David Moores letter to The Times

[PTP]

Sued by who? And for what? There was no direct loss to Moores or the shareholders from any breach of such an agreement. It didn't alter the value they received for their shares.

i don't know? i was just asking the question - it states that there was a document in place from hicks/gillett stating what their intentions where, and the club was only sold to them as a result of this later, it then looks like they bought the club and went and did the opposisite -

[red g]

That's the american way that so many people have espoused around the world mate. It's going bust and with it all our institutions. When it was booming, no one was saying anything against it.

sorry mate, thats bollocks lots of people were saying stuff against it, just no-one gave to ****s as they were making loads of money!!

[PTP]

I doubt something like that was written into the contract of sale

Even if it was chances are it would have a time limit on it

There has been various whispers over the years about Moores investigating pursuing a legal case against the owner because exactly what you have stated

I assume he does not have a leg to stand on otherwise he'd have taken it further legally

cheers.

[The Birdman]

I honestly cannot believe people are defending Moores.
He got it massively wrong and hasn't even got the bollocks to accept responsibility for it.

I don't think he's a bad person, don't think he did it all deliberately but the fact remains it was his decision and don't even get me started on how he let us slip further and further behind with the commercial aspect etc... before the sale was even thought about

[Guest]

It could be also be argued that the ones who were responsible for Man.Utd's success did a massive cock up selling their family silver to the Glazer's. It's just not as black and white as this. You don't know how much pressure there is involved in all of this, with Liverpool being such a massive institution and one which is in the public eye. Moores tried to do the right thing but messed up. I just think he came out trying to defend his image and his family, he isn't trying to duck out excuses for failing, he's said it himself that he could have done things better.

[Vermilion]

Nobody seems to want to take responsibility, for Steve Morgan to be 'insistent' that they sold to H&G, and amongst other major share holders this view seems to be pretty unanimous, they all proclaim their love for the club...why did NONE of them do more checks personally, or sound the warnings, they are business men ffs, or was it all about the cash for THEM too!.

Bloody bunch of back stabbers if you ask me.

[Guest]

As I've said, it wasn't just about David Moores. People are being too simplistic.

[Dalglish]

As I've said, it wasn't just about David Moores. People are being too simplistic.

No. People are reacting to a letter written by David Moores, which covers David Moores' views on the sale from David Moores' perspective

It's ALL about David Moores in this instance

[Vermilion]

No. People are reacting to a letter written by David Moores, which covers David Moores' views on the sale from David Moores' perspective

It's ALL about David Moores in this instance

It is, but i expect Steve Morgan to get involved at some point, having been personally mentioned by Moores as a 'co conspiritor/eager seller to h&g'.

[Kenneth]

i don't know? i was just asking the question - it states that there was a document in place from hicks/gillett stating what their intentions where, and the club was only sold to them as a result of this later, it then looks like they bought the club and went and did the opposisite -

Sure, it could be misrepresentation, but seeing as the shareholders were openly looking to sell, and the Americans made the higher offer, I am not sure what a legal challenge could achieve. The only remedy would be compensation for the shareholders, not anyone else. And as the shareholders can't claim they lost anything as a result, they's stuggle. It's not simply a case of saying the sale was invalidated by the lie, and that ownership can be reverted back to where it was at the time. That's just not possible.

[Guest]

No. People are reacting to a letter written by David Moores, which covers David Moores' views on the sale from David Moores' perspective

It's ALL about David Moores in this instance

He is just trying to defend himself to the abuse he got. I guessed he and his family have been threatened. Do you think this is right? If people were instigating a hate campaign against you, what would you have done? There's nothing wrong in him trying to pass on his true feelings on the matter. I also think, judging that there was some kind of email exchange with the Echo reporter previously, he was invited to come forward with his views.

[Chrono]

The few things I got from reading this on my way in to work this morning:

1) Moores doesn't get that when people mentioned he should have Googled Tom Hicks they weren't referring to his finances they were talking about his history of being a lying *******. He keeps referring to the banks saying he was good for it which completely misses the point

2) DIC were obviously not a good option either

3) He did the right thing by not going with the Thais

He ****ed up no doubt about it and was very naive to utterly retarded in the handling of the sale but clearly his intentions were good and I hope that once this **** is resolved he would be welcomed back as a fan.

[ntto]

when it became obvious that we werent going to finish 4th this season then RBS should have pulled the plug and called in the loans there and then.

That would have made the best business sense. Take the points deduction this season rather than in the next season or two when it didnt matter to us.

They will be really reluctant to do it in future and risk our continuation on the prem league

[PTP]

It is, but i expect Steve Morgan to get involved at some point, having been personally mentioned by Moores as a 'co conspiritor/eager seller to h&g'.

i'm sure he will - morgan will be fuming that moores has thrown his name into the blame game in this letter.

Whether he is to blame or not - imo, moores shouldn't have mentioned any other party in this letter except himself and hicks/gillete - i include parry in that too - if parry has something to say or add he should do so,

the letter just smacks me of a bit of desperation and regret because it's backfired and makes all involved look like cunts.

greedy cunts.....every party involved, the banks, the major shareholders, the financial advisors and the owners, all saw the ££££'s flashing in front of their eyes and took their slice and basically raped and left the club for dead

[Kenneth]

He is just trying to defend himself to the abuse he got. I guessed he and his family has been threatened. Do you think this is right? If people were instigating a hate campaign against you, what would you have done? There's nothing wrong in him trying to pass on his true feelings on the matter. I also think, judging that there was some kind of email exchange with the Echo reporter previously, he was invited to come forward with his views.

Come on, nobody would think a hate campaign against him and his family is right.