Instead of DIC....

[Ged B]

What I want is for them to borrow enough money for a one-off influx of quality that will get us genuinely challenging.

 

Fair enough opinion, and not a strategy without merit, but high risk, let's ask Leeds.

 

All the same, one point regarding the angst on here is that they never said they'd do that, so why the outrage now that they aren't? (generally as a point to discuss, not aimed at you per se)

 

 

Maybe because most people are acknowledging that we've gone totally stagnent in recent years, and despite recruiting a world class manager, we still don't seem capable of winning the lead.

 

We need major investment in the first team in order to go to the next level, and if that means taking a few financial risks, so be it. We can't afford to stand still any more.

[zigackly]

Sorry, last post was meant to be light hearted but if you want an answer here goes; taking the piss out of anybody that wants to believe the bollocks in the papers making out we are the new Gallacticos instead of listenning to what is actually being said.

 

Never thought we would be splashing £100M or whatever for a minute, but the whole point of getting investment was supposed to be to top up the transfer budget as well as building a new stadium. Moores wasn't able to do both, so we looked outside. Otherwise we could have had the same loan they took out to build a stadium, spent some of the new TV money on the squad, and probably been a lot better off than we might end up now, without paying off the loan they took to buy the club on top.

[Red Sun Rising]

 

 

Maybe because most people are acknowledging that we've gone totally stagnent in recent years, and despite recruiting a world class manager, we still don't seem capable of winning the lead.

 

We need major investment in the first team in order to go to the next level, and if that means taking a few financial risks, so be it. We can't afford to stand still any more.

 

Most recently, 2 CL finals out of 3 is stagnant? I said earlier some people are embarrasing themselves on here, thanx for the back up.

[Ged B]

Never thought we would be splashing £100M or whatever for a minute, but the whole point of getting investment was supposed to be to top up the transfer budget as well as building a new stadium. Moores wasn't able to do both, so we looked outside. Otherwise we could have had the same loan they took out to build a stadium, spent the new TV money on the squad, and possibly been a lot better off than we might end up now, with £22M a year allegedly going to pay off the loan they took to buy the club.

 

Where did you hear that from?

[zigackly]

[/b]

 

Where did you hear that from?

 

Something said on another forum. Edited my post when I realised I don't have a strong source for it. We will still be paying something towards it however. They're not in this because they're freewheeling philanthropists. They'll be looking for that money back and something on top.

[Guest Ulysses Everett McGill]

Something said on another forum. Edited my post when I realised I don't have a strong source for it. We will still be paying something towards it however.

 

As far as i understand, the only loan that we will be paying off is the one they have got to fund the stadium.

[Ged B]

 

Most recently, 2 CL finals out of 3 is stagnant? I said earlier some people are embarrasing themselves on here, thanx for the back up.

 

 

I was refering to our domestic form mate, which is our number one priority is it not?

Maybe I didn't make that clear in the post, but either way I don't think I embarased myself. But thanks for the insult anyway.

[zigackly]

As far as i understand, the only loan that we will be paying off is the one they have got to fund the stadium.

 

Let's hope so, but I don't think they bought the club to make a loss.

[Guest Ulysses Everett McGill]

Let's hope so, but I don't think they bought the club to make a loss.

 

Not saying they did, but, and unless anything has changed, they cought the club with thier own funds, or at least, got the loans to but the club in thier own name and have not, as yet, if ever, attached that debt to the club, if indeed it exists at all.

 

The jist of the information as i understood it was the money from RBS was for the stadium.

 

If they did ever want to sell the club, its a more saleable asset if less debt is attached, and if they bought the club to make money and keep it long term, I can't see how paying for it with a loan and then having to pay interest on that loan is cheaper than paying for it with your own cash.

[zigackly]

So what's in it for them? Never mind me, I'm feeling extremely fucking cynical.

[Guest Ulysses Everett McGill]

So what's in it for them? Never mind me, I'm feeling extremely fucking cynical.

 

Look at the club as an asset, an asset that is worth more the less debt it has.

 

The asset (us) has the potential to make for more money than what it already is, so they can make money in more ways than one

 

They can take a small(ish) dividend if/when the club makes a profit over a certain amount, and if the club is well run, and is consistently making a profit, the value of thier asset (LFC) increases, so they could, in theory, make a killing by selling the club for more than what they bought it for, whose value, again will be more if it has less debt attached.

 

That is why im not panicking as yet, as it is totally in thier interest for the club to be run well, and be succesfull.

[zigackly]

That is why im not panicking as yet, as it is totally in thier interest for the club to be run well, and be succesfull.

 

Whilst I'm being cynical though, would it not also be in their interest to trouser all the TV money, keep us qualifying for the Champions League and sell up for a vast profit once the stadium is built and paid for?

[Cardie]

 

 

I was refering to our domestic form....

 

Not strictly because of lack of investment that though is it?

