DIC: takeover thread

[coop]

Wouldnt it not make a difference though what DIC invest as there will be no contract regarding what each invest has a knock on effect for the other owner.

Like i said if DIC are going to take the 49% then they obviously have something up their sleeve.

As Baldrick would say ' as cunning as a cunning fox thats just passed its exams in cunningness at cunning school'.

[RedinSweden]

I would be happier having them with 49% than Gillett holding on to his 50%.

[Carra_is_legend]

Originally Posted by RedinSweden

I would be happier having them with 49% than Gillett holding on to his 50%.

If Hicks gets 51%, he can effectively get rid of Moores and Parry and put the entire debt on the club if he wants to.

Also Bond has reported that DIC will be buying Gillett's equity with £40m cash. Does this mean they will get the 49% of the loan transferred to their name? If this is the case, what is the difference between G&H or Hicks/DIC?

DIC buying 49% just doesn't make sense.

[Remington]

Dubai prepared to take minority stake in Liverpool FC
Mar 7 2008

DUBAI International Capital (DIC) last night indicated it was willing to accept a minority share in Liverpool FC.

DIC is attempting to buy out co-owner George Gillett, and is understood to be encouraged by claims that fellow owner Tom Hicks has agreed not to block the sale.

Hicks wants to become a majority shareholder, acquiring 1% of Gillett’s shareholding while DIC is understood to be “happy” to buy up his remaining 49% share. But a source close to negotiations said DIC was becoming increasingly frustrated at Gillett’s unwillingness to accept a profit of between £40m and £80m for his half share. Meanwhile, Hicks is expected in London early next week to discuss the future of Liverpool with DIC.

He is believed to have assured Amanda Staveley, DIC’s chief negotiator in the UK, that he will be prepared to talk business at the same time as Liverpool will be in Italy preparing for their Champions League showdown with Inter Milan.

By the time Liverpool return, the future ownership of the club could be known – and a DIC source said: “We are in the end zone.”

DIC is the financial arm of Dubai’s ruler, Sheikh Mohammed Al Maktoum, and Staveley reports directly to him and chief executive Sameer Al Ansari – a lifelong Liverpool fan who has been the driving force behind two attempts to buy the club.

DIC has been encouraged by claims that Hicks has now agreed not to block the sale of his co-owner George Gillett’s 50% holding.

Hicks has also intimated he is still not prepared to sell any of his stake – but DIC appears prepared to go with that suggestion, for now at least.

The source said: “To accommodate a deal, DIC, within reason, would accept certain agreements.”

“It looks as if we are in the home straight. A deal involving both parties could be imminent.”

After a week of constant cross-Atlantic negotiations through Staveley, lawyers and accountants, DIC are confident they will eventually control Liverpool.

It is also believed that Gillett, who has wanted “out” for some while, is not willing to sell a small percentage of his stake to Hicks.

DIC dispatched a representative to Anfield on Wednesday night to watch the Barclays Premier League match against West Ham from the Kop - where he was able to judge the mood of fans and hold general discussions with members of the “Spirit of Shankly” group who have been campaigning for the end of the Americans’ rule at Anfield.


Dubai prepared to take minority stake in Liverpool FC - Liverpool Daily Post.co.uk


Same old "news", I know.

[hamstrung]

Nothing makes sense in this crazy, topsy turvy world.

[zico]

I can't see DIC buying 49% of the club, as it will leave them with no real power.

Hicks could block any move by them to invest in the team as well as putting equity into the club. And he could sit tight whilst our club falls further, trying to blackmail DIC into paying over the odds, a situation that could potentially drag on for years.....

Hicks would get all the power and our club would probably be worse of than it is now, as he does not have all the power now.

Someone should just shoot him and get the farce over with.......

[Remington]

Originally Posted by The Cage

Some of them pictures are like star wars! May the force be with us.

Too bad DIC aren't the ones building our stadium.

[coop]

There has been that many twists and turns i expect another contradicting story today saying that DIC will not accept a minority role.

[sh#t waffle]

Originally Posted by Remington

Too bad DIC aren't the ones building our stadium.

In fairness, our design is much nicer than any of those. Unless you mean that you'd like four stadia?

[Remington]

Originally Posted by sh#t waffle

In fairness, our design is much nicer than any of those. Unless you mean that you'd like four stadia?

