DIC: takeover thread

[Rashid]

His dad said in the Evening Standard that Walcott would have joined Liverpool but we wanted them to run down his contract and go for a tribunal which they refused to do.

[Roy Hobbs]

Originally Posted by Rashid Both players made Liverpool their first choice but we missed out because of Parry.

stop blaming Rafa then.

Apologies for quoting him.

[Rashid]

I've never blamed Rafa for Augero or Walcott.

[Kennys_spell]

Originally Posted by Rashid I've never blamed Rafa for Augero or Walcott.

Why do you feel the need to blame anyone - it's football, these things happen.

[rebel23]

here's the article from the Express:

Tuesday April 29,2008
By Harry Harris

AMERICAN bankers JP Morgan have told Tom Hicks “time is up” on his huge loans and are calling on the Texan to sell his 50 per cent stake in Liverpool.

The bank is getting jittery at Hicks’ failure to raise the required capital to buy out co-owner George Gillett, who has agreed to sell his share of the club to Dubai International Capital.

This highly significant development is a body blow to Hicks’ stubborn resistance to sell to DIC, with Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum taking a personal interest in the end game of their proposed Anfield takeover.

Hicks has been eager to demonstrate his refusal to be budged from his position of power at Anfield, showing up for the Champions League semi-final first leg against Chelsea, waving a scarf and singing ‘You’ll Never Walk Alone’. He went to the training ground twice for talks with Rafa Benitez, and the pair have agreed a summer transfer budget.

But there are now claims it was all a facade – that Hicks is playing hardball, merely trying to hang on for a bigger offer before selling out. He values the Hicks Sports Group – including baseball’s Texas Rangers and ice hockey franchise Dallas Stars as well as Liverpool – at £1billion, with the Premier League club making up 75 per cent of that figure. And although Royal Bankof Scotland and Wachovia financed his joint-takeover of Liverpool, it is JP Morgan who bankroll the group.
They see a buyer and worry it may fall through

My well-connected City source informs me Hicks is being so heavily squeezed by JP?Morgan he may be forced to sell sooner rather than later, but they are sensitive to Liverpool’s bid to reach the Champions League final and will not pull the plug on Hicks’ loans until that campaign ends – tomorrow or after the final in Moscow on May 21.

My source said: “Hicks’ bankers are getting very nervous about his ability to finance his debt. They can see a buyer for his Liverpool shares, and as there is only one out there, they are worried it might fall through. They cannot allow that to happen.

“He owes the banks, and they want him to sell up. Hicks has had his chances to raise money, but in the current markets he has been unable to do that.

“Hicks’ camp continue to suggest he doesn’t need to refinance until 2010, but that doesn’t add up with Hicks trying as hard as he has been for some time now to find other partners.

“If Hicks can hold out until 2010, then he hasn’t got the personal resources to either add anything to the transfer budget or raise more loans to build the stadium. That again applies even greater pressure to his personal financial situation.”

DIC will want to help Benitez, and thus far there is no suggestion of replacing the manager despite some weekend reports that Jose Mourinho has already been approached in a situation similar to that admitted by Hicks and Gillett, who met Jurgen Klinsmann last year.

Sources at DIC deny they have ever “offered the job to Mourinho, or met him to discuss it” and contacted a number of Liverpool fans’ groups, including the recently-formed Spirit of Shankly organisation, to deny the speculation.

Supporters have not forgiven Mourinho for his rhetoric and confrontational attitude towards the club over the years and DIC know if they do take over, Benitez has the fans’ backing.

[Kennys_spell]

Originally Posted by Baps Is page 175 for VIP's only?

Page 175 is where all the hidden porn is.

Can't you see it?

[Rashid]

Harry Harris reporting that JP Morgan who financed Hicks want their money back and have asked Hicks to sell in light of DIC directly making their intentions to buy clear.

I think DIC will get in sooner rather than later... I really want to know how fans will react to a government that doesn't allow certain country citizens and religions in as owners of LFC?

E.g. Yossi Benayoun was refused entry only 18 months ago.

