DIC: takeover thread

[Roy Hobbs]

Originally Posted by Rashid

The only way in for DIC is to make Gillett an offer Hicks can't match. So a £300m offer tomorrow would do it. The banks won't lend Hicks that... they can then squeeze Hicks once they are in.

Rash, you have been a source of such great entertainment through this mega episode drama. Thank you.

[Sinos]

Originally Posted by woo-lfc

Would Gillette have to tell Hicks how much higher the offer was. I know its soft but say for example Hicks matched DICs bid of £200m, then DIC offered an extra £100, would Gillette have to tell Hicks how much more DIC offered and give Hicks the chance to match the offer again?

If Gillette doesnt have to say anything then this may not be that big a problem.

I'm guessing he would have to inform Hicks that DIC raised their offer and he would give him a ball park figure and considerably shorter time to raise the finance.

[Trucker Paddy]

Well if it proves anything, the next time that fat american cunt is at anfield he deserves 90 minutes of abuse, fucker got off scot free at Chelsea game! Him his bird his kids everyone of the cunts deserve abuse, hope the cunt dies soon!

[StevieH]

Originally Posted by Trucker Paddy

Well if it proves anything, the next time that fat american cunt is at anfield he deserves 90 minutes of abuse, fucker got off scot free at Chelsea game! Him his bird his kids everyone of the cunts deserve abuse, hope the cunt dies soon!

Hicks has taken advantage of the incompetence of Moores and Parry who also deserve some verbal.

[lfc4eva99]

Originally Posted by StevieH

Hicks has taken advantage of the incompetence of Moores and Parry who also deserve some verbal.

A little more than verbal....

[Richie T]

Originally Posted by Trucker Paddy

Well if it proves anything, the next time that fat american cunt is at anfield he deserves 90 minutes of abuse, fucker got off scot free at Chelsea game! Him his bird his kids everyone of the cunts deserve abuse, hope the cunt dies soon!

I wouldnt stoop as low to hurl abuse at his wife or grandkids thats below the belt man. Tom and His son tom or mac or whoever is on the board and involved with the club deserves everything they get but going at his wife or grandkids isnt something youd expect from liverpool fans.

[andyfm]

Originally Posted by FTORRES09

I wouldnt stoop as low to hurl abuse at his wife or grandkids thats below the belt man. Tom and His son tom or mac or whoever is on the board and involved with the club deserves everything they get but going at his wife or grandkids isnt something youd expect from liverpool fans.

Erm, Posh Spice...

[real red]

takingstock: Man U fan advises Liverpool sale

[Falla]

Nothing suprises me in this circus anymore.

[taliesin08]

Hicks delays Glorypark due to “extreme conditions”
Posted on May 15th, 2008 by Jim Boardman

A press release issued in Dallas overnight UK time will add more weight to the claims that Liverpool FC co-owner Tom Hicks will not be able to find suitable finance to purchase the other half of the club from partner George Gillett.

The Glorypark project in Arlington, Texas, is to be delayed due to financial concerns.

The Dallas Morning News quotes Hicks as saying: “We’re in the most difficult credit crunch I’ve seen the last 20 years.”

The press statement, from Hicks Holdings, said that “financing and construction of a proposed mixed use development between Rangers Ballpark and the new Cowboys stadium in Arlington has been put on hold because of ‘extreme conditions’ in the country’s financial and retail markets.”

Glorypark, Arlington, TexasIt goes on to say that “the nation’s economic markets today have made it impossible to come to terms with lenders for Glorypark, a half billion dollar (approx £257m) project.”

Hicks Holdings’ development partners on this project are Steiner +Associates, and the statement says that S+A have “been unable to secure a firm and final commitment from an anchor department store.” It’s reported in the Dallas media that S+A have been in lengthy discussions with Dillard’s department stores.

Now, the statement says, “The developers do not plan to exercise a May 15, 2008 option to extend a letter of commitment to underwrite bonds for roads and parking garages. As a result, construction mobilization will not begin this spring as planned.”

Tom Hicks is quoted in the statement: “We have put an enormous amount of time and money into Glorypark. In the end, the dream can’t become reality without the right financial package. We will pursue alternative funding options and examine our reprogramming options.”

Hicks compared it to another project he was a partner in, the Victory Park project, a similar initiative sighted alongside the American Airlines Center, home of his Dallas Stars NHL side. “This is extremely disappointing to me, personally,” Hicks said. “It’s almost the exact situation we had at Victory when we were ready to go, but the financial markets were in deep trouble after 9/11. That’s when we had to regroup.”

Of the Victory Park project, the statement says: “After two years, Victory did re-emerge although the project has evolved and continues to evolve.” Last week Ross Perot Jr’s company announced their plans to build a 43-storey hotel on the Victory development were being delayed, also due in part to the condition of the financial markets.

