DIC latest - the largely wild speculation thread

[Jayesh87]

Hicks misses meeting.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2008/03/12/tom-hicks-pulls-out-of-trade-fair-speech-100252-20611530/

Tom Hicks pulls out of trade fair speech
Mar 12 2008

LIVERPOOL FC co-owner Tom Hicks has pulled out of a rare public appearance – on Liverpool’s stand at the Mipim trade fair.

The controversial Texan was lined up to deliver a keynote speech to international delegates at the world property and investment market in Cannes.

Last year Tesco boss Sir Terry Leahy delivered the main speech for the city, drawing one of the biggest crowds at the annual Riviera event, which is expected to attract 28,000 delegates.

Mr Hicks’s appearance was a closely guarded secret but he pulled out of the event over the weekend. Organisers said it was due to a clash with a prior commitment.

But it is understood ongoing talks with Dubai investment body DIC over their proposed acquisition of the Reds from Mr Hicks and his partner George Gillett forced him to cancel on the eve of the Mipim event.
The keynote delivery will now be made by Wirral council.

Yesterday, Mr Hicks issued a statement denying reports he pulled out of a deal with DIC over proposals to put a fans’ representative on the board.

Thought he terminated talks Arnie style

[Lecter]

Thought he terminated talks Arnie style

Shock horror once again it looks like Hicks is caught out telling lies

[Jayesh87]

Shock horror once again it looks like Hicks is caught out telling lies

He will issue another statement as soon as he reads it though

[Vermilion]

Hicks misses meeting.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2008/03/12/tom-hicks-pulls-out-of-trade-fair-speech-100252-20611530/

Tom Hicks pulls out of trade fair speech
Mar 12 2008

LIVERPOOL FC co-owner Tom Hicks has pulled out of a rare public appearance – on Liverpool’s stand at the Mipim trade fair.

The controversial Texan was lined up to deliver a keynote speech to international delegates at the world property and investment market in Cannes.

Last year Tesco boss Sir Terry Leahy delivered the main speech for the city, drawing one of the biggest crowds at the annual Riviera event, which is expected to attract 28,000 delegates.

Mr Hicks’s appearance was a closely guarded secret but he pulled out of the event over the weekend. Organisers said it was due to a clash with a prior commitment.

But it is understood ongoing talks with Dubai investment body DIC over their proposed acquisition of the Reds from Mr Hicks and his partner George Gillett forced him to cancel on the eve of the Mipim event.
The keynote delivery will now be made by Wirral council.

Yesterday, Mr Hicks issued a statement denying reports he pulled out of a deal with DIC over proposals to put a fans’ representative on the board.

Thought he terminated talks Arnie style

As out of the blue (****e colour) & shocking Hicks's announcement of his Termination of Further talks with Dic was, it would be fantastic to hear in the same sudden way that he had deciced to sell ALL his shares to Dic.

[AFII]

Shock horror once again it looks like Hicks is caught out telling lies

No, not Hicks, never, he is the most honest man on the planet. My life is now destroyed, even Hicks is now telling lies, you really can't believe anyone anymore

[Scratch]

Shock horror once again it looks like Hicks is caught out telling lies

Or possibly, the talks were terminated at that point, but have now restarted, as DIC have rethought their demands and we are now going back to discussing...ie Hick's has DIC over a barrel, and they know it?

Just speculating.

[Pacman]

He will issue another statement as soon as he reads it though

Hicks Statement

Reports in todays local press that Tom Hicks couldn't make a scheduled guest speaker appearance on Liverpool’s stand at the Mipim trade fair because he is in negotiations with DIC about the possibility of selling a minority stake in the club are total rubbish. Mr Hicks in fact had to pull out because he couldn't get his fat head out of his ranch in Dallas. No matter how many tubs of lubricant his people used on his oversized door frames Mr Hicks just couldn't squeeze his huge cranium through.

[Rafa Shankly]

I think we need to look at the situation. Hicks may not be going anywhere for some time. He's personally blamed Gillett for a number of things.

It may just be his way to be open in the press.

If reports of Hicks and Rafa getting on well are true, do you want Rafa out as well?

Do you think there is ANY chance that Hicks does actually want to do well by LFC?

I'm really interested to see what happens this summer should Hicks still be in charge. Would be nice to know what happens or could have happened.

i think your failing to see the big picture mate,we may be fine this pre season but thats only because hes already borrowed the money required for transfers.

my worry is every pre season after next,how does he borrow money for transfers when we cant afford to pay off the current loan he already has out.

and if he does manage to get loan after loan that will worry the **** out of me as well.

and why would we want rafa out for having a working relationship with his boss?

i have a working relationship with my boss but beyond that i waouldnt say were friends or anything.

our futures with in the company are not connected just because we are civil to each other.

