Rhone group in talks over 100mil takeover.

[StevieH]

Liverpool to reject £110m offer from New York investors - Premier League, Football - The Independent

 

Liverpool appear ready to reject a bid for control of the club from New York-based fund management company Rhône Group, which would enable them to pay off £100m of debt demanded by Royal Bank of Scotland. Rhône's deadline for Liverpool to take or leave their £110m offer – tabled on 13 March – expires tomorrow. With seemingly no willingness on the part of the company's partners, Robert Agostinelli and Steven Langman, to offer an extension, Liverpool must look elsewhere for funds.

 

 

The Independent on Sunday understands that the sticking point in talks with Rhône relates to their demands for control of the club rather than the valuation of the 40 per cent share they would take. Rhône are understood to have wanted concrete assurances written into any deal that Liverpool's co-owners, Tom Hicks and George Gillett, would not be able to combine their 30 per cent shares to maintain overall control. A 100 per cent takeover from Hicks and Gillett would seem to solve that issue, which always seemed a sticking point. Though Rhône's departure leaves Liverpool with no firm offers as the club reaches the Easter deadline, which managing director Christian Purslow had identified for finding a new equity partner, there are suggestions that the interest of two prospective investors may be turned into firm bids.

 

Liverpool, who need a win at Birmingham today to maintain their hopes of taking the fourth Champions' League position, continue with Hicks and Gillett. The unpopular Americans have been told by RBS that they must reduce their £237m debt burden by £100m by July if they are to be granted a deal to refinance their loans over a longer period and given access to funds to begin work on any new Stanley Park stadium.

<!-- adSurroundStart -->

<!-- adSurroundClose -->

<!-- adSurroundStart -->

[RedKnight]

Absolute nightmare.

[Anubis]

I know Texans are fond of guns, but I had no idea that some of them are also fond of shooting themselves in the foot. Hard times ahead while the gruesome twosome hold their valuation stance.

[Dougie Do'ins]

Liverpool to reject £110m offer from New York investors - Premier League, Football - The Independent

 

Liverpool appear ready to reject a bid for control of the club from New York-based fund management company Rhône Group, which would enable them to pay off £100m of debt demanded by Royal Bank of Scotland. Rhône's deadline for Liverpool to take or leave their £110m offer – tabled on 13 March – expires tomorrow. With seemingly no willingness on the part of the company's partners, Robert Agostinelli and Steven Langman, to offer an extension, Liverpool must look elsewhere for funds.

 

 

The Independent on Sunday understands that the sticking point in talks with Rhône relates to their demands for control of the club rather than the valuation of the 40 per cent share they would take. Rhône are understood to have wanted concrete assurances written into any deal that Liverpool's co-owners, Tom Hicks and George Gillett, would not be able to combine their 30 per cent shares to maintain overall control. A 100 per cent takeover from Hicks and Gillett would seem to solve that issue, which always seemed a sticking point. Though Rhône's departure leaves Liverpool with no firm offers as the club reaches the Easter deadline, which managing director Christian Purslow had identified for finding a new equity partner, there are suggestions that the interest of two prospective investors may be turned into firm bids.

 

Liverpool, who need a win at Birmingham today to maintain their hopes of taking the fourth Champions' League position, continue with Hicks and Gillett. The unpopular Americans have been told by RBS that they must reduce their £237m debt burden by £100m by July if they are to be granted a deal to refinance their loans over a longer period and given access to funds to begin work on any new Stanley Park stadium.

If Cancer + Aids are in a position to refuse a solid offer of investment with the RBS deadline nearing then there must be something else going on. Either they know RBS are going to extend or their confident of getting the required investment from elsewhere.

 

If the RBS threat is a serious one then they'd be mad to reject the offer from Rhone because if there's nobody else prepared to invest then C+A will be leaving themselves wide open to the banks.

 

I find the emboldened part very interesting as I would have thought the last thing Gillett would want to do is side with Hicks.

 

The plot thickens by the second.