Hicks said in the statement that the land between his Texas Rangers baseball stadium and the new Dallas Cowboys stadium would still be developed: “When my family purchased the Rangers, we pledged to invest in a development around the Ballpark. We are still committed to doing that, but we may have to re-examine what should be built and what actually can be built if the market conditions continue.”

Hicks said he contacted Arlington’s mayor, Robert Cluck, about their decision: “These events are in no way related to the City of Arlington. The city did absolutely everything possible to facilitate negotiations while, at the same time, protect the taxpayers’ interests. We all must take the long view for this important piece of real estate between two great sports venues.” The Fort Worth Business Press says: “The city of Arlington has approved several zoning changes to make way for the development and the city had planned to contribute about $135 million through various taxing districts.”

According to Hicks, the developers will now be most likely to concentrate on attracting dining and entertainment businesses to the site: “We have had enormous response from those business segments at Glorypark. I believe reprogramming will produce a plan that is more incremental and includes those elements as well is specialty retail, residential and office components.”

The statement says that Hicks Holdings has invested “almost $50 million into the improvements, design studies, and master planning of the area around the Ballpark.” It also says “plans will continue for the development and opening of the 310-room Westin Hotel and condominium project that was previously announced by Hicks Holdings and Gatehouse Capital. It will be located across Johnson Creek from the new Cowboys stadium.”

Glorypark was due to open in March 2010. The Dallas Morning News talks about how Dallas and the rest of the US have felt the pressures of the current financial environment: “Since last summer, lenders have increased requirements for virtually all types of real estate loans. And some debt sources that previously financed office buildings, hotels, high-rise condos and such have exited the market. The so-called credit crunch is expected to significantly reduce the amount of speculative development this year in Dallas and cities across the nation.”

According to the same paper, this isn’t the first holdup to the project: “The completion of Glorypark, which would have included restaurants, retail, office space and residential, had been delayed at least twice previously.”

As well as needing to raise investment of around £200m (approx $389m) to buy George Gillett’s half of Liverpool FC, Hicks also needs to raise the funds to continue with the building work on the club’s new £300m (approx $584m) stadium, due to open on Stanley Park in 2011. £60m is already in place to commence the work, but the other £240m (approx $467m) still has to be found.

Much can be read into this announcement.

On the one hand it does add weight to the various claims Hicks had been struggling to get finance for his Liverpool FC needs, but on the other hand it suggests the Texan could now be in a stronger position to get the finance for LFC - the total borrowings of the Hicks Holdings group of companies won’t now include this figure in the immediate future.

Again, on the one hand this announcement adds weight to the claims that the US banks Hicks does business with have been looking to call time on his borrowings, but on the other it could be said that recent talk of Hicks approaching hedge funds related to his quest for finance for Glorypark rather than Liverpool FC.

Is it possible Hicks has sacrificed this phase of Glorypark for now in favour of finalising the LFC situation?

The fact remains that Hicks is adamant George Gillett cannot sell without his say-so. This would leave Dubai relying on Hicks hitting financing problems as their only means of getting control of the club. If their assumption turns out to be true then sitting it out could eventually see them take control for the figure they’ve already decided is their top price. But if their assumption is wrong, and they don’t make a substantially higher and tempting bid, George Gillett may just go back on his vow not to sell to his partner rather than sit in this state of limbo for too long.

[Rashid]

If he now finances LFC at the expense of Arlington he will be lynched over there.

[Kennys_spell]

[quote=Carra_is_legend;1149111]You are just making an assumption that

Gillett will be free to sell to whoever he wants if Hicks doesn't match the offer. Like many of us on here.

Well yes I am, afterall - what's to stop him? It's his 50% he can do what he likes with it. He can give it to Charity if he wants. If hicks matches the offer he can still refuse - if hicks increases the offer by £100 Mill he can still refuse (Unlikely, but he can do what the fuck he likes with it).

I know Gillett has said he won't sell to Hicks but if this situation drags on for another 11 months, do you think Gillett will be sitting on a beach sipping champagne?

Well actually, Yes. If it drags on for another 11 months, some of the profits that Hicks can see may well start syphoning through and he'll be making as much money off it as Hisks is.

And what if DIC had walked away by then? What if the banks refuse to lend them money? If the banks refuse to lend Hicks, Hicks can no longer keep his 50% shares, never mind buy Gillett out (this is what I meant by Gillett losing a buyer). These are the things Gillett will be worried about the longer this goes on.

Thats a shit load of "IF" there lad. Now use your "IF" and make the "IF" outcome positive - because "IF" can have more than one outcome.

At any case, Gillett also said he won't be putting the debt on the club. He also wanted to keep the refinancing news quiet. Going by his past 'promises', there is no guarantee that he won't sell to Hicks.

There are no guarantees about anything in life. Educated guesses is all we can make. I tend to wonder about those who make guesses that are always based on "Worst possible outcome". Can I fill up that 'half empty' glass for you?

