fuck. DIC pull out ..

[Kobayashi Maru]

accountable like how exactly? you've got your choice, don't go the game. this current board wil be gone with when we sell up anyway and if you don't like it who takes over, start up FC Liverpool or something.

 

Even if the club have fucked up there's nothing us or anyone can do about it, what's done is done. you sound like a villa fan with a "sack the board" poster.

 

I agree to a certain extent, however accountability needs to be made on this as this has the potential to destabilise the long term future of the club. Enough is enough, we seem to have ingrained a pervasive culture of fuck ups at the top level of the club and dealing with things in a highly amateurish manner. Failures to get many of our top targets not because of the just the finances but being slow in responding, the gerrard episode, players going for a pittance, marketing failures etc..the list grows.

 

Apart from looking completely and utterly stupid in this, what has shown up in this sorry episode is how fucking useless Moores and the board really are. I have given him and Parry the benefit of doubt, but after yesterday this is one person they wont be getting that off in future of for ever how long they are part of the club.

 

Whilst any lingering hope of salvaging anything has gone now with the PR machines playing the blame game, my hope is a wrong decision is not made in haste with pressure and emotions running high - for the future of our club.

[Juniper]

So instead we pat them on the back and say

"hey... you fucked the club over for a measly 8M more but... atleast we're in tons of debt and owned by a guy who's been bankrupt and wants a groundshare... WAHEY!"

 

 

I think one of the reasons Parry stated we might be going back for this American is that he's no longer into a ground share.

 

Still fucked up though with DIC, only time will tell.

[Lapskaus]

To gain a perspective from here in Dubai, much of the media and journo's are saying moore's and the boards dithering and courting of gillettes bid whilst at the same time giving assurances on another hand made them pull the plug. Jist is they were being made to look like mugs by inviting a bidding war surreptitiously and failure to communicate.

 

One official from representative of DIC was quoted as saying "was like amateur hour dealing with the Liverpool board".

 

Im sure the comment about amateur hour is correct, but still I dont trust the press in Dubai, we all know everything is censored by *drum solo* the sheikhs men, consequently

everything they write will be in his and DICs favour

[Guest Josh W]

Alarming that his major plus is "no groundshare anymore". Other than that the whole thing is to be financed on loans. So we go from what they say is £80 'debt' to £200M debt plus a loan on the stadium with a man who isn't very rich in terms of being able to 'shoulder' the burden. Steve Morgan would be better and he is a prick, even Laural and Hardy should stay in preference.

[Barrington Womble]

So instead we pat them on the back and say

"hey... you fucked the club over for a measly 8M more but... atleast we're in tons of debt and owned by a guy who's been bankrupt and wants a groundshare... WAHEY!"

 

as i said originally, what exactly would you do? Put them over your knee and smack their arses? The only way they are accountable to ordinary fans is via the turnstile. To shareholders, they are accountable at the AGM and that will be discussed with other shareholders. Ranting all you like on a forum won't fix any errors (if any) made.

[rebel23]

our debt will be similar to Manchester United's (and they make a decent profit), I dont know how it can be sustained for them nevermind us

[Juniper]

Alarming that his major plus is "no groundshare anymore". Other than that the whole thing is to be financed on loans. So we go from what they say is £80 'debt' to £200M debt plus a loan on the stadium with a man who isn't very rich in terms of being able to 'shoulder' the burden. Steve Morgan would be better and he is a prick, even Laural and Hardy should stay in preference.

 

 

Exactly, I think that's one of the most worrying things about the whole thing as DIC's proposal seemed to be a good one.

[Barrington Womble]

I agree to a certain extent, however accountability needs to be made on this as this has the potential to destabilise the long term future of the club. Enough is enough, we seem to have ingrained a pervasive culture of fuck ups at the top level of the club and dealing with things in a highly amateurish manner. Failures to get many of our top targets not because of the just the finances but being slow in responding, the gerrard episode, players going for a pittance, marketing failures etc..the list grows.

 

Apart from looking completely and utterly stupid in this, what has shown up in this sorry episode is how fucking useless Moores and the board really are. I have given him and Parry the benefit of doubt, but after yesterday this is one person they wont be getting that off in future of for ever how long they are part of the club.

