Liverpool enter talks with Saudi Arabian and Qatari consortiums over a potential £3BILLION takeover

[Scott_M]

1 minute ago, TheHowieLama said:

Because that is the way their ownership group is structured. Pretty simple concept really.

I would assume these discussions have already occurred with Redbird? 

[TheHowieLama]

Well, there is a lot of assuming in this thread already so go for it.

[dockers_strike]

Havent we been sold yet?!

[HBenn]

2 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Because that is the way their ownership group is structured. Pretty simple concept really.

What has that got to do with it?

 

Anybody buying shares in LFC would be buying them from the entity that owns the club, they are not buying into the holding group. I don't see the relevance? 

 

As a minority investor in the holding group, depending on what has been agreed, I am not sure Redbird would even have a say if the FSG entity sold some of its shareholding. 

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

Havent we been sold yet?!

Yes, but nobody has bought us.

[HBenn]

17 minutes ago, Scott_M said:

I would assume these discussions have already occurred with Redbird? 

FSG bought the club, I am sure if they want to sell some shares or all their shares they have the ability to do that. 

[Scott_M]

1 hour ago, TheHowieLama said:

Well, there is a lot of assuming in this thread already so go for it.

Well, they’d look pretty fucking stupid asking for investment in LFC for a minority shareholder to say ‘no’ or them not to know how to make it an LFC likely investment. 

[dockers_strike]

57 minutes ago, Shooter in the Motor said:

Yes, but nobody has bought us.

 

That's ok then. I can go back to my torpor contented.

[HBenn]

Just now, Scott_M said:

Well, they’d look pretty fucking stupid asking for investment in LFC for a minority shareholder to say ‘no’ or them not to know how to make it an LFC likely investment. 

That would be my thinking. I don't really get how the structure of the holding group prevents them from being able to transfer ownership in some or all the LFC shares. Be interesting to understand what the relevance is. 

[Megadrive Man]

2 hours ago, Scott_M said:

Alternatively, somebody is giving you money to get a new car stereo, new speakers, a CD player, new seats, new tyres and a full paint job but want X% of a return when you sell it. 
 

 

 

Has this person been frozen in time until 2007?

[TD_LFC]

You want a CD Changer in the boot not a CD Player.

[Moo]

2 hours ago, HBenn said:

That would be my thinking. I don't really get how the structure of the holding group prevents them from being able to transfer ownership in some or all the LFC shares. Be interesting to understand what the relevance is. 

 

Absolutely.

I'm assuming the original poster is an expert on these matters since it's declared with such certainty.  Hopefully explanation forthcoming, genuinely interested.

[TheHowieLama]

FSG have never parsed off individual shares in their many sports holdings. Doing so for a single team within their group holdings would be a fundamental difference in the way they operate now as well as departing from the method they used recently to bring on partners. 

That is not saying they can't going forward - it is simply stating the obvious.

My feeling was they would have preferred a sale and have found that the valuations floated are not seeing alot of interest.

If they do in fact take share based investment it will be interesting to see what it ends up funding.

 

 

[Jose Jones]

5 hours ago, JohnnyH said:

Is this based on anything? Or just a disgruntled fan assuming the worst?

 

I ask because it would be a desperately poor business decision to let Liverpool regress to also-rans? That 10% is only worth £300m because of the success we’ve had on the pitch. 
 

In my opinion, if we were to get in £300m then that guarantees at least £200m for the team.  The owners are allowed take out money too (it’s not a charity) as long as there’s investment, which I think we will see quite a significant amount of this summer. 

 

 

It’s based on the fact that if FSG thought lack of investment in the team meant that we were in danger of becoming also-rans and therefore the value of their asset depreciating markedly then they already have plenty of capability to be able to invest more money in the team.

They haven’t so they obviously don’t. Their method is that the club pays for everything itself, stadium expansion, new training ground, players.

 

They could easily have decided to invest their own funds in the stadium and allocated more to the team, if they thought this was the most effective way to grow/protect the value of the club.

 

They obviously haven’t. So why would you expect them to change?

