DIC latest - the largely wild speculation thread

[Jayesh87]

In the article ...

"He was also upset with what was considered triumphant comments that suggested DIC would soon buy his stake." , unless hes talking about Hicks?

The article was talking about Hicks and what he thought about DIC.

[wishiwasascouser]

The article was talking about Hicks and what he thought about DIC.

Ok - good! Must of got confused as it swtiched from Gillett to Hicks!

[El Jefecito]

i like your posts speedy mate and thus i respect your opinions BUT i just cant agree with you there mate.

hicks is a proven liar and has handled us so badly its untrue
his last refinancing loan (350 mil) was just another short term high interest safe hold whilst securing our sale, hardly the sort of thing that makes me want him to stay.

id like to believe him when he says that he wants to make us great again but his words are hollow.

he has neither the funds nor the integrit to own our great club, points of which have been proved on several occasions, so unless he has mr kraft or wild bill gates up his sleeve the sooner the deal with dic (real supporters) is done the better

I'm trying to view the whole situation as dispassionately as I can, if you don't this would be an emotional roller coaster that would be unhealthy.

Forgetting the recent past, the glazers have shown that an equity investment can work. THE degree of his success is dependent on our success, so I believe he'll carry us forward.

For sure, I'd rather have DIC (range rover), than hicks (Citeron 2cv), but both are better than Moore (pushbike)!

[El Jefecito]

Anyone who thinks Hicks can move us forward needs to look at how far "forward" we haave come these past 12 months... mountains of debt, and a power struggle... with his cuntish views in the press every day.

You are like a ****ing broken record. Stadium design, Torres, Babel, Mascherano. That's an improvement on Moores. Debt show me a publically traded company that does not have a lot of debt. It's all about liquidity.

[El Jefecito]

Speedy, I thought Hicks was going to be good for LFC given his sports and financial background but events have proved otherwise surely? Loading debt onto the club when he said he wouldnt-and it possibly could have been a lot more debt if not for moores and parry, the stadium debacle-all we have are some nice designs at the moment, the re-financing and the horrendous interest bill, and the ruckus with the Manager in public. Teething problems?

Yeah, he's a lying ****er, is more interested in the money than anything else, doesn't understand the LFC way, all true. Point is some would have us believe that we will go out of business under him. I don't think we will, I think we will improve. As much improvement as would be possible under DIC probably not. But we will be better

[G]