[Rashid]

Originally Posted by Baps Doesn't FIFA prohibit governments from directly owning football clubs?

We will be bought in a way that clearly shows we aren't I presume.

[Kennys_spell]

Originally Posted by Rashid Harry Harris reporting that JP Morgan who financed Hicks want their money back and have asked Hicks to sell in light of DIC directly making their intentions to buy clear. I think DIC will get in sooner rather than later... I really want to know how fans will react to a government that doesn't allow certain country citizens and religions in as owners of LFC? E.g. Yossi Benayoun was refused entry only 18 months ago.

Politics for Politicians - Football for Football fans.

I'm a football fan.

[spider-neil]

Originally Posted by Rashid Harry Harris reporting that JP Morgan who financed Hicks want their money back and have asked Hicks to sell in light of DIC directly making their intentions to buy clear. I think DIC will get in sooner rather than later... I really want to know how fans will react to a government that doesn't allow certain country citizens and religions in as owners of LFC? E.g. Yossi Benayoun was refused entry only 18 months ago.

would be interesting to see if yossi is sold this summer if the DIC, rafa could of course claim he was moved on because he was mediocre.

[Rashid]

I am a Muslim but I find it sickening that ordinary people are stopped from travelling.

[Carra_is_legend]

I really want to know how fans will react to a government that doesn't allow certain country citizens and religions in as owners of LFC? E.g. Yossi Benayoun was refused entry only 18 months ago.

I think we should be owned by 2 wealthy business men, coming from the free country that is America, with a track record of owning sports franchises

[theRedHorse]

