We only need a billion then!!!!!!!!!

[BRAP]

Buyer needs £1bn for Anfield takeover to succeed | Liverpool - Times Online

[G Richards]

It might even be more, as I would imagine G&H would want £400M for the club while still leaving the £250M debt in place.

[Soup]

Buyer needs £1bn for Anfield takeover to succeedJonathan Northcroft

 

Recommend?

THE ENTRANCE to Liverpool’s Melwood training ground is almost always open during working hours, with just a couple of gateman to keep out the public. On Friday a 10ft steel barrier was drawn across but the only punters it offered protection from were a bloke and his girlfriend who stood politely telling journalists they had to knock against the metal if they wanted to get inside. Liverpool’s fans are still at the jeering rather than rioting stage. Walking on is what they signed up for. They cannot just say to bad times, in the manner of Tom Hicks Jr: “Blow me, f***face. Go to hell. I’m sick of you.”

 

Yesterday’s draw against Stoke plunged their football club further into the morass, but though dissent against Rafael Benitez is growing, the affectionate response on the message boards towards his humorous performance at his Friday press conference shows he still knows how to play to his audience. Liverpool’s owners, Tom Hicks Sr and George Gillett, remain the focus of their ire. If the Americans sold up, as fans implore them to, it would be the most popular exit from Merseyside since the M62. The chances of it happening, however, remain remote.

 

The price of buying out the Americans and bringing Liverpool back, on and off the pitch, to the standard of a world-class club, was revealed this week to be in the region of £1billion. Hicks and Gillett continue to cast around for a new investor to buy a 25% stake in their club, on offer for £100m. That values Liverpool at £400m and in a local newspaper interview on Wednesday the chief executive, Christian Purslow, branded building a new stadium as “the key” to Liverpool being able to contend with other leading clubs.

 

The admission underlines that leaving Anfield must now be considered a necessity rather than optional for any would-be buyer and the cost of a new stadium is estimated as being another £400m. Chelsea, in the first 12 months of Roman Abramovich, spent a net £210m on transfers and in the same span under Sheikh Mansour, Manchester City’s transfer investment was £180m. It is fair to say, therefore, the tariff for revamping a squad such as Liverpool’s back to standard would exceed £100m. Then there is the question of whether replacing Benitez is desirable. If a new owner deemed so, the manager would require the remainder of his contract, worth £4m per year and running until summer 2014, to be honoured and a sizeable part of his entourage would inevitably need paying off, too. And how much would that cost? Benitez has at least 20 backroom staff, of whom nine followed him to England from Spanish football, 17 were Benitez’s appointees and 13 arrived in the past year.

 

 

Who is going give fans their wish and run Hicks and Gillett out of town at that price? “In the current market, finance for football club buyouts is brutally hard to come by and there are no investors out there saying, ‘I’m desperate to lend to the football sector’,” said leading football financial consultant Harry Philp. “The cost of buying Liverpool and building a new stadium is £800m before you start on players. Given Arsenal, who already have the Emirates, are worth £800m, that doesn’t seem great value.

 

“Twenty-five per cent of Liverpool is on offer but I don’t see why anyone would buy that minority stake. You’d pay £100m into getting one quarter of a dysfunctional football club and your money would go straight to the bank, to service Hicks and Gillett’s debt.

 

“The prospect of investment is made even slimmer by the presence of the sheikhs at Manchester City. It’s that much harder to buy a club and compete when faced with such a rich competitor. Three or four years ago, I was working with American investors and they all asked, ‘What happens if another Abramovich appears, and there’s another Chelsea in the Premier League to dislocate the transfer market?’ These people were savvy, the owners of NBA and NFL franchises, and they just couldn’t live with that risk. You’d have to say, with City, their worst fears have come true.”

 

A source in the football finance sector, who has dealt with Hicks and Gillett and has knowledge of their search for Middle Eastern money, said: “Christian Purslow has been talking for weeks about being close to finding £100m but it’s yet to materialise and I’d be shocked if it comes from the Middle East. Hicks and Gillett have kept on and on going to the region and sending people there, and getting no interest. They just don’t seem to understand the word ‘No’.

 

“They can talk about interest from investors but who in their right mind would want to part with £100m for a minority stake in that set-up? Any serious businessperson would be after a controlling stake.”

[rebel23]

we dont need a squad revamp if they let Benitez get on with the job of sorting out the academy and integrating it more with the 1st team. we have hired ex-Barce youth coaches and that is what they're trying to do so we have a supply of players without having to go out and spend big money

 

This season we might see Pacheco emerge I hope and we have already seen others like Kelly, that is a positive at least for the long term.

 

I know suddenly everyone is an expert and thinks we should sack Benitez but he's doing more than managing the first team on a relative shoestring, he is overseeing the football development of the club which will yield long term benefits

[Trucker Paddy]

Any chance the banks may call in this loan? the hints from a few hacks including the respected ones was that the only got the extention to either sell up or get investment, come july if no investors what happens?