Taken from Anfield road

This was posted on the Liverpool Echo forum and reinforces the notion that we haven’t all ben side tracked by the spin from either the Hicks or DIC camps. "The 5 myths - don’t fall for them. I am a sad old retired red fanatic. As such I have time to follow my passion, LFC and everything to do with it. I regularly trawl the various forums and you get a feel for the waves of feeling on the boards before and after a match and also before and after major developments on the ownership saga. over the last sew days, since Hicks dramatically pulled the plug on his negotiations with DIC there have appeared on each of the main forums well reasoned and professionally put together posts putting the case for Hicks and his “love for LFC” no more “Liverpool Reds” so Tom didn’t write them himself!! These posts seek support for what I believe are myths and I have tried below to give my take on them. Please forgive any typos as this was written somewhat in anger at being lectured to about corporate debt, Leveraged buyouts Tom Hicks philanthropy etc as if all our supporters had the brains of the Sandon Spit merchants. Anyway here goes: 1 Liverpool fans want rid of Tom Hicks because of his personality or lack of it. His nationality is irrelevant, his economy with the truth is a disappointment but also irrelevant as is, what some perceive as, his hectoring bully boy nature, Some might make a case that he is morally unfit to run an institution like LFC but personally I would be just as opposed to Pope Benedict or Mother Theresa if either of them came in with the lack of real resources demonstrated by Messrs. Hicks and Gillett. 2 All businesses borrow money so Hicks is only doing what all owners, including DIC would do. Not so. The leveraged buyout is very rare in top level football clubs. The normal buyout situation is for the buyers to rely on dividends, if justified by trading results, to reward them for their investment and/service the interest on any borrowing by them to acquire the club. This point is crucial as in that orthodox situation the dividend is the last call upon the profits whereas in our situation with Hicks interest is payable regardless of the trading result. In actual fact the owners of many leading clubs don’t take a dividend out but allow the club to reinvest to the maximum in players, facilities etc. This is because in that “normal” situation the owners are fans first, investors second. 3 Hicks gets a bad press George Gillett is the real villain. This has gained currency almost coterminously with Hicks opening negotiations with DIC. There may be no relevance in that coincidence but in the absence of any comment from George Gillett it must be viewed with suspicion. It is a further irrelevance. Whether Hicks or Gillett is the bigger villain does not subtract from the real danger they pose via they debt and high gearing position of the club. They are both leveraged to the maximum. 4 DIC won’t be any better It is tempting to dismiss his one simply by saying that DIC cannot be any worse. DIC are indivisible from the wealth of the ruler of Dubai therefore their mission is to invest that wealth prudently for the benefit of Dubai. To that extent they have an immediate advantage over Hicks. They don’t have the problem of raising the finance needed to develop our club. They won’t donate millions to LFC, no one sensibly expects that. They do offer a shelter from the ups and downs of the capital market so to that extent we would be insulated from the threat of a Leeds-type meltdown which, however remote, is present with the Hicks ownership model. We will not face the now you see it now you don’t farce of the stadium project. In fact DIC’s first attempt to buy LFC was not premised upon any debt but instead on equity. DIC will ensure the club is effectively administrated and managed with top professionals in key positions, Surely this better than Hicks’ version - management by email! The fans are not sheep. they will not be as unquestioning with DIC should they or anyone else gain control from Hicks. Once bitten twice shy. 5 Hicks bought us Torres, Babel, Yossi, Skyrtl and the Masch Arrant nonsense. Torres, Babel and Yossi were targeted and attracted to the club via the in-house scouting system and on the manager’s recommendation they were bought from in-house resources plus club borrowing. The truth of this is found in the fact that summer spending was wrapped up in the refinancing package as the club’s borrowing was presumably from another source. Presumably Hicks would be a co-signatory for payments of this size so his involvement would be precisely that - signing the cheques. He had only been involved with the club 5 minutes and freely admitted he knew almost nothing about us before buying in so would have not known whether Fernando Torres was coming in to play or sell pies. The signings of Skyrtl and Masch were funded from sales (Momo) and the clubs normal trading from November (when Rafa brokered the deal) to February when we had resources enough to finalise it."

[AFII]

You are like a ****ing broken record. Stadium design, Torres, Babel, Mascherano. That's an improvement on Moores. Debt show me a publically traded company that does not have a lot of debt. It's all about liquidity.

It's not an improvement on Moores. He could have loaned the same kind of money against the club. Remember one thing, every pound of the loan is against the club, not £105m, the whole £350m.

[Steve101]

You are like a ****ing broken record. Stadium design, Torres, Babel, Mascherano. That's an improvement on Moores. Debt show me a publically traded company that does not have a lot of debt. It's all about liquidity.

Not worth it mate. there are good posters on this site, and theres rashid, a wanabe whos 'info' hasnt come about the way he said it would (dont worry lads etc etc>)

[El Jefecito]

That's the problem, not a pound risked by himself or any signs that he will build that stadium and the great design isn't that great anymore, now it just looks cheap.

I will start to believe that he will build the stadium when it's completed, not before then.

Niave, nothing is as sure as that stadium being built. The additional revenue is money straight in his pocket. The funding will be easy, it'll be secured against future revenues a la Arsenal.

Only a fool wouldn't build it.

[AFII]

Taken from Anfield road

This was posted on the Liverpool Echo forum and reinforces the notion that we haven’t all ben side tracked by the spin from either the Hicks or DIC camps. "The 5 myths - don’t fall for them. I am a sad old retired red fanatic.

As such I have time to follow my passion, LFC and everything to do with it. I regularly trawl the various forums and you get a feel for the waves of feeling on the boards before and after a match and also before and after major developments on the ownership saga.

over the last sew days, since Hicks dramatically pulled the plug on his negotiations with DIC there have appeared on each of the main forums well reasoned and professionally put together posts putting the case for Hicks and his “love for LFC” no more “Liverpool Reds” so Tom didn’t write them himself!!

These posts seek support for what I believe are myths and I have tried below to give my take on them. Please forgive any typos as this was written somewhat in anger at being lectured to about corporate debt, Leveraged buyouts Tom Hicks philanthropy etc as if all our supporters had the brains of the Sandon Spit merchants.