[HBenn]

13 minutes ago, Jose Jones said:

It’s based on the fact that if FSG thought lack of investment in the team meant that we were in danger of becoming also-rans and therefore the value of their asset depreciating markedly then they already have plenty of capability to be able to invest more money in the team.

They haven’t so they obviously don’t. Their method is that the club pays for everything itself, stadium expansion, new training ground, players.

 

They could easily have decided to invest their own funds in the stadium and allocated more to the team, if they thought this was the most effective way to grow/protect the value of the club.

 

They obviously haven’t. So why would you expect them to change?

The suggestion has been that they now feel that the club cannot fully compete through self sufficiency with Gordon raising this since April. That is the change.

I don't see anyway in which someone invests say £300m and they just pocket it. The people investing would be Muppets and it would stop them from getting investment into their business going forward. 

 

[HBenn]

39 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

FSG have never parsed off individual shares in their many sports holdings. Doing so for a single team within their group holdings would be a fundamental difference in the way they operate now as well as departing from the method they used recently to bring on partners. 

That is not saying they can't going forward - it is simply stating the obvious.

My feeling was they would have preferred a sale and have found that the valuations floated are not seeing alot of interest.

If they do in fact take share based investment it will be interesting to see what it ends up funding.

 

 

None of that means there is no vehicle for them to do it now, just that they have preferred to bring in partners into the holding group before.

The fact that their mouthpiece has said they are seriously considering doing it suggests that maybe FSG 3.0 will be different.

Frankly if they do go down the route of selling off LFC shares then that would be preferable as investors are going to be keen to see us do well as opposed the group as a whole. 

[Jose Jones]

6 minutes ago, HBenn said:

The suggestion has been that they now feel that the club cannot fully compete through self sufficiency with Gordon raising this since April. That is the change.

I don't see anyway in which someone invests say £300m and they just pocket it. The people investing would be Muppets and it would stop them from getting investment into their business going forward. 

 

Why would they be muppets? They would own 10% of the club that they will have bought knowing FSG’s business model. 

[TheHowieLama]

A partial sale of say 300 mil would be the worst option.

It can't all go to players in any case so even if you could put 150 mil into transfers - that is a regular window, maybe at a stretch two - for the clubs we are chasing. 

If the club truly cannot compete based revenue then unless there is a Super League they will need to flog another 10 percent in a couple of years at minimum. 

[HBenn]

5 minutes ago, Jose Jones said:

Why would they be muppets? They would own 10% of the club that they will have bought knowing FSG’s business model. 

Follow your logic through. By your logic the team won't get investment, won't be able to compete and will drop off. The £300m investment ends up being worth less. 

Any investor, solely in Liverpool, imo is not going to hand over £300m without being shown what will happen with it and how it will increase in value. Redbird handed over $600m and it went towards buying a new team. The idea that someone will just pay FSG and they will carry on like before just doesn't add up, imo, unless they are Muppets.

[HBenn]

3 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

A partial sale of say 300 mil would be the worst option.

It can't all go to players in any case so even if you could put 150 mil into transfers - that is a regular window, maybe at a stretch two - for the clubs we are chasing. 

If the club truly cannot compete based revenue then unless there is a Super League they will need to flog another 10 percent in a couple of years at minimum. 

Perhaps they will agree a slightly bigger % with a conditional option for more in a few years

Ridiculous as it sounds, I agree that £200-300m won't get them that far. Albeit it will get them probably further with Jürgen and our recruitment staff than with many others. 

[Barrington Womble]

8 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

A partial sale of say 300 mil would be the worst option.

It can't all go to players in any case so even if you could put 150 mil into transfers - that is a regular window, maybe at a stretch two - for the clubs we are chasing. 

If the club truly cannot compete based revenue then unless there is a Super League they will need to flog another 10 percent in a couple of years at minimum. 

Not necessarily. They could use the 300m to clear debt the club has acquired through infrastructure projects and there is some money for the rumoured kop expansion. Then without the burden of paying the infrastructure debt, the club maybe in the position to buy a couple of extra players every few years. 