[Timão]

To be fair, we know sod all about the accuracy of these figures. I still htink something will happen in terms of investment/stadium this year, though not sure it will be for better or for worse.

 

However, what with us and the Mancs in such a financial mess - nevermind Hull, Pompey, Newcastle, Southampton etc, etc - it just shows that football is totally fucked. I think it will take one of the big boys, i.e. us or the Mancs, to get into serious trouble (administration etc) before something may drastically change. Football is poisened and people have totally forgotten what makes a great football club.

 

If it was us to bite the dust first, I would look forward to starting from scratch with the ethics and values that made us great in the first place.

[Liverpool lad]

Brilliant, I don't see an end to the shitstorm we find ourselves in

[Johnni]

Not fully understanding how these things work but if the Yanks sold the club would the debt be then passed on to the new owners? Is the debt on the club itself or the parent company the 2 yanks set up?

[FortressAnfield]

A friend just emailed me this story. He's one of the ones who hates Rafa and gloats at any bad news about Liverpool. My response to him was:

 

"Those figures are meaningless.

 

It will not cost £1b to take over the club. If Gillett and Hicks were to sell, it would take £400m. G & H wouldn't care if new owners didn't build a stadium or overhauled the squad. And why would new owners change the managerial team (OK, loads of reasons, but they don't HAVE to)?

 

New managerial team? We were talking about this this evening. Has LFC been insane enough to say to Rafa 'If we sack you, not only will we give you a mega-payoff, but we'll payoff the backroom staff as well?' The club is run so badly that it wouldn't surprise me. But, if the boss leaves, why would we pay off anyone wants to go with him? If Rafa is fired, and Sammy Lee isn't, but Sammy decides to go also, surely he doesn't get compensation. He will have simply LEFT his job. Managerial switch would probably be less than £5m - how long would Rafa be out of a job? Just don't fire any of the rest.

 

If I wanted to be a new owner, it would cost £400b + (possibly) Rafa's payoff. Initially, no stadium, no other sackings, and make do with the squad you have and any money you get from player sales.

 

"Buyer needs £1b for Anfield takeover" TO SUCCEED. What does SUCCEED mean? They'll get the club for 40% of that (less if they do a G & H and borrow the money). Do they mean £1b to buy Liverpool AND win the title. Is a new stadium a pre-requisite? Given the performance of other teams, might a new manager simply stop us conceding last minute goals, improve our set-pieces, improve our defending against set-pieces, and provide more motivation for the team?

 

Incredibly shoddy - and headline-seeking - journalism. I need a job - give me this guy's job as a Times sports journalist. I could do a better job."

 

Maybe I'm being naive, but I really cannot see where the £1b figure comes from. It would be nice if we had it (new stadium, no debts, new players), but it isn't NEEDED to buy out G & H. £400m should do it - that's all. All we need do is find someone with £400m burning a hole in their pocket.

[Menc]

If somebody bought the club without loading debt onto it they could comfortably get a loan to build the stadium and service it with the extra revenue the stadium would provide, as Arsenal have done.

 

I also don't think the squad would need £100m's worth of investment. Our squad now and Man City's when their new owners took over are in significantly different situations. I'd say £60m, if spent wisely, would make a world of difference to us. Even £40m perhaps, if the manager could sell and reinvest the proceeds.

 

At least the asking price for the club has (if that's accurate) dropped by £600m from the £1bn they were asking for a year and a half ago. I suspect he's plucked all of these figures out of his arse though.

[a stoner]

A friend just emailed me this story. He's one of the ones who hates Rafa and gloats at any bad news about Liverpool. My response to him was:

 

"Those figures are meaningless.

 

It will not cost £1b to take over the club. If Gillett and Hicks were to sell, it would take £400m. G & H wouldn't care if new owners didn't build a stadium or overhauled the squad. And why would new owners change the managerial team (OK, loads of reasons, but they don't HAVE to)?

 

New managerial team? We were talking about this this evening. Has LFC been insane enough to say to Rafa 'If we sack you, not only will we give you a mega-payoff, but we'll payoff the backroom staff as well?' The club is run so badly that it wouldn't surprise me. But, if the boss leaves, why would we pay off anyone wants to go with him? If Rafa is fired, and Sammy Lee isn't, but Sammy decides to go also, surely he doesn't get compensation. He will have simply LEFT his job. Managerial switch would probably be less than £5m - how long would Rafa be out of a job? Just don't fire any of the rest.

 

If I wanted to be a new owner, it would cost £400b + (possibly) Rafa's payoff. Initially, no stadium, no other sackings, and make do with the squad you have and any money you get from player sales.

