David Moores letter to The Times

[BobTheCharmer]

He did the right thing. It was his decision as a majority shareholder, but he consulted all respective parties (the other shareholders) plus reputed accounting firms made their checks on them. What could have he done more? There was a lot of pressure on him to sell the club, many misinformed people on here were calling for him to accept whatever silly offer that came forward. Well, he held on for 4 years because he wanted to do the right thing. To criticise him for this is uncalled for. It's been a mistake but one he was entitled because it was untenable for him to hold on for much longer. Moores is a ****ing good bloke and one who holds this club close to his heart. I would take him back in a heartbeat if he had the financial nous to take us forward.

Are you Shaggy?

[Guest]

Are you Shaggy?

What's your point? Cock.

[Kenneth]

He did the right thing. It was his decision as a majority shareholder, but he consulted all respective parties (the other shareholders) plus reputed accounting firms made their checks on them. What could have he done more? There was a lot of pressure on him to sell the club, many misinformed people on here were calling for him to accept whatever silly offer that came forward. Well, he held on for 4 years because he wanted to do the right thing. To criticise him for this is uncalled for. It's been a mistake but one he was entitled because it was untenable for him to hold on for much longer. Moores is a ****ing good bloke and one who holds this club close to his heart. I would take him back in a heartbeat if he had the financial nous to take us forward.

But it's not that clear cut. Yes, he took advice on Hicks, but what advice? "Does Hicks have money?", "Yes", or a more subtle assessment of his business practices? We don't know. Either way, having invested so heavily in assessing potential bidders, he did, by his own admission, make a snap judgement about Hicks. Almost like he thought '**** it', and sold.

[red g]

What a ****ing joke, Man up and apologise.......he ****ed up and ****ed up big time.

I cannot believe he has tried to wriggle his way out of this and shify blame every else!! the letter should have read more like

Dear Tony,

I am thick as pig **** and got taken for a ride by those yanks, didnt see it coming but then i dont suppose i would. Both Rick and I are massive LFC fans but have both overseen the clubs steady decline and decided we had ****ed up the club as much as we could since my tenure and it was only right that we passed it onto someone else to **** up. In george and tom I believe we have found a pair who are nearly as incompetent as us 2, but they will also bleed LFC dry but hey i made an extra 10million quid and i am still on board so its not all bad

Yours

Freddie Boswell

[Guest]

But it's not that clear cut. Yes, he took advice on Hicks, but what advice? "Does Hicks have money?", "Yes", or a more subtle assessment of his business practices? We don't know. Either way, having invested so heavily in assessing potential bidders, he did, by his own admission, make a snap judgement about Hicks. Almost like he thought '**** it', and sold.

He doesn't deserve the abuse, that's all I am saying.

[Craig_H]

He did the right thing. It was his decision as a majority shareholder, but he consulted all respective parties (the other shareholders) plus reputed accounting firms made their checks on them. What could have he done more? There was a lot of pressure on him to sell the club, many misinformed people on here were calling for him to accept whatever silly offer that came forward. Well, he held on for 4 years because he wanted to do the right thing. To criticise him for this is uncalled for. It's been a mistake but one he was entitled because it was untenable for him to hold on for much longer. Moores is a ****ing good bloke and one who holds this club close to his heart. I would take him back in a heartbeat if he had the financial nous to take us forward.

I'm not sure how you can say he did the right thing.

He took Hicks 'on trust' and based on what he was told by an organisation employed by Hicks to paint him in a good light. You ask what more he could've done - well, maybe making some proper independent checks on Hicks would've been a start. It would've been easy enough to track down the Corinthians debacle, if he'd actually taken some time to do so.

You say on one hand, he did the right then, and then on the other hand, that it was a mistake.

And i dont understand this 'entitled to make the mistake' part. He was responsible for something massive, that millions hold extremely dear and he messed up.

Being a good bloke doesnt make someone right to run a football club and take it forward. I would take him back as an alternative to the yank ****s, because frankly, i'd take anyone as an alternative to them.

But all things being equal, he's a poor businessman and if it wasnt for the fact that we're currently owned by two parasites, i wouldnt ever want Moores back.