[JohnnyH]

45 minutes ago, Jose Jones said:

It’s based on the fact that if FSG thought lack of investment in the team meant that we were in danger of becoming also-rans and therefore the value of their asset depreciating markedly then they already have plenty of capability to be able to invest more money in the team.

They haven’t so they obviously don’t. Their method is that the club pays for everything itself, stadium expansion, new training ground, players.

 

They could easily have decided to invest their own funds in the stadium and allocated more to the team, if they thought this was the most effective way to grow/protect the value of the club.

 

They obviously haven’t. So why would you expect them to change?

We’ve won the league and the European cup in the last 3 seasons. Outside of that we’ve got to 2 other European cup finals, and twice scored a points totals in the league that would have won every other title in the 150 year history of the league. Their break even plan with an expectation of a proper and working FFP was going very well. Now they know for certain that any financial control is pie in the sky, they are looking at moving on. Entirely fairly. 
 

As for them easily just paying for the stadium, that’s just not realistic in any business. The fact they gave an interest free loan is pretty decent for a project we’ll see the benefit of for decades. 

You’re last like just doesn’t make any sense to me I’m afraid? I don’t know what they’ve not done? We’ve one of the highest wage bills in world football. We rewarded players. Any idea we’ve not spent comes from the singular and daft idea that all spend is just on the transfer fee. 

 

I just think that peoples anger is all a result of Man City’s cheating. They think we haven’t competed when that’s far from the case. We should never compare what we are doing to those scum bags. I think it’s sad that FSG will leave with people saying anything other than they were very good owners.  Sad and embarrassing in fact, such as the title of this thread. 

[HBenn]

3 minutes ago, JohnnyH said:

We’ve won the league and the European cup in the last 3 seasons. Outside of that we’ve got to 2 other European cup finals, and twice scored a points totals in the league that would have won every other title in the 150 year history of the league. Their break even plan with an expectation of a proper and working FFP was going very well. Now they know for certain that any financial control is pie in the sky, they are looking at moving on. Entirely fairly. 
 

As for them easily just paying for the stadium, that’s just not realistic in any business. The fact they gave an interest free loan is pretty decent for a project we’ll see the benefit of for decades. 

You’re last like just doesn’t make any sense to me I’m afraid? I don’t know what they’ve not done? We’ve one of the highest wage bills in world football. We rewarded players. Any idea we’ve not spent comes from the singular and daft idea that all spend is just on the transfer fee. 

 

I just think that peoples anger is all a result of Man City’s cheating. They think we haven’t competed when that’s far from the case. We should never compare what we are doing to those scum bags. I think it’s sad that FSG will leave with people saying anything other than they were very good owners.  Sad and embarrassing in fact, such as the title of this thread. 

I think they have reached the point where buying players from selling fringe players and adding a bit will no longer allow them to get by. 

[TheHowieLama]

3 minutes ago, JohnnyH said:

 Their break even plan with an expectation of a proper and working FFP was going very well. Now they know for certain that any financial control is pie in the sky, they are looking at moving on. Entirely fairly. 
 

I think it’s sad that FSG will leave with people saying anything other than they were very good owners.  

 

Spot on about what they have accomplished.

 

The rest is a damning indictment of the reality going forward for LFC. Without some sort of Super League LFC will be one of the first casualties of traditional European powers.

[HBenn]

19 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

Not necessarily. They could use the 300m to clear debt the club has acquired through infrastructure projects and there is some money for the rumoured kop expansion. Then without the burden of paying the infrastructure debt, the club maybe in the position to buy a couple of extra players every few years. 

I didn't hear that about the Kop. That would be great. Invest in the team, do the Kop and remove the debt would be fantastic. 

Politically think it would be interesting if they sold a % of the club. Having made a huge thing of "we don't put any money in but we don't take any money out" I cannot see them not using the vast amount to invest in the club. 

Frankly though if they invest in the team, improve the stadium and remove the debt I don't care if they cream some off for themselves.