 

Whilst any lingering hope of salvaging anything has gone now with the PR machines playing the blame game, my hope is a wrong decision is not made in haste with pressure and emotions running high - for the future of our club.

 

and they'll be accountable in the next AGM/EGM. if they had not listened to the Gillett bid they may have had to answer to more than the other shareholders as it would be more than possible this could have ended in legal action. People can cry and winge all they like. They can go on about what "insiders" are telling them - but at LFC there's probably no more than the board member who know and I really can't imagine they tell anyone anything other than what they want them to know. When they wanted DIC, they built them up to be the perfect fit. It doesn't mean they were and it doesn't mean they would have been better or worse than Gillett, it just suited the agenda at the time. Before the board and in particular Parry and Moores can be accused of fucking anything up, they have to be allowed to finish the job they're doing and they will be accountable in the AGM/EGM that follows. At the moment this has been no more than a PR disaster.

[Barrington Womble]

Alarming that his major plus is "no groundshare anymore". Other than that the whole thing is to be financed on loans. So we go from what they say is £80 'debt' to £200M debt plus a loan on the stadium with a man who isn't very rich in terms of being able to 'shoulder' the burden. Steve Morgan would be better and he is a prick, even Laural and Hardy should stay in preference.

 

How do you know how he's paying for it? Are you a baord member and have seen the details?

[Brownie]

and they'll be accountable in the next AGM/EGM. if they had not listened to the Gillett bid they may have had to answer to more than the other shareholders as it would be more than possible this could have ended in legal action. People can cry and winge all they like. They can go on about what "insiders" are telling them - but at LFC there's probably no more than the board member who know and I really can't imagine they tell anyone anything other than what they want them to know. When they wanted DIC, they built them up to be the perfect fit. It doesn't mean they were and it doesn't mean they would have been better or worse than Gillett, it just suited the agenda at the time. Before the board and in particular Parry and Moores can be accused of fucking anything up, they have to be allowed to finish the job they're doing and they will be accountable in the AGM/EGM that follows. At the moment this has been no more than a PR disaster.

 

That's a good post, and as the dust has settled from the initial announcements, i've started to calm down and attempt to think rationally about it.

 

For me, the issue now is about what the club have been saying/not saying. For three years we've been told that investment is a major issue and a 'huge' amount of work has been done behind the scenes to attract the right deal.

 

Then the club announce that they have found the perfect deal and subsequently let us know through the media about the details and also suggest that the Gillette deal wasn't as good for various reasons.

 

Then hey presto, all of a sudden Gillette comes back with another offer, the only difference being the amount of money shareholders would make from it, and suddenly this deal is viewed as superior to a deal that they've already signed an exclusivity deal to conclude.

 

It doesn't add up correctly to me. For once the club needs to be transparent and let us know:

 

a) why the Gillette deal usurped the DIC proposition

b) why they indicated that Gillette wanted a groundshare when they obviously didn't know

c) why a process that has taken three years to perform, has taken such a major alteration in direction so suddenly

[Kurt]

They've done nothing on or off the pitch.

 

They`ve done quite well.

 

One thing you have to consider is that Canadian teams in NHL have a huge disadvantage compared to american teams financally. While their earnings are in canadian dollar, they have to pay salaries in US dollars, resulting in very few canadian teams left in NHL.

 

But NP is the one who knows this stuff...

[Dirk]

They`ve done quite well.

One thing you have to consider is that Canadian teams in NHL have a huge disadvantage compared to american teams financally. While their earnings are in canadian dollar, they have to pay salaries in US dollars, resulting in very few canadian teams left in NHL.

 

But NP is the one who knows this stuff...

 

In what way?

[Juniper]

For me, the issue now is about what the club have been saying/not saying. For three years we've been told that investment is a major issue and a 'huge' amount of work has been done behind the scenes to attract the right deal.

 

 

People within the club should read more

 

[Dirk]

 

Moores and Parry got the wrong end of the stick when they resorted to pheromones to attract DIC.