[Carra_is_legend]

The Telegraph and Independent articles looks like they are carbon copies.

 

I mean they couldn't have been leaked by a club "source" could they? Especially about the "two" mystery investors.

[Carra_is_legend]

If Cancer + Aids are in a position to refuse a solid offer of investment with the RBS deadline nearing then there must be something else going on. Either they know RBS are going to extend or their confident of getting the required investment from elsewhere.

 

If the RBS threat is a serious one then they'd be mad to reject the offer from Rhone because if there's nobody else prepared to invest then C+A will be leaving themselves wide open to the banks.

 

I find the emboldened part very interesting as I would have thought the last thing Gillett would want to do is side with Hicks.

 

The plot thickens by the second.

 

The little cunt will take sides with any other cunt in the world - as long as he gets the money. If Hicks comes up with a decent offer for little George, I'm sure the little cunt will jump at the chance.

[coop]

Hicks defaulted on a loan in America for $500m i think a year a go now and they are still waiting for their money.

 

Do you think he is bothered about RBS and their threats.

 

I would imagine the bank are more likely to bottle it rather then Hicks.

 

For me the bank taking the club and selling it for the debt (£237m) would be the best course of action as at that price many would be interested.

 

That would bring its own complications though regards whoever the new owners could be.

[Royal Family]

Coop is spot on. Does anyone seriously think that RBS will just waltz in, take control of the club, and Hicks and Gillett will just sit back passively and let this happen? You'd have at the very least a lawsuit that makes Jarndyce versus Jarndyce look straight-forward. Even if RBS sold the club, our main creditors will be Hicks and Gillett, and we'd be paying them off for decades.

 

So either (1) the Americans have alternative funding or (2) they know that RBS won't be able to simply pull the plug on them, and so are quite happy with this brinkmanship.

[JagSquared]

One day this will make an engrossing read as a book, sickening most likely but engrossing "Death of a Football Club", I can see it now.

[Baldi]

Hicks defaulted on a loan in America for $500m i think a year a go now and they are still waiting for their money.

 

Do you think he is bothered about RBS and their threats.

I would imagine the bank are more likely to bottle it rather then Hicks.

 

For me the bank taking the club and selling it for the debt (£237m) would be the best course of action as at that price many would be interested.

 

That would bring its own complications though regards whoever the new owners could be.

 

Coop is right, the bank will bottle it, they couldnt even get their own finances right 18 months ago. They will settle for a little money rather than no money and legal wranglings.

 

RBS are like Hans Blix in Team America "Pay up or... we will be very very very angry with you and we will write you a letter letting you know how angry we are" In fact for that matter Hicks will be like Kim Jong Ill

 

[YOUTUBE]fSXNJMP8ir4[/YOUTUBE]

[HJohal]

Hicks defaulted on a loan in America for $500m i think a year a go now and they are still waiting for their money.

 

Do you think he is bothered about RBS and their threats.

 

I would imagine the bank are more likely to bottle it rather then Hicks.

 

For me the bank taking the club and selling it for the debt (£237m) would be the best course of action as at that price many would be interested.

 

That would bring its own complications though regards whoever the new owners could be.

 

Logically, you would think no financial institution with any credibility will lend Hicks any cash - In the last 12 months he has defaulted on a number of large high profile payments and as a result his credit record must be worse than junk status. After all who wants to lease a house to a tennat who has a nasty serial habit of not paying rent - after a while your reputation precedes you.

 

RBS is the weak link here - Hicks & Gillet dont really give a damn about the current noise however this bank owned by taxpayers will, it needs to managed carefully as there is a fine line between re-finance at ruthless hedge fund and RBS calling in the loan and selling the club to the highest bidder. I hope Purslow is guiding the ship rather than Hicks/Gillet and can gently steer us to the latter.

[Moo]

No chance of an RBS threat of a winding up petition like at Portsmouth?

[Baldi]

No chance of an RBS threat of a winding up petition like at Portsmouth?

