DIC latest - the largely wild speculation thread

[Vermilion]

Hicks will be the one that will have the final say in everything so DIC wouldn't be able to invest a lot of capital and diluting Hicks shares if Hicks don't agree with it.

It's confusing, i just never thought they would agree to this, could it just be a precursor to Hicks selling the 51% for a Fortune. Although he has insisted all along HE would retain CONTROL.

Sickening thought your above point, that Dic wouldn't be able to invest a lot of capital, the thought of them having the $$$$$ to buy players & not being able to do it, Just because that Fat Cunt was sat there. Part of the Club. Like a CURSE.

[blacky]

Hicks will be the one that will have the final say in everything so DIC wouldn't be able to invest a lot of capital and diluting Hicks shares if Hicks don't agree with it.

How will that work though? At the moment Hicks has 2 seats and Gillette has 2 with RP and DM making up a 6 man board (corect me if I am wrong). Lets say Hicks asks for an extra seat because of his majority stake this would mean examples:

7 man board - Hicks 3, DIC 2, RP and DM (temporarily)
6 man board - Hicks 2, DIC 2, RP and DM

You get the jist. If DIC get RP and DM onboard can they veto hicks stadium loans in 18 months, can they veto club profits servicing the loan, can they invest capital and dilute his shares? does anyone know enough about this sort of thing to shed some light on the possibilities?

[AFII]

Parry and Moores will probably be sacked.

[Diego]

Hicks will be the one that will have the final say in everything so DIC wouldn't be able to invest a lot of capital and diluting Hicks shares if Hicks don't agree with it.

don't know if that is the case there have been a few reports claiming a loophole witch prevents him stopping the deal...

[blacky]

Parry and Moores will probably be sacked.

Eventually I'm sure but while a power struggle takes place I can't see Hicks or DIC wanting them out.

[Imy]

Parry and Moores will probably be sacked.

The slimey ******* Parry will look after himself, i doubt he'll lose his job, won't be surprised if Moores walks.

[Dhav]

Eventually I'm sure but while a power struggle takes place I can't see Hicks or DIC wanting them out.

My corporate governance knowledge is a bit on the wane, but what percentage of the shares will Hicks need to resolve to remove/appoint directors? Is it a simple majority or 75%?

[Vermilion]

How will that work though? At the moment Hicks has 2 seats and Gillette has 2 with RP and DM making up a 6 man board (corect me if I am wrong). Lets say Hicks asks for an extra seat because of his majority stake this would mean examples:

7 man board - Hicks 3, DIC 2, RP and DM (temporarily)
6 man board - Hicks 2, DIC 2, RP and DM

You get the jist. If DIC get RP and DM onboard can they veto hicks stadium loans in 18 months, can they veto club profits servicing the loan, can they invest capital and dilute his shares? does anyone know enough about this sort of thing to shed some light on the possibilities?

If they could do the any of the above, veto stadium, profits servicing loans, would Hicks not know this, if he CAN be forced out somehow once DIC buy 49%, Surely he knows this.

Why not take a huge profit now, Dic are obviously willing to pay Handsomly for TOTAL CONTROL, why stay if it's possible for him to be forcibly (in a financial way) removed.

[The_weatherman]

Lets boycott holidays to Dubai and staying at the Burj Al Arab.

Hit the shieks in the wallet until they buy us

I am starting the boycott right now - they won't now what hit them

[pezzzer]

looking back on the week though at least we now know for sure dic are in for us, no more of that due dilligance **** going on,

i didnt think h and g owned 100% anyway, i thought that a couple of board members had a share of 2% or something, but i could be wrong

[Vermilion]

looking back on the week though at least we now know for sure dic are in for us, no more of that due dilligance **** going on,

i didnt think h and g owned 100% anyway, i thought that a couple of board members had a share of 2% or something, but i could be wrong

You must surely be wrong, if there was a handy 2% hanging about we'd know by now surely. That would be the Holy Grail of %'s. For Dic & Us Anyway.

[AFII]

It could also of course just be that DIC will buy Hicks out when the stadium is finished for around £400m. His 51% would probably be worth that by then.

Then it wouldn't look like DIC are paying over the market price for the club and Hicks would get his massive profit.

Hicks would also still keep his business friends in the stadium project happy.

[barnes10]

i think its a non story.

gillett and hicks each own 49.8% so i think the press are making up this majority bull**** just because technically speaking, if DIC buy out gillett, they haven't quite got 50%.

The second side of things is all this PR twists and turns is about making sure both sides 'look good' and tough negotiators etc. i just cannot see where hicks' powerbase lies at the club if gillett wants out.

[Fowler_God]

Nicked from Rawk.

They deffo know how to build things

http://www.iai-banten.org/2008/02/23/dubai-1990-now/

[AFII]

Tom Hicks to fly into UK for talks with Dubai bidders
Mar 6 2008

Tom Hicks is expected in London early next week to discuss the future of Liverpool with Dubai International Capital.

The club’s co-owner has been in a stand-off with DIC all week over their attempts to buy Liverpool for £400million.

He is believed to have assured Amanda Staveley, DIC’s chief negotiator in the UK, that he will be prepared to talk business at the same time as Liverpool will be in Italy preparing for their Champions League showdown with Inter Milan.

By the time Liverpool return from the San Siro, the future ownership of the club could be known - and a DIC source said: “We are in the end zone.”

DIC is the financial arm of Dubai’s ruler Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, and Staveley reports directly to him and chief executive Sameer Al Ansari - a lifelong Liverpool fan who has been the driving force behind two attempts to buy the club.

DIC have been encouraged today by claims that Hicks has agreed not to block the sale of his co-owner George Gillett’s 50% holding.

Hicks has also intimated he is still not prepared to sell any of his stake - but DIC appear prepared to go with that suggestion, for now at least.

The source said: “To accommodate a deal, DIC, within reason, would accept certain agreements.

“It looks as if we are in the home straight. A deal involving both parties could be imminent.”

After a week of constant cross-Atlantic negotiations through Staveley, lawyers and accountants, DIC are confident they will eventually control Liverpool.

It is also believed that Gillett, who has wanted ’out’ for some while, is not willing to sell a small percentage of his stake to Hicks.

DIC dispatched a representative to Anfield last night to watch the Barclays Premier League match against West Ham from the Kop - where he was able to judge the mood of fans and hold general discussions with members of the ’Spirit of Shankly’ group who have been campaigning for the end of the Americans’ rule at Anfield.

Fans chanted against the Americans before the game and at half-time, but not during the match or at the end.

http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/...4375-20570374/