[Rafa Shankly]

Les Lawson, secretary of the Liverpool Supporters' Association, said: "As far as I'm concerned, there is no way Hicks and Gillett are going to win back the trust of the 5% (i.e RTK) of intimidating, xenophobic and generally myopic supporters."
Interesting and fair point there. Im hate these people coming out in public and telling anyone who'll listen that they represent me.........well i was naever asked by them, and cit pisses me off no end. As LFC fans weve done ourselcves no good at all over the years by arguing amonst orselves over so many issues,

over the years

care to mention what weve been arguing about among ourselves all these years?

and i hate to say it mate but when RTK quote a percentag im sure their talking about the number of people who get off their arse and attend meetings rather than the internet community.

plus the straw polls the echo and daily pot held would be good indications as to how the majority of fans feel.

[kopdan]

i think your failing to see the big picture mate,we may be fine this pre season but thats only because hes already borrowed the money required for transfers.

my worry is every pre season after next,how does he borrow money for transfers when we cant afford to pay off the current loan he already has out.

and if he does manage to get loan after loan that will worry the **** out of me as well.

and why would we want rafa out for having a working relationship with his boss?

i have a working relationship with my boss but beyond that i waouldnt say were friends or anything.

our futures with in the company are not connected just because we are civil to each other.

fair enough

I got the impression from some press reports posted by AFII that they were getting on very well.

A big turnaround which may suggest Gillett was more at fault than Hicks?

Again, i'm not trying to cause a fight, just looking at it from another possible angle and asking the questions.

[Lecter]

Or possibly, the talks were terminated at that point, but have now restarted, as DIC have rethought their demands and we are now going back to discussing...ie Hick's has DIC over a barrel, and they know it?

Just speculating.

Or more likely its all bluff and bluster by Hicks and when he sits and reflects on what hes said he thinks twice and goes back

Everything Hicks has said in the press regarding DIC talks has been proven wrong

Hicks presents one public perception whilst privately doing the opposite

[Jayesh87]

Or more likely its all bluff and bluster by Hicks and when he sits and reflects on what hes said he thinks twice and goes back

Everything Hicks has said in the press regarding DIC talks has been proven wrong

Hicks presents one public perception whilst privately doing the opposite

Would you kick him in the balls if you had the chance?

[barnes10]

what if it was gillette that forced the financing situation? what if its him that forced the pair to look to load debt on the club itself? hicks and gilette have to act as a pair in this dont forget.

what if hicks were alone? perhaps he could leverage the debt at decent interest rates and also raise the funds for the stadium? if he couldnt but he pursued with rejecting DIC then its a suicide mission is it not? he might not go bankrupt if the club goes under but it'd have massive impact on his other interests/wealth and he'd lose millions.

because they were a partnership, they had to be percieved to be a sound pairing in order to have raised the finance from rbs/wachovia. hence the fact that the attributing the blame to george in public is only now surfacing whilst previously it was all 'we'. as the financing is now done and gilette selling his half is public knowledge.

just has DIC wouldnt subsidise hicks, hicks wouldnt subsidise gillette without diluting his shareholding. if gillette wouldnt accept this and instead wants to sell, then he is the bad guy as he is suspiciously being touted as from several reliable sources (including barrett) recently. im convinced the 'its gillette's fault' bit is basically true.

if you say hicks will sell players to balance the books in lean years then what's to say DIC won't do the same? if you say hicks will only finance us via loans then what's to say DIC won't do the same if only for tax breaks and reduced liabilities of their own? if the only difference becomes the interest rate we'd be charged, then how do we know that without gilette, hicks could get the same/similar rates DIC get? how do we know any of this? we don't.

i think hicks knows that gilette weakens him. he therefore envisages a scenario that were he not bound by a partnership, he could do things the way he thinks will work out. i also think that the fan protests are like a red rag to a bull - in the context that without GG the issue wouldnt have arisen, what displays fan devotion more than the type of protests we've been having?

if you ask me why i'm thinking like this then its because the person I trust in this more than any other: Rafa. Why did he soften his stance to Hicks? why does he say about 'one of the owners' indirectly pointing the finger at GG? he knows what's gone on thats why.

Hicks has convinced Rafa, Rafa has more access to any info, future and historical financial plans / strategy and he has been on the Board of Directors (whatever that does or doesnt get him access to) throughout. He sided with Hicks. Why is that?

bottom line is that there are tax advantages to loading the club with debt. no getting away from that. but that tax saving can be used to either line their own pockets or as funds to invest in the team. if gilette was about the former whilst hicks the latter what would be you thinking about the debt then?

if the model is Man u then lfc with 650mill debt versus man u with 800 mill both earning similar sums since we now have a huge stadium and have improved our marketing etc to push us into the top 5 clubs in terms of income then are we not in a very healthy financial and footballing state? is that not exactly what we wanted moores to sell us for?

basically, where, given the situation described above, is the problem?

