinance, the board vote on matters of importance. The shareholders decide who's on the board though. Now if DIC get 50% then Hicks wouldn't be able to get rid of Parry without their say so. So like i said above in DIC had the support of Parry then there would be little that Hicks could do about anything without DIC agreeing to it, which is why i suspect that providing DIC get Gillett's shares then it will only be a matter of time before Hicks sells (unless DIC are happy only having 50%).

The only thing of concern would be if Hicks finds a way of buying Gillett out.

[Sarb]

Thats put me right off my tea!!!

And he swallows

[kris90210]

What a total ****ing mess.

The guy blantently doesnt give a flying **** about what we say or do. This should never have been allowed to happen in the first place - DIC were there and we ****ed them off for these two. Absolutely sickening.

[marcus50bucks]

BBC Radio 5 Live football correspondent Jonathan Legard said: "Hicks's response has been typically robust - he's claimed reports that he was about to sell up have been planted in the UK media by parties with their own self-interested agenda.

"He again stated his commitment to the Anfield club personally, professionally and financially but if you read his statement it makes no mention at all of any negotiations over the club and as I understand it those talks are continuing with DIC, the Dubai based consortium.

"There is no hint yet of the consortium being allowed to assess the accounts, let alone make an offer.

"I'm also told that a potential deal with George Gillett, Hicks's disaffected partner is not quite as straightforward as it seems because of an agreement between the pair that allows the other first refusal. So it looks like DIC could be waiting some time yet to achieve their Anfield takeover at the second attempt.

[Sarb]

Hicks wants as much money as possible and in an ideal world wants to be partners with DIC 50/50 - and this is what DIC don't want - just my opinion.

What do you think to the latest comments? Seems to indicate that he's looking to buy out gillett and is almost there.

Bascombe saying anything else?

[Sarb]

BBC Radio 5 Live football correspondent Jonathan Legard said: "Hicks's response has been typically robust - he's claimed reports that he was about to sell up have been planted in the UK media by parties with their own self-interested agenda.

"He again stated his commitment to the Anfield club personally, professionally and financially but if you read his statement it makes no mention at all of any negotiations over the club and as I understand it those talks are continuing with DIC, the Dubai based consortium.

"There is no hint yet of the consortium being allowed to assess the accounts, let alone make an offer.

"I'm also told that a potential deal with George Gillett, Hicks's disaffected partner is not quite as straightforward as it seems because of an agreement between the pair that allows the other first refusal. So it looks like DIC could be waiting some time yet to achieve their Anfield takeover at the second attempt.

Oh dear. Looks like it's true

[sinbad]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/foot...ol/7269910.stm

All this mutha****ing pig faced goathumper is going to fix is the most profitable route out of the club.

[El Jefecito]

Don't pay any attention to what Hicks has came out with. When he says Gillett requires his consent, all he's reffering to is that he has first refusal on his shares.
If Hicks can't/won't buy Gillett's shares (which he can't or won't) then he cannot stop Gillett selling to DIC. Also providing that DIC have the backing of Moores and Parry then even without selling any of his shares Hicks' will not have control as Parry, Moores and DIC would be able to out vote him.

How can you be so sure. Hicks is the best leveraged buy-out guy in the world. I wouldn't be suprised if he has negoitated that.

[Steve101]

And he swallows

Right thats enough...mods...MODS......MODS...stop this!!!

[MattB]

Shouldn't Gillette feel as though he should at least come out and explain his view point?

Whatever is going on behind the scenes, Gillett must be bound by some kind of confidentiality agreement. That is the only possible reason I can see for his continued silence.

If he doesn't respond to this, I'll be 100% convinced of that.

What we don't know is who has asked him to abide by an NDA. Judging by the provocation in those quotes from Hicks, I'd guess it was DIC.

What that means in terms of any deal, I don't know.

[El Jefecito]

What a total ****ing mess.

The guy blantently doesnt give a flying **** about what we say or do. This should never have been allowed to happen in the first place - DIC were there and we ****ed them off for these two. Absolutely sickening.

The odd thing though is that DIC walked away when we upped the price a litle bit yet they are now prepared to pay well over the odds. If only they'd paid up then.

[wishiwasascouser]

Could Hicks be trying to be annoying as possible so DIC think "We don't want to be associated with someone like that" and pull out, leaving Hicks with a different partner...

[MattB]

Smacks of posturing to me. Those quotes are aimed at someone and are very light on detail. Fixing what and how?

I think he is just trying to strengthen his position by hinting that he has more than one option as a buyer

[Imy]

The odd thing though is that DIC walked away when we upped the price a litle bit yet they are now prepared to pay well over the odds. If only they'd paid up then.

No they pulled out because they felt they were being ****ed over by the greedy Moores and his gimp Parry.