David Moores letter to The Times

[Lecter]

Personally I think that viewpoint is wrong, I dont hold any grudges against Moores for selling to the yanks, he did what he thought was best for the club, of that I am sure. I guess what I and all of us should be pissed off with the man for is his inability to progress us during one of the richest phases of modern football, he could have done more for sure however its plain to see he is not the best example of a successful businessman.

Personally I hold no ill will against Moores and hope at some stage he is welcomed back to Anfield to see us lift no.19.

Certainly in taking the club forward as a business Moores "fiddled whilst Rome burned"

Selling to the current owners was a monumental error, I will be interested to hear his take on DIC walking away I dont believe that was actually his fault

[Chris]

Tony Evans also said theres another bit in the times tomorrow about the supposed sale going nowhere. That was my big fear all along, they will just cling and cling and cling until they eventually get forced out.

[Vermilion]

Certainly in taking the club forward as a business Moores "fiddled whilst Rome burned"

Selling to the current owners was a monumental error, I will be interested to hear his take on DIC walking away I dont believe that was actually his fault

Well they spat the dummy because they say a deal was agreed or something...then when they called Moores wouldn't take their call, but regardless of who or what made them walk, i just think Moores should have counted to 100...and thought about what was right, and not about how he'd look if he sold to neither party.

He should have waited..to be sure dic didn't come back, or if they had walked for good, maybe another buyer might have surfaced with them out of the picture, we'll never know now though, h&g also pushed with a better offer for Moores..put him on the spot, he should have waited though, how could he not, stupid, gutless when the chips were down, just the way he's made i suppose.

Wonder what he'll say, if he'll have anything really revealing that noone knows about....yet.

[cream]

Should be online around midnight.

[Tatterdemalion]

Whatever he says we shouldn't labour under the illusion that DIC would have been perfect owners. The evidence of the time, and since, suggests that they would not (though perhaps not as clueless as our current bunch).

[Qantaga]

cool, got sweet f--k all to do until then.

[Darth Marty]

cool, got sweet f--k all to do until then.

watch 24 dumbass, thats what i gonna do.......now..see ya in 90 mins

[cream]

Please remember, its the ****ing yanks that have put us this position and are ****ing screwing us, not Moores. All our anger should be aimed at them, preferbly in physical form.

[Qantaga]

Last episode? crap. I need to invest in some Newsgroups.

Last 2 by the looks. Woohoo! go go go my 10kb/s.

[SERVO2]

So far this has appeared...
From The Times May 26, 2010

RBS is losing patience with pair’s inflated asking priceAnalysis: Helen Power Recommend? Tom Hicks and George Gillett Jr are holding out for an offer of at least £600 million for Liverpool, but have yet to find a serious buyer more than a month after putting the club on the market.

The Times has learnt that while that is the price tag set by the American owners, Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), the club’s lender, values Liverpool at closer to £400 million and may put pressure on the pair to lower their demands to secure a sale.

RBS declined to comment, but sources close to the bank said that frustration with the unpopular Americans is growing.

Liverpool’s £290 million loan from RBS and Wachovia, the American bank, formally expires in July, which ordinarily would have precipitated a debt crisis at the club. But Hicks and Gillett gained an informal agreement with lenders last month to get an extension on the loan in return for a promise that they would sell up.

The banks granted Liverpool a non-binding assurance that cash will continue to be available next season. The promise was essential because Martin Broughton, the club’s recently appointed chairman, had to appear before the Premier League to give a commitment that they would be able to fulfil their fixtures.

Accounts published by the club a fortnight ago disclosed the extent of Liverpool’s financial malaise. As of July 31 last year, the club’s total debts were £472.5 million — Kop Holdings, the company that owns Liverpool, is responsible for £351 million — and they are paying £40.1 million interest on their bank loans.

KPMG, the club’s auditor, expressed a “material uncertainty” about Liverpool’s ability to continue as a going concern, the second year running it has made that assessment of the club’s finances.

RBS is expected to bankroll Liverpool long enough for the Americans to find a buyer. But while it is not in RBS’s commercial interest to make Hicks and Gillett forced sellers of the club, the bank’s patience is not infinite and it is likely to start to apply pressure on the Americans to cut the price if no credible bidder has appeared by the start of next season.

Broughton, who is facing down the unions over strike action in his role as chairman of British Airways, has said that he will stay on at Liverpool only until the club are sold. He has already told The Times that he expected a sale to go through “within a matter of months”.