That's not just four stadiums, that's a little glimpse of Dubai Sports City, a little collection of sports arenas located in Dubailand.

Also available in Sim City Sci/Fi:

[Rafa Shankly]

first off,dont believe DIC would take a smaller percetage than hicks,how would it benifit them?

but if it is true and they are willing to accept it,they must have something up their sleeve for the future.

they run a multi billion pound empire,im sure they know what their doing.

i think its best just to wait this out tbh rather than take every single article on the subject as gospel.

[Anny Road]

on the fishometer

[Alias75]

Originally Posted by zico

I can't see DIC buying 49% of the club, as it will leave them with no real power.

Hicks could block any move by them to invest in the team as well as putting equity into the club. And he could sit tight whilst our club falls further, trying to blackmail DIC into paying over the odds, a situation that could potentially drag on for years.....

Hicks would get all the power and our club would probably be worse of than it is now, as he does not have all the power now.

Someone should just shoot him and get the farce over with.......

Not sure thats exactly true, im not sure what 49% gets you in terms of board members but with Moores and Parry's help you could have a majority at board level. Also its not as if with 49% they'd have to do exactly what Hicks said, and just stump up their percentage of the money, it doesnt work like that.

With a 49% share DIC could put pressure on Hicks, for example if they were prepared to invest £50 million in the team and Hicks wasn't prepared to match them thats obviously going to put huge pressure on Hicks from the fans in terms of holding the club back because he wouldn't have the funds to match DIC's ambition.

I think Hicks wants to stick around to build the stadium because im sure hes making a pretty penny from that, and once thats finished he may be more open to selling his share, but if DIC get a foot in the door even if its 49% thats the beginning of the end for Hicks and as a fan having DIC on board even as a minority shareholder at least puts me at ease that a Leeds Utd type situation wouldn't be allowed to happen.

[Carra_is_legend]

Originally Posted by Rafa Shankly

first off,dont believe DIC would take a smaller percetage than hicks,how would it benifit them?

but if it is true and they are willing to accept it,they must have something up their sleeve for the future.

they run a multi billion pound empire,im sure they know what their doing.

i think its best just to wait this out tbh rather than take every single article on the subject as gospel.

DIC WERE looking to be a minority share holder - just a few months ago. Don't be surprised if this happens now.

If it happens that they become a minority share holder, well, they may have something up their sleeve but if Hicks is adamant, there is nothing DIC will be able to do. Just like Moores and Morgan - Morgan wanted a seat on the board but just couldn't get one because Moores had the control. I'm not talking just about a seat on the board - if Hicks wants things his way, things will happen his way and DIC won't be able to do a thing about it.

But, as you have said lets just wait and see.

[sh#t waffle]

His apparent insistence on staying on as majority stakeholder more than likely has as much to do with kickbacks from giving mates the stadium contracts as anything else.

[Carra_is_legend]

Originally Posted by Alias75

Not sure thats exactly true, im not sure what 49% gets you in terms of board members but with Moores and Parry's help you could have a majority at board level.

Well, if Hicks has the full control, he can get rid of Parry and Moores.

Originally Posted by Alias75

With a 49% share DIC could put pressure on Hicks, for example if they were prepared to invest £50 million in the team and Hicks wasn't prepared to match them

If Hicks gets 51%, he will be the sole chairman. He WILL decide how much money goes into the team. DIC may have the ambition and money but they have to do what Hicks says.

[coop]

Originally Posted by Carra_is_legend

DIC WERE looking to be a minority share holder - just a few months ago. Don't be surprised if this happens now.

If it happens that they become a minority share holder, well, they may have something up their sleeve but if Hicks is adamant, there is nothing DIC will be able to do. Just like Moores and Morgan - Morgan wanted a seat on the board but just couldn't get one because Moores had the control. I'm not talking just about a seat on the board - if Hicks wants things his way, things will happen his way and DIC won't be able to do a thing about it.

But, as you have said lets just wait and see.

I thought Hicks and Gillett approached DIC about taking 15% of the club and DIC said no they wanted the whole club not just 15%.

[Carra_is_legend]

Originally Posted by coop

I thought Hicks and Gillett approached DIC about taking 15% of the club and DIC said no they wanted the whole club not just 15%.

I thought the deal fell through because of the £1bn valuation by Hicks. My understanding was that DIC were prepared to be a minority share holder.