[PTP]

am i being a bit thick or is it not as simple - why, if there is a document in place stating that the club would not have debt placed on it, they can't be ****ing sued for i don't know blagging they were going to do one thing to get the club, then once they got it, they did the opposisite.

Surely, if they had stated that they would leverage debt onto the club, then there is an arguement in there that the club would not have been sold??

[BobTheCharmer]

What's your point? Cock.

Cock. Are you Shaggy? Aye? Non?

[red g]

He did the right thing. It was his decision as a majority shareholder, but he consulted all respective parties (the other shareholders) plus reputed accounting firms made their checks on them. What could have he done more? There was a lot of pressure on him to sell the club, many misinformed people on here were calling for him to accept whatever silly offer that came forward. Well, he held on for 4 years because he wanted to do the right thing. To criticise him for this is uncalled for. It's been a mistake but one he was entitled because it was untenable for him to hold on for much longer. Moores is a ****ing good bloke and one who holds this club close to his heart. I would take him back in a heartbeat if he had the financial nous to take us forward.

we trusted Moores........ with great power comes great responsibility.

He ****ed it.

[Lecter]

RBS have informally agreed to extend the loan to facilitate a sale. They can go back on the agreement anytime they want if they want if they think the yanks are ****ing about. I don't there are any new terms apart from sell up and **** off.

I just dont see that sorry

ANY agreement would be in the form of a legally binding contract (not an informal agreement as you put it)

ALL suggestions is that its a MINIMUM of year long renewal / extension to help the owners facilitate a sale

Now if the owners set the reserve price artificially high then come the end of the agreed period then and only then can RBS make a judgement call on what they want to do

EVEN then the ability to pull the plug would depend on the terms and conditions of the renewal / extension

I'm sorry I do not share your optimism / beliefs in the slightest

This will go on for the entire renewal period after which you will again hear noises about how the owners are still in discussions with potential buyers and are close to a deal which imo will be shortly followed by another RBS renewal / extension to facilitate the sale process

[Craig_H]

am i being a bit thick or is it not as simple - why, if there is a document in place stating that the club would not have debt placed on it, they can't be ****ing sued for i don't know blagging they were going to do one thing to get the club, then once they got it, they did the opposisite.

Surely, if they had stated that they would leverage debt onto the club, then there is an arguement in there that the club would not have been sold??

I've been thinking this too.

Surely if there were written guarantees that they wouldnt load the debt onto the club - and the fact that they obviously have done this - isnt there a legal issue whereby they can be held accountable for this lie?

[Lecter]

Hmmm, here's a little beauty....


Don't like the 'nothing to apologise for or i would have long ago' bit either, face up to it man, then maybe we can have some closure on this part, untill Moores does that not many will forgive him. imo.

Despite Morgans recent claims in the press he did FULLY endorse Hicks & Gilletts offer at the time

[Guest]

I'm not sure how you can say he did the right thing.

He took Hicks 'on trust' and based on what he was told by an organisation employed by Hicks to paint him in a good light. You ask what more he could've done - well, maybe making some proper independent checks on Hicks would've been a start. It would've been easy enough to track down the Corinthians debacle, if he'd actually taken some time to do so.

You say on one hand, he did the right then, and then on the other hand, that it was a mistake.

And i dont understand this 'entitled to make the mistake' part. He was responsible for something massive, that millions hold extremely dear and he messed up.

Being a good bloke doesnt make someone right to run a football club and take it forward. I would take him back as an alternative to the yank ****s, because frankly, i'd take anyone as an alternative to them.

But all things being equal, he's a poor businessman and if it wasnt for the fact that we're currently owned by two parasites, i wouldnt ever want Moores back.

By the right thing I meant he had to sell the club.

I don't think we'll end up with the right owners even after those americans anyway, this is a lottery and I don't trust any of those capital ****wits to do what is right for this club. They'll only be concerned about their money.

[Craig_H]

By the right thing I meant he had to sell the club.

I don't think we'll end up with the right owners even after those americans anyway, this is a lottery and I don't trust any of those capital ****wits to do what is right for this club. They'll only be concerned about their money.

So your assessment is based on a speculative view that we wont have decent owners anyway - so **** it, not to worry Mr Moores, let's have a cuddle?

[Shaggy]

Cock. Are you Shaggy? Aye? Non?

What the **** are you on about?