The market valuation of Liverpool is about £350 million, lower even than what RBS believes the club are worth.

[kingfunk]

Tony Evans Football Editor
Tony Barrett

The man who sold Liverpool to George
Gillett Jr and Tom Hicks broke his
silence last night to call for the club’s
American owners to “stand aside” and
not “punish the supporters any more”.
In an emotional and wide-ranging
letter to The Times, David Moores
writes that Gillett and Hicks “risk damaging
a sporting institution of global renown
and if they have a conscience or
nobility they will stand aside and allow
new owners to take over the club”.
The letter will turn up the pressure
on the Americans, who bought the club
from Moores three years ago in a deal
worth £202 million. The new owners
leveraged the club with debt, which
now stands at £351 million. Moores, a
member of the Littlewoods pools
dynasty, walked away with £88 million.
Five years to the day that Moores
woke up in Istanbul with the
Champions League trophy beside him
in bed, the former owner explains the
reason why he sold the club and how
he looked for a “fantasy investor . . . the
infintely wealthy Liverpool-loving individual
or family with the wherewithal
to transform our dreams into reality”.
The reality turned out very different
and Moores admits he was taken in by
the Americans. “We had looked at
George Gillett’s affairs in detail and he
came up to scratch,” he writes. “To a
great extent, we took Tom Hicks on
trust, on George’s say-so.”
Moores rejects allegations, however,
that anyone at the club was negligent
in the due diligence process, saying
Rothschild, the merchant bank representing
representing
the Americans, assured Anfield
officials “both were good for the
money”. The share offer, Moores contends,
“was laid out in unambiguous
terms . . . the document pledged there
would be no debt placed upon the club,
and significant funds would be made
available for investment in the squad
and the new stadium”.
The letter also explains why Moores
felt he had to sell the club and why the
bids from Thaksin Shinawatra and
Dubai International Capital to buy
Liverpool failed. Moores, 65, sees no
need to apologise but admits to making
“honest mistakes” while acting in the
“best interests of the club”. Nevertheless,
he “hugely regrets selling the club”
to the American pair.
Since he resigned from the board a
year ago, Moores has not been back to
Anfield. “It has been hard for me,
sitting mute on the sidelines as the club
I love suffers one blow after another,”
he writes.
The scale of his contempt for the
men who replaced him in Anfield’s
corridors of power is clear. “I call upon
them to stand back, accept their role in
the club’s current demise, and stand
aside with dignity,” he writes.
It is a sentiment that will resonate
across Anfield Road but with no buyer
in sight, one unlikely to be answered in
the near future.

The quiet man who Barclay
finally voiced his anger
Why the Arab bid for
Anfield fell apart
Outlandish price turns
buyers off Reds
Liverpool crisis, pages 83-85

[Chris]

“To a great extent, we took Tom Hicks on trust, on George’s say-so.”

Astonishing, absolutely ****ing incredible. His ineptitude is mindblowing.

The club had already ****ed Gillett off as had Aston Villa, yet he brings in a partner and he trusts that? Amazing, just amazing.

[Vermilion]

So what's this in aid of, "step aside" he says to them, they wont step aside untill they get their price, or untill the bank says so...he probably means lower the price, but RBS should be ****in doing that now for them..**** em! not waiting till the start of next bloody season! like it says RBS will wait till before applying pressure.

We need a buyer in place during the world cup, get the price down now, look at the serious bidders, pick the richest but with the best pedigree, and do the deal...goodbye ya pair o ******s!

[Lecter]

Well they spat the dummy because they say a deal was agreed or something...then when they called Moores wouldn't take their call, but regardless of who or what made them walk, i just think Moores should have counted to 100...and thought about what was right, and not about how he'd look if he sold to neither party.

He should have waited..to be sure dic didn't come back, or if they had walked for good, maybe another buyer might have surfaced with them out of the picture, we'll never know now though, h&g also pushed with a better offer for Moores..put him on the spot, he should have waited though, how could he not, stupid, gutless when the chips were down, just the way he's made i suppose.

Wonder what he'll say, if he'll have anything really revealing that noone knows about....yet.

DIC had an exclusivity agreement (and quite possibly an agreement in principle) they commenced DD based on this

If you remember back they took an age on DD and their exclusivity period expired

The Yanks took advantage, Moores talked to them and DIC took umbridge at that

I agree Moores should have counted to 10 and equally DIC should have taken a breath instead of taking their ball away

Ahh well we live and learn

[-V-]

What a ****ing arsehole. Thats all he's got to say? Dickhead