 

"Buyer needs £1b for Anfield takeover" TO SUCCEED. What does SUCCEED mean? They'll get the club for 40% of that (less if they do a G & H and borrow the money). Do they mean £1b to buy Liverpool AND win the title. Is a new stadium a pre-requisite? Given the performance of other teams, might a new manager simply stop us conceding last minute goals, improve our set-pieces, improve our defending against set-pieces, and provide more motivation for the team?

 

Incredibly shoddy - and headline-seeking - journalism. I need a job - give me this guy's job as a Times sports journalist. I could do a better job."

 

Maybe I'm being naive, but I really cannot see where the £1b figure comes from. It would be nice if we had it (new stadium, no debts, new players), but it isn't NEEDED to buy out G & H. £400m should do it - that's all. All we need do is find someone with £400m burning a hole in their pocket.

 

Hang on I'll get my wallet

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I got £1.38

Anyone else?

 

You are right though, the first thing is to buy the club and decide if you want to keep the manager, back room staff have the choice (although a new manager would probably want to bring his own arse lickers in), or promote one of the staff to caretaker manager until the ones who want to go do go.

The stadium can wait, we have survived until now with anfield so no real rush, also if the new manager wants to he can either sell the waste and buy in or bring the youngsters on (still a viable option in my opinion).

We would probably have to accept a season or 3 of 4 - 6 place until everything settles back down but this is going to be needed to get the club back into some order of financial stability and match day quality.

I also think it's about time FIFA and UEFA sorted out if there is going to be a foriegn player limit/pay limit/transfer fee limit.

It's these 3 things that are putting so much strain on clubs these days, noone is worth £80M or £100k plus a week. It is totally out of hand and causing players to become the lazy fatcats that the owners of these clubs are.

In short the first thing is to find a buyer for the club and see what happens, sadly this isn't going to happen until either the financial markets pick up or the bank decide enough is enough.

[Maldini]

I think the stadium could end up being almost self-financing. The value of naming rights deals has gone through the roof in the last few years. The New York Mets and the New Jersey Nets just got $400m (£250m) for 20 years for each of their new arenas. Our worldwide recognition is WAY higher than theirs, you'd imagine we'd be pulling in £300m-400m (bare in mind I'm pulling that number out of my arse) for a similar period of time.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if this is why the stadium is back on the agenda.

[23_Carra_Gold]

I think the stadium could end up being almost self-financing. The value of naming rights deals has gone through the roof in the last few years. The New York Mets and the New Jersey Nets just got $400m (£250m) for 20 years for each of their new arenas. Our worldwide recognition is WAY higher than theirs, you'd imagine we'd be pulling in £300m-400m (bare in mind I'm pulling that number out of my arse) for a similar period of time.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if this is why the stadium is back on the agenda.

 

Why do we need a new stadium though?

 

Attendances over the last few weeks have been diabolical. Imagine how that'd look in a 60,000 seater.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

What we need is a buyout, with debt wiped out, and then the football club run efficiently and with profits going towards playing staff. That'll me even bigger levels of income.

[Maldini]

Why do we need a new stadium though?

 

Attendances over the last few weeks have been diabolical. Imagine how that'd look in a 60,000 seater.

 

Loads are boycotting cos of the yanks and then there's also the small matter of the worst weather in 60 years.

 

We've 60,000 people on the waiting list. 60,000 isn't anywhere near enough of a capacity. We'd sell a shit load more season tickets if we could supply demand. Your average casual armchair fan doesn't even bother trying to get tickets anymore.

 

Then there's also the fact that the Mancs and Arsenal make 2 or 3 times what we make from matchday revenue. Arsenal's 9000 corporate seats alone make nearly as much as our 45,000 make in a season.

[massy316]

Loads are boycotting cos of the yanks and then there's also the small matter of the worst weather in 60 years.

 

We've 60,000 people on the waiting list. 60,000 isn't anywhere near enough of a capacity. We'd sell a shit load more season tickets if we could supply demand. Your average casual armchair fan doesn't even bother trying to get tickets anymore.

 

Then there's also the fact that the Mancs and Arsenal make 2 or 3 times what we make from matchday revenue. Arsenal's 9000 corporate seats alone make nearly as much as our 45,000 make in a season.

 

as anyone heard how the proposal from shareliverpool lfc is going or as this fallen by the wayside, regarding the possibilety of the supporters clubing together.

[Sangria]

It might even be more, as I would imagine G&H would want £400M for the club while still leaving the £250M debt in place.

 

If and it is a big if they could get 400 million that would include the debt. The debt would be cleared and they would get 75 million each.

That is definite in my mind.

 

I also think Maldini is right the cost of the stadium would cost nowhere near 400 million for us to build.

Naming rights etc we could recoup a lot of what it would cost. Also would it cost that much in todays markets. If and again a big if, we started soon, it could cost a lot less.

Steel, Labour etc and a big amount of contractors looking for work of that size.

 

What I do know is we need the current owners out or we are on a slippery slope.