Re: Rafa Post Match statement - Shock

[Vermilion]

Three points to make here, in order:

1. It is vitally important at present as the Americans do not have the cash to pay for transfers and build a stadium. Whoever Hicks or Gillet bring in it will only be as a replacement to the other. I wouldn't expect anyone with a massive amount of cash being brought in. Hence they would still sruggle.

2. I would like to know how you came to this conclusion. It would certainly make me feel better if you could show me in case he does win the war. At the moment, looking at our club and the others he owns or has owned, then I would suggest the evidence shows otherwise.

3. Damn right.

[homer1]

The worst thing that can happen in my opinion is we continue to bumble on with divided owners and no firm hand on the commercial rudder and Rafa or any future manager is not given the funds to continue improving the team.

I'm not sure that we can unequivocally say that all those involved are morons or unable to run the club. The first thing we have to accept is that anyone coming in is likely to care about the club as an investment and best case scenario in some peoples eyes as an advert for another country. What is important to me is that the club is run well and that we succeed.

Unlike you I think it is possible that one of the people in charge now if they get in funding streams, the right people and have sole control might be able to bring the club forward. I see no obvious difference between the parties internal and external who have all happily dragged the name of the club through the mud in the tabloid press. Caring little for supporters or the impact on the team.
If someone can propose an owner with a love of the club and the money and will to take it over I'm all for campaigning to get them in. However I see no reason that the fans should be another group getting the club in the news for the wrong reasons and offering no solutions. To my mind there is a real danger of us the fans cutting our nose off to spite our face in a campaign to dislodge our owners without any superior alternative.

Maybe DIC would be a boon to the club but their behaviour in the press and in general has done nothing to convince me they are the wonderful cure for all our ills some portray them as. They may be the best of a bad bunch though I accept but I don't think I'm in a great position to judge.

The idea that stability and unity throughout the ownership and managerial structure though seems to self evidently be what we need. I want to see this and to a certain extent at this point I want that to happen more than I want any of the options on offer in charge per se or indeed than I want to see any of those options out specifically.

So maybe I do fall into the 'ah **** it, I just want it resolved' camp but I would say that the resolution has to meet certain criteria that will make it and the very worst considerably better than it is now.

You may be right but in order for one of other of the Yanks to make it work on their own it is going to take someone else to come in and provide the funding to buy out the other's 50% - are they going to do this without wanting a say in the running of the club? I doubt it very much & therefore it keeps us in a joint ownership situation, just with 1 owner remaining the same and a new one coming in

[Vermilion]

Wonder what plans would already have been made, had Hicks just taken DIC's offer the 1st time & sold.

[DannyMan2006]

Do you believe the delay on the stadium is down to ownership & not money, The only way Hicks can build the stadium is by putting the club in Hock for how ever many decades. I can see why the others see the safer option for the good & Security of LFC is to now sell to DIC.

Especially now we know the truth, which is that these two were NEVER wealthy enough to own the club.

I think they may have been. I think the much talked about credit crunch has seriously affected their plans for LFC.

I think the stadium would be being built by now if it wasn't for the sudden change of the £ v the $. In effect their fortune has been cut by a third or more. That is bound to have had a massive detrement to their long and short term plans.

[Darkon]

Jurgen Klinsmann: Liverpool FC officials met him TWICE
Apr 14 2008 EXCLUSIVE by Tony Barrett, Liverpool Echo

ffs, more twists to the tale...

A question though, thanksgiving is when is that compared to the meeting where everybody was involved?? Before or after?

If before then it is quite clear that hicks took contact to klisnmann

[DannyMan2006]

ffs, more twists to the tale...

A question though, thanksgiving is when is that compared to the meeting where everybody was involved?? Before or after?

If before then it is quite clear that hicks took contact to klisnmann

Echo says Hicks met Klinsmann again after the original meet.

[dww]

You may be right but in order for one of other of the Yanks to make it work on their own it is going to take someone else to come in and provide the funding to buy out the other's 50% - are they going to do this without wanting a say in the running of the club? I doubt it very much & therefore it keeps us in a joint ownership situation, just with 1 owner remaining the same and a new one coming in

Basically I have no idea and in the same way that I can't suggest a clear ideal owner who we could turn to. I agree that clearly to buy the other out some sort of external investment will be needed by either Hicks or Gillet. To my mind though this is likely to be a group of investors which would mean that one person would be giving leadership even if others had a say. The problem as I see it now is that both owners have equal say and as such if they disagree then no progress can be made and no individual has sign off on big decisions.