[Kurt]

In what way?

 

Better than they did before his arrival. Improved their team and reaching the play off regularly.

 

They havent won the Stanley Cup though. So if that`s the only way to measure success, i guess you can say they`ve done nothing. But life ain`t that black or white.

[Cardie]

They`ve done quite well.

 

 

Their final positions in the North Eastern conference for the past few years has been

 

2005/6 3rd (season not over yet)

2004/5 SHUT OUT

2003/4 4th

2002/3 4th

2001/2 4th

2000/1 5th

 

In a league of 5 teams.

 

The teams value in that time has also fluctuated

 

 

2000/1 - 182 (mill $)

2001/2 - 187 (mill $)

2002/3 - 170 (mill $)

2003/4 - 0 (due to shut out)

2005/6 - 230 (mill $)

 

In addition they possibly (i've asked for clarification in another thread) have a debt level of 104% their total value, the only club in the league to be above 100% due in part to Gillett borrowing a huge amount to allow himself a 75 million dividend.

[Dirk]

Better than they did before his arrival. Improved their team and reaching the play off regularly.

 

They havent won the Stanley Cup though. So if that`s the only way to measure success, i guess you can say they`ve done nothing. But life ain`t that black or white.

 

So finishing in the equivalent of 4th place every season is considered a decent achievement? In terms of hockey, the Canadiens are a massive franchise. They are the most decorated team in NHL history. I wouldn't be happy with that type of success here.

[Cardie]

Prior to Gillette their record was

 

99/00 4th

98/99 5th

97/98 4th (six team division)

96/97 4th (six team division)

95/96 3rd (six team division)

[Sangria]

Their final positions in the North Eastern conference for the past few years has been

 

2005/6 3rd (season not over yet)

2004/5 SHUT OUT

2003/4 4th

2002/3 4th

2001/2 4th

2000/1 5th

 

In a league of 5 teams.

 

The teams value in that time has also fluctuated

 

 

2000/1 - 182 (mill $)

2001/2 - 187 (mill $)

2002/3 - 170 (mill $)

2003/4 - 0 (due to shut out)

2005/6 - 230 (mill $)

 

In addition they possibly (i've asked for clarification in another thread) have a debt level of 104% their total value, the only club in the league to be above 100% due in part to Gillett borrowing a huge amount to allow himself a 75 million dividend.

 

It just gets worse.

All I can see us is getting laden with a mountain of debt, that is unless there is a big white rabbit about to pulled from the hat - which I very much doubt.

[Dirk]

It just gets worse.

All I can see us is getting laden with a mountain of debt, that is unless there is a big white rabbit about to pulled from the hat - which I very much doubt.

 

Just put your hands over your ears and shout as loudly as you can, pretend the problem doesn't exist.

[Barrington Womble]

That's a good post, and as the dust has settled from the initial announcements, i've started to calm down and attempt to think rationally about it.

 

For me, the issue now is about what the club have been saying/not saying. For three years we've been told that investment is a major issue and a 'huge' amount of work has been done behind the scenes to attract the right deal.

 

Then the club announce that they have found the perfect deal and subsequently let us know through the media about the details and also suggest that the Gillette deal wasn't as good for various reasons.

 

Then hey presto, all of a sudden Gillette comes back with another offer, the only difference being the amount of money shareholders would make from it, and suddenly this deal is viewed as superior to a deal that they've already signed an exclusivity deal to conclude.

 

It doesn't add up correctly to me. For once the club needs to be transparent and let us know:

 

a) why the Gillette deal usurped the DIC proposition

b) why they indicated that Gillette wanted a groundshare when they obviously didn't know

c) why a process that has taken three years to perform, has taken such a major alteration in direction so suddenly

 

Paul, the trouble with those 3 points is this -

 

a) the Gillett bid may not have unsurped the DIC proposition. We were just giving it due consideration. If you like, carrying out our due dillegence on our offers. If that has been enough to piss off DIC (or if some sections of the press are to be believed Maktoum), then seriously are they the right people for us? Could they not wait another few day or a week. This is the single biggest decision LFC and it's board have ever had to make. If they had respect for what we wanted out of the deal, bearing in mind it appears they still had Moores support despite the boards reservations, thy'd have given us that time.