[Kennys_spell]

Hicks wouldn't be buying the club. He'd be buying the other half of the holding company. The holding company has two partners, who each have half a vote. There is no majority. And Parry and Moores have no say in it.

He can put the borrowing against the holding company, which owns the club, and if he wants to move the borrowing directly onto the club he can do that later, when he's overruled the board as the 100% shareholder. And the board don't have much say in anything anyway.

The only obstacle then is GG. If Hicks has legally got the option to block DIC, then all GG has left is to sell to Hicks or hang on in there as 50% owner.

The point I made still stands - if there are two partners on the holding company (Gillett and Hicks) the loan couldn't be loaded onto the holding company unless BOTH partners agreed to it. The Banks are very unlikely to loan the odd £300 Mill to a pair of partners at Loggerheads. It would have to be taken out by Hicks against his own name.

Let him put himself further in debt and further at risk.

[Kennys_spell]

Originally Posted by aws

Yes. He could accept a higher offer from DIC but not the same or a lower offer.

I think you're wrong there - it depends on how the offer is structured. He could accept a bid for the same amount.

[lfc4eva99]

Originally Posted by Kennys_spell

The point I made still stands - if there are two partners on the holding company (Gillett and Hicks) the loan couldn't be loaded onto the holding company unless BOTH partners agreed to it. The Banks are very unlikely to loan the odd £300 Mill to a pair of partners at Loggerheads. It would have to be taken out by Hicks against his own name.

Let him put himself further in debt and further at risk.

He is obviously going to structure that in a way that the CLUB has to pay the interests, like the Glazers, which basically means We're fucked if he gets the finance,... expect a steep rise in prices, merchandise etc...

How the fuck do parry and co sleep at night.....

[Kennys_spell]

Originally Posted by lfc4eva99

He is obviously going to structure that in a way that the CLUB has to pay the interests, like the Glazers, which basically means We're fucked if he gets the finance,... expect a steep rise in prices, merchandise etc...

How the fuck do parry and co sleep at night.....

I'm sure thats what he'll try - but like I said, he has to get the loan against his own holdings before he can buy Gillett' 50%. If he succeeds in doing that, Gillett will disapear and we'll all be paying through the nose.

[lfc4eva99]

The worst part is we are closer than ever to take the next step in the league, and this is not the time to be lost in uncertainty about finances and shit, Two more transfer windows of mediocre squad players and a poor league finish might see the end of this era of Benitez at the club..

And with the remaining clubs in the league improving quickly, one of them might get the right balance and have a crack at the top 4, leaving us staring at midtable mediocrity....

What sort of a background check was done on G&H, I hope Parry mentions that in his Autobiography - My Biggest Fuck Up.

[real red]

Originally Posted by Kennys_spell

The point I made still stands - if there are two partners on the holding company (Gillett and Hicks) the loan couldn't be loaded onto the holding company unless BOTH partners agreed to it. The Banks are very unlikely to loan the odd £300 Mill to a pair of partners at Loggerheads. It would have to be taken out by Hicks against his own name.

Let him put himself further in debt and further at risk.

Originally Posted by Kennys_spell

I'm sure thats what he'll try - but like I said, he has to get the loan against his own holdings before he can buy Gillett' 50%. If he succeeds in doing that, Gillett will disapear and we'll all be paying through the nose.

I could be missing your point here, so apologies if so.

He'll be borrowing the money against the new version of whatever actual company is up for sale. Say it's Kop Holdings, he'll buy Kop Holdings. When he buys it the current legal documents governing who can do what will either change by specifically being updated, or just by the fact that as Partner X and Partner Y are now both him he can authorise whatever he likes.

He can't technically borrow the money until he owns the club, but he can't own the club until he's borrowed the money. But that doesn't matter. If it did houses would never get sold, never mind big business deals go through so many times a day.

There will be a number of transactions that all technically happen at the same split second in time. I don't think it actually physically happens in that way, but for legal purposes it does.

All that Hicks needs is an agreement from Gillett to sell at a given price. Gillett can insist on proof from Hicks in advance that he's got all the money lined up.

The offer itself will probably be a good few pages long, and it will include conditions about Gillett revoking all his rights to votes in the club, rights to profits etc (unless it's an offer for part of the club in which case it will be pro-rata). That offer will also be part of the contract between Hicks and his lenders.

Gillett can only block the finance by not accepting the terms of Hicks' offer.

[Kennys_spell]

Originally Posted by real red

I could be missing your point here, so apologies if so.

No you understood my point and have enunciated it very eloquently.

The Point is that the banks know what is going on between them and will see that as an extra risk - in the current climate they are very unlikely to take the extra Risk of lending the money against the possibiliy of a "new holding company". That Leaves Hedge funds which essentially follow the same rules but accept more Risk. It remains to be seen if they'll accept the inherent risk in this situation.

[aws]

I hope our new stadium is going to be called "Glorypark" too.