Anyway here goes: 1 Liverpool fans want rid of Tom Hicks because of his personality or lack of it. His nationality is irrelevant, his economy with the truth is a disappointment but also irrelevant as is, what some perceive as, his hectoring bully boy nature, Some might make a case that he is morally unfit to run an institution like LFC but personally I would be just as opposed to Pope Benedict or Mother Theresa if either of them came in with the lack of real resources demonstrated by Messrs.

Hicks and Gillett. 2 All businesses borrow money so Hicks is only doing what all owners, including DIC would do. Not so. The leveraged buyout is very rare in top level football clubs.

The normal buyout situation is for the buyers to rely on dividends, if justified by trading results, to reward them for their investment and/service the interest on any borrowing by them to acquire the club.

This point is crucial as in that orthodox situation the dividend is the last call upon the profits whereas in our situation with Hicks interest is payable regardless of the trading result. In actual fact the owners of many leading clubs don’t take a dividend out but allow the club to reinvest to the maximum in players, facilities etc.

This is because in that “normal” situation the owners are fans first, investors second. 3 Hicks gets a bad press George Gillett is the real villain. This has gained currency almost coterminously with Hicks opening negotiations with DIC. There may be no relevance in that coincidence but in the absence of any comment from George Gillett it must be viewed with suspicion.

It is a further irrelevance. Whether Hicks or Gillett is the bigger villain does not subtract from the real danger they pose via they debt and high gearing position of the club. They are both leveraged to the maximum.

4 DIC won’t be any better It is tempting to dismiss his one simply by saying that DIC cannot be any worse. DIC are indivisible from the wealth of the ruler of Dubai therefore their mission is to invest that wealth prudently for the benefit of Dubai.

To that extent they have an immediate advantage over Hicks. They don’t have the problem of raising the finance needed to develop our club. They won’t donate millions to LFC, no one sensibly expects that.

They do offer a shelter from the ups and downs of the capital market so to that extent we would be insulated from the threat of a Leeds-type meltdown which, however remote, is present with the Hicks ownership model. We will not face the now you see it now you don’t farce of the stadium project. In fact DIC’s first attempt to buy LFC was not premised upon any debt but instead on equity.

DIC will ensure the club is effectively administrated and managed with top professionals in key positions, Surely this better than Hicks’ version - management by email! The fans are not sheep. they will not be as unquestioning with DIC should they or anyone else gain control from Hicks. Once bitten twice shy.

5 Hicks bought us Torres, Babel, Yossi, Skyrtl and the Masch Arrant nonsense. Torres, Babel and Yossi were targeted and attracted to the club via the in-house scouting system and on the manager’s recommendation they were bought from in-house resources plus club borrowing.

The truth of this is found in the fact that summer spending was wrapped up in the refinancing package as the club’s borrowing was presumably from another source. Presumably Hicks would be a co-signatory for payments of this size so his involvement would be precisely that - signing the cheques.

He had only been involved with the club 5 minutes and freely admitted he knew almost nothing about us before buying in so would have not known whether Fernando Torres was coming in to play or sell pies. The signings of Skyrtl and Masch were funded from sales (Momo) and the clubs normal trading from November (when Rafa brokered the deal) to February when we had resources enough to finalise it."

Just made it it easier to read.

[El Jefecito]

The Liverpool Echo / Daily Post straw polled readers on the other month

Think 90% or more wanted Hicks & Gillett to go

So just internet loudmouths then?

[Steve101]

Anyway, good news for us all , the bitters go out of europe on pens, so extra time, all knackered etc. good night that!!

[AFII]

Niave, nothing is as sure as that stadium being built. The additional revenue is money straight in his pocket. The funding will be easy, it'll be secured against future revenues a la Arsenal.

Only a fool wouldn't build it.

He did the thing a fool would do with Corinthians.

[El Jefecito]

What with his own lies

Like the ones he issued last week that said "I have not met nor do I have any intention of meeting with DIC and or their representatives to discuss any stakeholding in LFC"

Two days later he sends a letter acknowledging previous meetings and requesting a further meeting

The man is no angel for sure.

[Sarb]

Can't wait for Hicks to build this stadium. He said building was going to start last year didn't he? Must be like the new Stadium he promised Corinthians which never came about