[dww]

Do you believe the delay on the stadium is down to ownership & not money, The only way Hicks can build the stadium is by putting the club in Hock for how ever many decades. I can see why the others see the safer option for the good & Security of LFC is to now sell to DIC.

Especially now we know the truth, which is that these two were NEVER wealthy enough to own the club.

I think the money/ownership things is linked. For me it is such an obvious money spinner in the long term that getting the loans shouldn't be an enormous problem if the project had good leadership and the necessary decisions had been made about design etc.

To be honest I think all potential buyers will pay for the stadium with loans. It is how much of the building in Dubai has been paid for. Possibly the credit crunch is the reason that building has been delayed and I am being unfair on the owners.

[dww]

2. I would like to know how you came to this conclusion. It would certainly make me feel better if you could show me in case he does win the war. At the moment, looking at our club and the others he owns or has owned, then I would suggest the evidence shows otherwise.

I would suggest the fact he is a billionaire is a reasonable indication he sometimes gets things right. I have no idea of the specific circumstances of the other clubs he owns but I think that anyone with some business sense could make a decent fist of LFC as the potential revenue growth is fairly obvious and we already have the reputation to exploit.

Obviously I think he views all business ventures as a gamble which might not pay off and in some ways that is a worry but at the same time I don't see that being much different to most business men and I see no alternative to a businessman owning the club.

I may be being too hopeful but I really don't see that there is a viable alternative to waiting and seeing. Anything else to me seems to involve hurting the team in order to oust Hicks/Gillet. I can see the long term/short term argument but that still relies on their being a viable alternative out there and I lack any real faith in DIC after all the ****ing about.

Whilst it may be a dangerous policy at the minute I'm just backing Rafa and the team. Rafa seems to be siding to some degree with Hicks and he certainly has a better idea of what is going on than I do.

[homer1]

Basically I have no idea and in the same way that I can't suggest a clear ideal owner who we could turn to. I agree that clearly to buy the other out some sort of external investment will be needed by either Hicks or Gillet. To my mind though this is likely to be a group of investors which would mean that one person would be giving leadership even if others had a say. The problem as I see it now is that both owners have equal say and as such if they disagree then no progress can be made and no individual has sign off on big decisions.

How likely is it though that he will get together a group of 5 or 6 people, all prepared to pay a minimum GBP50 each without having a major say in how the club is run - I think it's unlikely to be honest & I am not convinced a 50% owner with a consortium of owners making up the other 50% is that much better than the current 50/50 arramgement

People argue about fan power but I would love to know how many potential "minor" investors at this level MAY have been interested until they took heed of the level of negative press Hicks has received

[kop-al-74]

Am i the only who see's that this is all part of the drama.We all knew it would get messy and thats exctly whats happening.

DIC backing away officially with a statement is the clearest indication to me that they will soon own the club.

There is no way Hicks can now be sole owner of Liverpool fc.Too much damage to go back.

The fan's will never have it.

[Skillz]

What is Rafa's problem with Parry over this, Parry had to attend, he was ordered to attend, if he had then gone running to Rafa would he not have been out of a job, would HICKS not now be in a STRONGER position with Parry's vote off the board.

Hicks told Rafa to stop 'POUTING' 'Coach the team he has' Now Hicks expects us to believe he's Rafa's best chance.....Utter RubbiSH.

I really hope Rafa has not fallen for Hicks lies & promises.

Noone knows if Rafa has a problem. It's conjecture at this point.

[Skillz]

you have to give it to Parry. He kept his involvement in the meeting very quiet and didnt for one second give any indication that he was present when they met klinsmann.

As I have said before we need to get behind Parry - for now. The first step is to remove Jabba the hut as our owner and then send Parry back to the FA where he can **** up their organisation.

But Parry will get what's coming to him.

They wouldn't be very hard even for Rick.

[homer1]

Noone knows if Rafa has a problem. It's conjecture at this point.

Rafa will have a problem with Parry if Parry a) told him he wasn't there or b) intimated he knew nothing about it at the time as either way he will have been lied to blatantly

Rafa is a proud man and if he has been lied to then it's another reason / excuse for him to go as his position is further undermined and being made more & more untenable all the time.

[El Jefecito]

Rafa won't walk. If he was going to do that it would have been when he found out about Kilnsmann.

He'll be looking to use this as an opportunity to entrench/enhance his position and power.