Gillet Interview

[sinbad]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/liverpool/7318780.stm

bbc too.

[Lecter]

Interesting analysis off RAWK

I think Gillett's interview provides an insight into the strategy that he and D.I.C. have been following over recent months.

A few weeks ago the media were telling us that when Kop Holdings was established last year, a clause had been included in the company’s constitution to allow either owner to veto the sale of the others shares. I have never believed that such a veto exists. I cannot imagine any sane businessman agreeagreeinging to such a restrictive clause.

I think it is far more likely that when Kop Holdings was set up a standard clause was included in it’s constitution requiring each owner to give the other first refusal of his shares should he ever wish to sell them. Kop holdings was set up in quite a hurry and I would be very surprised if such a clause was defined very precisely, other than perhaps to require the partner being offered the shares to match the market rate for them - i.e. the offer of an outside bidder like D.I.C.

The fact that the clause is unlikely to have been defined precisely could lead to problems should Hicks’ and Gillett’s business partnership become less than friendly - which it clearly has done. It may also explain why any sale to D.I.C. is taking time to resolve. In particular, if the co-owners can’t agree, does the clause mean that the partner being offered the shares has to buy all of them or, at the other extreme, does he have the right to buy just one share to give himself a controlling stake? A majority holding does, of course, also have that added benefit of providing a stronger negotiating hand if the remaining original partner also decides to sell.

It appears that Hicks has been trying to use the sale clause to force D.I.C. to increase their offer. I think that Gillett and D.I.C. have outmanoeuvred Hicks buy effectively offering him both extremes under the clause, a 100% holding and 51% holding, and demonstrating that declined to accept.

In his interview, Gillett states, ‘We gave our partner a long period of time to try to make arrangements to buy us out. We didn’t put pressure on him but he ultimately did not get to the finishing line’. So Hicks was offered Gillett's complete stake and either didn’t want it or could not raise the funds to purchase it even though he was given ample time to do so - Gillett no doubt knew Hicks wouldn't be able to raise the funds.

We also know that from previous reports, if true, that Gillett was prepared to sell D.I.C. a minority stake in Kop Holdings that would have given Hicks a 51% controlling share. This time Hicks voluntarily decided to end negotiations. Perhaps this happened as a result of some clever and intentional behind the scenes manoeuvring by D.I.C because they always wanted Hicks to stop these discussions. Whatever the truth as to why Hicks ended the negotiations, the consequence is clear: having been given the chance to purchase a 1% controlling stake Hicks turned the offer down.

I think that in these circumstances Gillett could now demonstrate, in court if necessary, that he gave Hicks ample opportunity to purchase any number of shares in Kop Holdings that he may have wanted but that Hicks either could not afford or did not want them. I believe that Gillett is now free to sell his complete stake to D.I.C without further reference to Hicks and if he was taken to court for doing so, Hicks would most likely lose the case.

Going back to the Gillett’s radio interview, when asked did Hicks block him selling his stake in Liverpool to D.I.C. he replies, ‘he threatened to’. I think this suggests that Gillett now has the upper hand. Having been outmanoeuvred, Hicks can no longer use the sale clause to try to force matters with either Gillett or D.I.C. In these circumstances he is far more likely to sell.

It maybe that the last few months has all been about forcing Hicks out of the Club leaving D.I.C. to take over or for a new partnership between D.I.C. and Gillett to emerge.

[redwien]

Death Threats! **** I thought that was Hicks' number!

[Jayesh87]

BBC Sport understands Hicks is aiming to take sole control

[Rix007]

BBC Sport understands Hicks is aiming to take sole control

[Manofthebog]

BBC Sport understands Hicks is aiming to take sole control

That's just a rehash.

[wavydavy]

BBC Sport understands Hicks is aiming to take sole control

Where did they get that from. Gillette made it clear that won't happen. D'you think they meant Gillette intends to gain total ownership/ control? I do.

[MattB]

BBC Sport understands Hicks is aiming to take sole control

He'll have a job on his hands acheiving that if Gillett isn't prepared to sell to him...

[cled the red]

BBC Sport understands Hicks is aiming to take sole control

BBC Sport seem to have understood a helluva a lot with regards this saga - they haven't got fu*k all right yet!!!

[Jayesh87]

BBC Sport seem to have understood a helluva a lot with regards this saga - they haven't got fu*k all right yet!!!

Personally i think they are correct but they are stating the obvious imo

[MattB]

Personally i think they are correct but they are stating the obvious imo

The fact that Gillett says Hicks 'failed to cross the finishing line' rather than 'hasn't yet crossed the finishing line', then inferred that he will not sell 'even one share' to Hicks, suggests that any chance of Hicks taking majority or sole control is dead.

[Vermilion]

Personally i think they are correct but they are stating the obvious imo

They are, but if it's from Hick's, as his reaction to GG's interview & the articles lately, it does sort of bring us back to where we were.
As far as thinking Hicks had backed off a bit, as was resigned to Dic taking over. As i say, IF it's Hicks response.

[barnes10]

As AF is saying could George be exercising his right to buy off Hicks?? No idea where he would get the money from but thats the impression I get. Maybe get a nice little bonus for his assistance in any deal

He may have made some mistakes (its specuation) but GG didnt get into a mudslinging compeittion with Hicks and so he is by far the lesser of two evils.

ermm how about from DIC?

[Roboklopp]

BBC Sport understands Hicks is aiming to take sole control

Relax FFS- he's been trying that for ages. Dont mean it'll happen- As GG said, eh's had his chance there the fat cunt

[Vermilion]

Relax FFS- he's been trying that for ages. Dont mean it'll happen- As GG said, eh's had his chance there the fat cunt

Don't think it's that simple somehow. Or Dic would have GG's shares Bought & Paid for by now.