For the record, i prefer dic because i hope they'd make us this emblem of dubai and do what it takes to make us champions. but there's the realist in me that says, 'its not sheikh makhtoum but his investment company that are after us'. potentially very different scenarios arent they. one would be worse than we've currently got whilst the other would be like abramovitch. the hope with DIC is that they are somewhere between the two and a huge improvement on the current pair. the thing is, we don't know whether they'd be a huge improvement on hicks going it alone do we?

[Skillz]

what if it was gillette that forced the financing situation? what if its him that forced the pair to look to load debt on the club itself? hicks and gilette have to act as a pair in this dont forget.

what if hicks were alone? perhaps he could leverage the debt at decent interest rates and also raise the funds for the stadium? if he couldnt but he pursued with rejecting DIC then its a suicide mission is it not? he might not go bankrupt if the club goes under but it'd have massive impact on his other interests/wealth and he'd lose millions.

because they were a partnership, they had to be percieved to be a sound pairing in order to have raised the finance from rbs/wachovia. hence the fact that the attributing the blame to george in public is only now surfacing whilst previously it was all 'we'. as the financing is now done and gilette selling his half is public knowledge.

just has DIC wouldnt subsidise hicks, hicks wouldnt subsidise gillette without diluting his shareholding. if gillette wouldnt accept this and instead wants to sell, then he is the bad guy as he is suspiciously being touted as from several reliable sources (including barrett) recently. im convinced the 'its gillette's fault' bit is basically true.

if you say hicks will sell players to balance the books in lean years then what's to say DIC won't do the same? if you say hicks will only finance us via loans then what's to say DIC won't do the same if only for tax breaks and reduced liabilities of their own? if the only difference becomes the interest rate we'd be charged, then how do we know that without gilette, hicks could get the same/similar rates DIC get? how do we know any of this? we don't.

i think hicks knows that gilette weakens him. he therefore envisages a scenario that were he not bound by a partnership, he could do things the way he thinks will work out. i also think that the fan protests are like a red rag to a bull - in the context that without GG the issue wouldnt have arisen, what displays fan devotion more than the type of protests we've been having?

if you ask me why i'm thinking like this then its because the person I trust in this more than any other: Rafa. Why did he soften his stance to Hicks? why does he say about 'one of the owners' indirectly pointing the finger at GG? he knows what's gone on thats why.

Hicks has convinced Rafa, Rafa has more access to any info, future and historical financial plans / strategy and he has been on the Board of Directors (whatever that does or doesnt get him access to) throughout. He sided with Hicks. Why is that?

bottom line is that there are tax advantages to loading the club with debt. no getting away from that. but that tax saving can be used to either line their own pockets or as funds to invest in the team. if gilette was about the former whilst hicks the latter what would be you thinking about the debt then?

if the model is Man u then lfc with 650mill debt versus man u with 800 mill both earning similar sums since we now have a huge stadium and have improved our marketing etc to push us into the top 5 clubs in terms of income then are we not in a very healthy financial and footballing state? is that not exactly what we wanted moores to sell us for?

basically, where, given the situation described above, is the problem?

For the record, i prefer dic because i hope they'd make us this emblem of dubai and do what it takes to make us champions. but there's the realist in me that says, 'its not sheikh makhtoum but his investment company that are after us'. potentially very different scenarios arent they. one would be worse than we've currently got whilst the other would be like abramovitch. the hope with DIC is that they are somewhere between the two and a huge improvement on the current pair. the thing is, we don't know whether they'd be a huge improvement on hicks going it alone do we?

DIC = Financial security
DIC have not bare faced lied

That's enough for me

[Lecter]

basically, where, given the situation described above, is the problem?

So tell me why did Hicks lie about meeting Klinsmann

Why on the day he owned up to that did he deny trying to sell 15% to DIC

Lets ignore the numerous lies between then and last week and pick up when Hicks stated early last week that he had "never met DIC nor do I have any intention of meeting with them to discuss the sale of any stake in LFC" on ly to then send a letter thanking them for the previous meetings and requesting a further one

Gillett might be the problem financially he might be the reason the debt has been forced on the club (bearing in mind they both have a history of leveraged buy-outs I find it highly unlikely this has been forced on them) but Gillett hasnt been the one telling lies and getting caught lying thats solely down to Hicks