 

b) how do we know Gillett hasn't had a change of heart with regard the stadium? he realised a shared stadium was a deal breaker, so has come back with a new proposal - that would seem to be normal business practice to me. Bose (from the bbc) seems to get fed info from the Gillett camp. He has constantly mentioned Gillett's origninal preference for groundshare, so this is not just a "line" fed by LFC. It could be a genuine change of position.

 

c) it's taken a major alteration because DIC walked away ... and reasons for that still go back to a) for me. It seems petulant of them to just give up on this deal because we considered other offers. They're supposed to be business men - I'm sure when they come to sell travelodge in 3 years time or whatever, they'll look to get the best price they can.

[Sangria]

Just put your hands over your ears and shout as loudly as you can, pretend the problem doesn't exist.

 

Made me laugh that - mind you I am so close to giving it a go.

[Guest Josh W]

Paul, the trouble with those 3 points is this -

 

a) the Gillett bid may not have unsurped the DIC proposition. We were just giving it due consideration. If you like, carrying out our due dillegence on our offers. If that has been enough to piss off DIC (or if some sections of the press are to be believed Maktoum), then seriously are they the right people for us? Could they not wait another few day or a week. This is the single biggest decision LFC and it's board have ever had to make. If they had respect for what we wanted out of the deal, bearing in mind it appears they still had Moores support despite the boards reservations, thy'd have given us that time.

 

b) how do we know Gillett hasn't had a change of heart with regard the stadium? he realised a shared stadium was a deal breaker, so has come back with a new proposal - that would seem to be normal business practice to me. Bose (from the bbc) seems to get fed info from the Gillett camp. He has constantly mentioned Gillett's origninal preference for groundshare, so this is not just a "line" fed by LFC. It could be a genuine change of position.

 

c) it's taken a major alteration because DIC walked away ... and reasons for that still go back to a) for me. It seems petulant of them to just give up on this deal because we considered other offers. They're supposed to be business men - I'm sure when they come to sell travelodge in 3 years time or whatever, they'll look to get the best price they can.

 

You don't consider other offers if you have signed an exclusivity agreement like the one we did with DIC. Or you agree a sale with shareholders before the 12th hour like we did on Tuesday so as to avoid pissing off the people whom you have told the world you would sell to.

 

It has been a shambles, Gillett is not first choice and his purchase will have to be along the lines of Glazier if not worse as all his other assets are mortgaged to the nose.

[Guest George Gillett]

Folks, I've been reading the forum for a couple of weeks now after my great pals Rick and Davy sent me the link and this thread is very interesting.

 

Let me take this opportunity to say how absolutely delighted I am to be getting the chance to invest in a franchise with as much success as Liverpool. I have to state that I have been a Liverpool red for many, many years and even though I haven't had the chance to come and see them at the Anfield Bowl, I am a big and passionate fan.

 

I mean 15 divisional championships and 4 European pennants, is pretty impressive, even by our American standards.

 

I pledge to work with and support Mr Benitez in the trade market to bring in new offensemen (Peter Crouch's scoringrate is only 0.321) as well as a new goal tender. A new left defenseman would also be at the top of my wish list ahead of the upcoming draft.

 

In the summer, we shall continue the search for more free agents.

 

I hope that you will all support what we're trying to achieve.

[Barrington Womble]

You don't consider other offers if you have signed an exclusivity agreement like the one we did with DIC. Or you agree a sale with shareholders before the 12th hour like we did on Tuesday so as to avoid pissing off the people whom you have told the world you would sell to.

 

It has been a shambles, Gillett is not first choice and his purchase will have to be along the lines of Glazier if not worse as all his other assets are mortgaged to the nose.

 

as I understood it the exclusivity deal expired some time ago - perhaps 31st december if i recall correctly. We were legally obliged to listen to Gillett's offer once he made it as long as the board assumed it was a serious offer and he had the money to make the bid. We are a plc, our hands are tied to a large extent.