[aws]

Not saying they did, but, and unless anything has changed, they cought the club with thier own funds, or at least, got the loans to but the club in thier own name and have not, as yet, if ever, attached that debt to the club, if indeed it exists at all.

 

The jist of the information as i understood it was the money from RBS was for the stadium.

 

 

They borrowed £298m from RBS in the name of Kop Holdings Limited. £185m was for the takeover and £113m was (mostly) to repay existing debt of the club. The interest rate is 1.5% above LIBOR (similar to base rate).

 

Kop Holding LImited then lent the £298m by way of inter-company debt to Kop Football Limited which is the company which directly owns the club. This loan is at the same interest rate.

 

The £22m annual interest is about right and the owners will be entitled to this from the club under the terms of the inter-company loan.

 

The loan to fund the new stadium will be a new and entirely separate loan.

[zigackly]

They borrowed £298m from RBS in the name of Kop Holdings Limited. £185m was for the takeover and £113m was (mostly) to repay existing debt of the club. The interest rate is 1.5% above LIBOR (similar to base rate).

 

Kop Holding LImited then lent the £298m by way of inter-company debt to Kop Football Limited which is the company which directly owns the club. This loan is at the same interest rate.

 

The £22m annual interest is about right and the owners will be entitled to this from the club under the terms of the inter-company loan.

 

Cheers, didn't think I was talking complete shit, but I wasn't sure of the ins and outs of it.

[cochcaer]

The jist of the information as i understood it was the money from RBS was for the stadium.

 

That's what they said at the press conference. I may be wrong but it appears Hicks is only involved in the stadium? It seems to be Gillett always talking of staff, players and contracts.

 

Either way, they did promise investment in the stadium and for strengthening the squad.

[Guest Ulysses Everett McGill]

They borrowed £298m from RBS in the name of Kop Holdings Limited. £185m was for the takeover and £113m was (mostly) to repay existing debt of the club. The interest rate is 1.5% above LIBOR (similar to base rate).

 

Kop Holding LImited then lent the £298m by way of inter-company debt to Kop Football Limited which is the company which directly owns the club. This loan is at the same interest rate.

 

The £22m annual interest is about right and the owners will be entitled to this from the club under the terms of the inter-company loan.

 

The loan to fund the new stadium will be a new and entirely separate loan.

 

Fair enough, i've got it completely fucking wrong then.

 

I'm going to sit in the corner and sulk

[Guest Ulysses Everett McGill]

Whilst I'm being cynical though, would it not also be in their interest to trouser all the TV money, keep us qualifying for the Champions League and sell up for a vast profit once the stadium is built and paid for?

 

I honestly don't know, but I think people are being a bit too jumpy at the minute, im prepared to wait a little longer before casting judgement

[aws]

Fair enough, i've got it completely fucking wrong then.

 

I'm going to sit in the corner and sulk

 

Your version is widely believed because there were a few misleading statements in the press at the time of the takeover about the club not being responsible for this initial debt.

 

This is true in the sense that the club aren't directly responsible to RBS but, if you follow the chain of debt, in practice the club are in the frame for it.

[zigackly]

I honestly don't know, but I think people are being a bit too jumpy at the minute, im prepared to wait a little longer before casting judgement

 

I know where you're coming from mate. Just finding it hard to be trusting in light of what Bascombe, Dave and the Count have been saying. There's a lad on another forum today saying he's heard the same thing from a first team player as well. Wish I could just fast forward to the end of August, this is doing my head in. Think I need to give up the internet.

[Guest Ulysses Everett McGill]

Your version is widely believed because there were a few misleading statements in the press at the time of the takeover about the club not being responsible for this initial debt.

 

This is true in the sense that the club aren't directly responsible to RBS but, if you follow the chain of debt, in practice the club are in the frame for it.

 

 

Don't care

 

I'm still going to sulk

 

Where my blanket?

[aws]

I honestly don't know, but I think people are being a bit too jumpy at the minute, im prepared to wait a little longer before casting judgement

 

I agree with that. At the moment we're bent over naked but only time will tell if the yanks are going to make love to us or dry fuck us in the ass.

[Guest Ulysses Everett McGill]

I know where you're coming from mate. Just finding it hard to be trusting in light of what Bascombe, Dave and the Count have been saying. There's a lad on another forum today saying he's heard the same thing from a first team player as well. Wish I could just fast forward to the end of August, this is doing my head in. Think I need to give up the internet.

 

Why then, would Stevie Me, Xabi, Carra and Pepe sign long term deals.

 

Maybe Carra i could understand, but Stevie, being the fucking egomaniac that he is, and Xabi with Barca calling?

 

Its all smoke and mirrors at the moment, but the truth eventually will out.

[aws]

Don't care

 

I'm still going to sulk

 

Where my blanket?

 

You're a funny guy.

[Guest Ulysses Everett McGill]

You're a funny guy.

 

I amuse you?