DIC latest - the largely wild speculation thread

[Reaper]

Warren Buffett, Now Offically Wealthier than Gates. Just from making Vol-au-vents.

[jayjay]

Sorry but this is rubbish, the level of the Dow Jones has nothing to do with declaring a US recession, a recession is defined as 2 quarters in a row of zero or negative growth, price of the Dow has nothing to do with it.

Whilst the American economy is struggling at present it doesn't prevent people making money, Warren Buffett increased his personal fortune by $10 billion last year so Hicks may very well be sheltered from the US downturn as none of us has a handle on all of his assets.

This indeed is all very ture however, businesses and their owners using the leveraged business models have no hiding places in todays credit markets, hence I can't imagine someone like hicks has much shelter in todays business climate.

Currency on the other hand, could play a role in the strength, or lack of the americans hands. I would imagine the banks have a clause relating to the value of the assets used to secure the loan. So assuming the loans were in GBP and the assets used as security in USD I see this possibly putting the amercians in a difficult position as long as UDS remains weak or even at current levels. As someone pointed out the USD has lost over 4% to the GBP in recent weeks.

Hopefully this will seriously weaken the Amercians hands and help speed up this inevitable takeover.

[CanadianRed]

I thought it was important to mention.

[Vermilion]

Don't Fear The Reaper, BOC fan eh.

[wishiwasascouser]

So apart from one new news article, theres been no new news today? Is no news good news in this situation, or is the fact that no new news has been reported..bad news?

[wishiwasascouser]

Hicks seeks funds for Liverpool bid battle-sources
17:48 GMT, Fri 7 Mar 2008
[-] Text

Email | Print | Digg This

One of Liverpool Football Club's new owners Tom Hicks speaks at a news conference at Anfield in Liverpool, northern England February 6, 2007. English Premier League soccer club Liverpool have agreed to be taken over by U.S. sports tycoons George Gillett and Hicks for 174 million pounds ($340 million). NO ONLINE/INTERNET USE WITHOUT A LICENCE FROM THE FOOTBALL DATA CO LTD. FOR LICENCE ENQUIRIES PLEASE TELEPHONE +44 (0) 207 864 9000. REUTERS/Phil Noble (BRITAIN

By Elena Moya

LONDON, March 7 (Reuters) - Liverpool co-owner Tom Hicks is trying to raise funds to match a takeover offer from a Dubai government-run fund and retain control of the English football club, sources familiar with the negotiations told Reuters.

Hicks wants to buy part or all of the 50 percent of the club he does not own, the sources said. This stake is in the hands of George Gillett, with whom Hicks bought Liverpool for 219 million pounds ($441 million) a year ago.

Hicks, also owner of the Texas Rangers baseball team, and Gillett have received a 400 million pound takeover offer from Dubai International Capital (DIC).

The U.S. billionaires outbid DIC when they bought the club last year, but fell out with each other this season, following some public comments from Hicks about having held talks with German coach Juergen Klinsmann over the possibility of him replacing Liverpool manager Rafa Benitez.

"One will end up buying the other out, with Dubai ending up with a smaller stake," one of the sources said.

Hicks, who has said he is not a seller, declined to comment from his office in Texas. Gillett, in Colorado, also declined to comment, as did Liverpool.

DIC Chief Executive Sameer al-Ansari said on Tuesday its talks with Hicks and Gillett were stuck because one of the owners "was in dreamland" about valuations.

Hicks said in January he had talked to DIC "once" about a 10-15 percent stake sale, but Dubai said at the time the valuation was too high.

Hicks, co-founder of buyout firm Hicks, Muse, Tate & Furst, also owns the Dallas Stars NHL franchise, while Gillett owns NHL's Montreal Canadians.
© Reuters 2008. All rights reserved.

http://football.uk.reuters.com/uk/news/L07417898.php?rpc=401&

[Vermilion]

Bloody Sources....Damn Nuisance. Although i guess we knew Hick was doing this.

[gerbin11]

Firstly I know nothing of finance or buisness on this scale. I have been wondering about this 49% deal that is being rumoured.
What about this, DIC buy the 49% stake, which I presume would be in actual terms taking on the £171.5m debt (49% of £350m). Now considering that the debt is structured, then about £49m will be attached to the club, (rumoured at the time that £100m of this amount was on the club itself) the rest is on Kop Holdings, or whatever it was they called it now if DIC pay off their part of the debt that is accociated to KOP holdings and then somehow present that they are then 49% owners of the club, as such in partnership with KOP Holdings, thenpay off the 49% of the club debt, then all of the remaining debt has to serviced by KOP Holding in other words by Hicks. Taking into consideration Hicks will only have 51% of the clubs profits to make the payments this could cripple him. All of the pressure, all of the strain would be on Hicks, while DIC could sit back and wait for him to cave in.

Again sorry if this is nonsense, just trying to see how it could work

[Sarb]

The Liverpool takeover bid rumbles on
Mihir Bose - BBC sports editor 7 Mar 08, 05:56 PM The Liverpool saga continues to rumble on with news that Tom Hicks and Dubai Investment Capital (DIC) may be prepared to adapt their position in order to accommodate each other. This could lead to DIC buying 49% of the club with Hicks taking 1% from his co-owner George Gillett in order to take controlling interest.