Originally Posted by real red Apologies for this first bit of quoting: Thoughts on this anyone? FT.com / Comment & analysis / Analysis - High debt risks leaving Dubai up the creek High debt risks leaving Dubai up the creek By Simeon Kerr and Roula Khalaf Published: April 2 2008 17:49 | Last updated: April 2 2008 17:49 In 1958 the grandfather of Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid (pictured below), Dubai’s current ruler, borrowed £500,000 from oil-rich Kuwait to dredge the silted-up creek and allow larger ships to anchor. Much scepticism greeted the decision at the time although its value eventually became apparent, as the Gulf emirate claimed a role as a regional trading hub. The next ruler, Sheikh Rashid, was equally fearless about leverage, borrowing heavily – from the banking group that is now HSBC and from the Saudi government – to finance initiatives such as Jebel Ali port, which diversified the economy from oil. This project in particular was widely derided as too ambitious. But business activity today at Jebel Ali free zone accounts for about 26 per cent of Dubai’s more than $50bn (€32bn, £25bn) annual gross domestic product, as well as a third of its trade. The city state’s admirers cite this history to rebuff warnings that its gaudy buildings and grandiose projects could be a debt-fuelled bubble. Unlike its oil-rich neighbours, Dubai – where hydrocarbon revenues make up less than 5 per cent of GDP – has had little choice but to rely on debt to transform itself from sleepy fishing village to global metropolis, they argue. Yet the lack of transparency over Dubai’s finances and its massive expansion still lead to questions about over-leverage. In a sign of unease among investors, the cost of insuring the emirate’s corporate debt against default has doubled since the credit crunch started last August. Some worry that Dubai could wind up in such trouble that neighbouring Abu Dhabi, the richest of the city states making up the United Arab Emirates, might have to bail it out. Dubai’s sprawling business empire spans government institutions and private companies owned directly by Sheikh Mohammed but acting as quasi-government bodies. The ruler has instituted a culture of competition among state-backed companies and insisted they run themselves as private sector entities. In their quest to satisfy his ambitions, the business groups have come to rely heavily on debt – leveraging myriad commercial ventures, from domestic property developments to international acquisitions. Along the way, Dubai’s finances have become complicated and the line between ruler and government assets blurred. As one consequence, the emirate’s efforts to secure a sovereign rating for its debt have stalled. Analysts say the government is in some cases reluctant to share financial information but in other cases simply does not have the figures rating agencies need to assess its creditworthiness. “As Dubai grows, it becomes more difficult to manage – each tentacle turns into a beast of its own,” says one financial analyst, wishing to remain anonymous. The government argues that it has reported an average fiscal surplus of 10 per cent since 2000, with limited recourse to debt. The finance department puts current outstanding debt at only 10 per cent of GDP. Standard & Poor’s, the rating agency, estimates the gross debt of the main arms of Dubai government-related entities at about 50 per cent of GDP – but still below 20 per cent of these companies’ equity. This compares with debt-to-GDP rates of 11 per cent in Saudi Arabia and only 2 per cent in Abu Dhabi – even before large foreign exchange reserves and sovereign wealth fund assets are counted. Tristan Cooper, sovereign risk analyst at Moody’s, says that from the limited information available, “it does seem that Dubai’s net public debt is climbing quickly given state-owned companies’ ambitious expansion plans”. This, he says, warrants careful monitoring, because Dubai “does not have the same magnitude of offshore sovereign financial assets as other Gulf peers”. Farouk Soussa, director of sovereign ratings at S&P, calculates that Dubai’s debt is still “very manageable” at this stage and its assets are substantial. “But, more than other Gulf Co-operation Council countries, the balance sheet is dependent on the domestic economy,” he says. One main concern is that a shock such as a regional war, a big terrorist attack or a significant downturn in global trade could begin to unravel Dubai’s success, driving foreigners away and hitting the property market, the backbone of the emirate’s current wealth. Since the government opened up property ownership to foreigners in 2002, prices have risen as investors from the region seek places to park capital and expatriates snap up homes in Dubai. As one banker asks: “What happens if the real estate collateral turns back into dust?” To get a better handle on its finances, the government has been seeking to institutionalise “Dubai Inc”. The recently established Investment Corporation of Dubai groups more than 30 government-owned entities in a holding company that includes Dubai Aluminium Company and Emirates Airlines.The umbrella corporation is to help its businesses raise debt and, when seen as appropriate, spin off companies in initial public offerings. Meanwhile the finance department in February set up a debt management office, which requires some state-owned operations to apply for approval before they issue debt. “The mandate will improve government entity co-ordination,” the department says. Bankers say they hope the creation of the debt office will limit the risk of various Dubai entities vying with one another for funding. Dubai World, one of the leading groups in the emirate, last year sought a $2.7bn Islamic bond, or sukuk, at the same time as DP World, its sister company, was raising a large loan. Dubai World eventually closed the deal at $5bn but at a significant premium to the prevailing spreads on Dubai corporate debt, bankers say. When Dubai Electricity & Water Authority tested the debt market a month later, the deal failed as the utility was not willing to pay so high a price. But the effort at co-ordination and consolidation is not as extensive as some analysts would have hoped. Big groups such as Dubai World and Dubai International Financial Centre fall outside Investment Corporation of Dubai – as do the ruler’s private assets, grouped under the Dubai Holding conglomerate. On the debt side, meanwhile, only government activities dedicated to infrastructure development – such as utilities and transport – will have to seek formal approval from the new management office before tapping the capital markets. As it tries to put its house in order – at a time when turmoil in global credit markets and volatility in equity markets are starting to be felt in the Gulf – Dubai may be forced to rein back its ambitions. For one, bankers are concerned about the exposure of Dubai International Capital, Sheikh Mohammed’s private equity vehicle, to losses on underperforming stocks. More*over, spreads have doubled in the limited secondary market for Dubai debt and it has become more expensive for companies to fund cross-border acquisitions. “The heady rate of overseas expansion by government-owned companies in Dubai may be tempered by the cooling global economy,” says Mr Cooper at Moody’s. But public sector indebtedness may rise further, “given the emirate’s ambitious plans for domestic investment”.

I know RR has had his own little agenda but is there a reason why everybody has chosen to ignore this?

It means fuck all to me personally, but I'm shocked we haven't had the usual uproar...

[Rashid]

RR has his agenda though... it is so transparent and I am pissed off people tried to make apologise for it.

[lfc4eva99]

too long to read i guess

[Skidfingers McGonical]

Rash can you explain what you said about RR and apologies as it doesn't make sense.

Who made who try and apologise? that what was is unclear to me mate.