I understand the deal being discussed between Gillett and DIC for his Liverpool shares would involve Dubai paying him £60m in cash, which would represent a profit of £40m on his cash investment.

Liverpool's two co-owners invested £20m each into the club only a few weeks ago - amazingly the only cash investment they have made. The rest of the recently refinanced funding package is in the form of letters of credit and personal guarantees.

The two Americans are believed to have each guaranteed £90m. The rest of the funding package, that has recently been refinanced, is in the form of letters of credit and personal guarantees given by Gillett and Hicks.


As part of the deal DIC would also share future profits in Liverpool and take over the loans for which Gillett has provided guarantees.


Dubai is also in negotiations with Hicks, who is not willing to sell but would like to get controlling interest, hence his desire to purchase a 1% stake from Gillett to give him a 51% holding.

In the past, Dubai has not been interested in being a minority shareholder but is now prepared to have a 49% stake.
Well-placed sources have told me Dubai have no problems with Hicks.

The American's desire to have a controlling interest is derived from the financing arrangements he is making for his sporting franchises which include Texas Rangers and Dallas Stars, among others. This requires him to have technical control of Liverpool.

The talks are believed to be proceeding amicably with expectations of a deal.

The negotiations between Gillett's lawyers and DIC have also seen the presence of Liverpool chief executive Rick Parry at the request of the American.

Although there has been talk of Dubai setting deadlines I understand this is more of a negotiating tactic. Talks are still proceeding with both Hicks and Gillett, but are still some way from completion.

It is not absolutely certain Gillett will sell.

Sources close to the deal have told me that he still has a conceptual problem about selling Liverpool, a club he fought so hard to acquire last year, snatching it away from DIC at the last minute.

Gillette has also to agree with the offer Dubai has made to him.

Back in February 2007, when Gillett and Hicks first acquired the club, the offer document made it clear the American duo had borrowed money to finance their purchase.

That document said an acquisition loan facility of £185m had been made, along with other borrowings as well.

The loan had to be refinanced in February and this has meant Liverpool's overall debt is £350m.

In addition to the £185m acquisition debt, there is a further £60m of inter-company debt, a £60m debt earmarked for the stadium as well as £45m for player transfers and working capital - all in all this emphasises just how little cash the Americans have put in.

The last two items, amounting to £105m, are charged on the books of the club. The rest of the debt is still being carried by Gillette and Hicks. All that will change if and when the Dubai deal takes place.


That's the latest from Bose. Interesting bit about why Hicks needs the 1%. I think the comment about Gillett having a problem with selling Liverpool after he fought so hard to buy them is just dramatic bollox.

Come on DIC. We all love DIC on here...especially some well known posters. Haha

[dom9]

From RAWK ....

It's not going to stop going down either. US is in big trouble today, going to fall below 12000 which could have a significant impact on Hicks and their entire economy. They'll officially fall into a recession as 12000 on the Dow is the support line. ****ed for them (and hopefully Hicks), world economy struggles, but if it can help move us out of their hands I'll be celebrating. Sorry for the financial crap, just think today could be vital for Hicks future negotiations (and ability to get funds in the future).

Come again?

What poppeycock.

Sorry but this is rubbish, the level of the Dow Jones has nothing to do with declaring a US recession, a recession is defined as 2 quarters in a row of zero or negative growth, price of the Dow has nothing to do with it.

Whilst the American economy is struggling at present it doesn't prevent people making money, Warren Buffett increased his personal fortune by $10 billion last year so Hicks may very well be sheltered from the US downturn as none of us has a handle on all of his assets.

Is the correct answer to that load of nonsense.

[Vermilion]

If it go's ahead this way, if anyone bumps into Hicks, just blank him, any success we get will be down to Dic, that'll really wind him up.

[PLY]

I know naff all about business and have no particular desire to but if for some reason Hicks needs to show he has control of the club is it possible that DIC will let him have 51% but then fund the stadium themselves with their own holding company. When the stadium is built the value of the club increases but they now hold half the original shares and the stadium therefore having a majority?

Sounds like ****e to me but every one else is writing it and I felt left out

[Vermilion]

I know naff all about business and have no particular desire to but if for some reason Hicks needs to show he has control of the club is it possible that DIC will let him have 51% but then fund the stadium themselves with their own holding company. When the stadium is built the value of the club increases but they now hold half the original shares and the stadium therefore having a majority?

Sounds like ****e to me but every one else is writing it and I felt left out

Think it was said earlier by someone that the stadium is Hicks baby, he has contacts with HKS, stands to do well from it's construction. Could be he'll be gone once it's built. Hopefully.

[Jimbob]

From Shankslegend on RAWK


Quote...
They are gonna say that though........

Start to smile people am hearing something which sounds very good maybe not all good but still good.......

I am sorry but i can't say no more, no pm's etc please.

[Sarb]

Wasn't ShanksLegend the one slating CTR?