 

Portsmouth is a different beast, I dont think they have the nerve. Liverpool is a much bigger brand and would have bigger ramifications because of its status in world football. Bottom line RBS are toothless and Hicks knows it.

[BolshieBastard]

Coop is spot on. Does anyone seriously think that RBS will just waltz in, take control of the club, and Hicks and Gillett will just sit back passively and let this happen? You'd have at the very least a lawsuit that makes Jarndyce versus Jarndyce look straight-forward. Even if RBS sold the club, our main creditors will be Hicks and Gillett, and we'd be paying them off for decades.

 

So either (1) the Americans have alternative funding or (2) they know that RBS won't be able to simply pull the plug on them, and so are quite happy with this brinkmanship.

 

In essence, this is what LBO's are all about, brinkmanship. Hicks especially is one for this and knows how close to the wind he can sail.

 

Its also why banks and sports organisations dont force the issue in the US where litigation is at the forefront.

 

Same thing will apply here. Unless those two via the club default on the payments there's no way RBS can call the loan in early. All RBS can do is walk away from any new loan but there again, that will probably mean they lose out on any further income from the club.

 

Despite what people think, banks just love people repaying big loans with all that interest although there is an associated risk of a company defaulting to be considered. What banks dont like is big loans not being repaid.

[BolshieBastard]

No chance of an RBS threat of a winding up petition like at Portsmouth?

 

Nope. The club is making the repayments in full and on time so RBS dont have any grounds for a winding up order. HMRC issued a winding up order because they considered Portsmouth to be trading when insolvent ie they weren't paying their bills on time or in full.

[beejay]

Why would there be a lawsuit? Banks call in loans every day of the week. Every report states that the loan agreement expires in July. That means the owners have to either agree new terms to re-finance or they pay back the loan. Full stop.

 

If RBS believe the owners are failing to meet their banking conditions - eg reducing the debt by £100m now - then what is to stop RBS from taking back the assets secured against the loan (ie the shares in the club) and selling them to recover their debt?

 

As I say, this sort of thing happens all the time, just because it's high-profile doesn't prevent the bank from acting in their own interests.

[BolshieBastard]

Why would there be a lawsuit? Banks call in loans every day of the week. Every report states that the loan agreement expires in July. That means the owners have to either agree new terms to re-finance or they pay back the loan. Full stop.

 

If RBS believe the owners are failing to meet their banking conditions - eg reducing the debt by £100m now - then what is to stop RBS from taking back the assets secured against the loan (ie the shares in the club) and selling them to recover their debt?

 

As I say, this sort of thing happens all the time, just because it's high-profile doesn't prevent the bank from acting in their own interests.

 

Banks can only call in a loan if some material breach of the terms and conditions have occurred, in other words, full payments have not been made on time.

 

The current loan deal expires in July. Either a new loan is taken with RBS who, for their part want the loan amount reduced by 100m if reports are to be believed, as part of the T&C's to a new loan, or, new finance is arranged with another bank or other means.

 

The owners could go to other banks and re finance for any amount the banks etc consider is prudent.

 

RBS couldnt take any assets of the club if the owners pay off the full debt with them then re finance the same amount via another bank or financial means.

[NorgieReds]

As far as I see the articles are more or less identical to what Chris Bascombe wrote last weekend.

[Woo]

Without reading through the thread, are we any closer to investment than we were a few weeks ago?

[zigackly]

No-one knows.

[BolshieBastard]

Without reading through the thread, are we any closer to investment than we were a few weeks ago?

 

I wish I could say yes but the real answer is no. Hicks wants his pound (dollar!?) of flesh. He wont sell until he gets it.

 

RBS will either re finance or the finance will come from elsewhere. This has lots of legs yet.

[Guest Ulysses Everett McGill]

It was also the 'source' to the media deadline for the Gillett/Rhone Red herring for Tuesday 6th

 

That was kind of what I was getting at

 

That Telegraph article isn't far off the mark

[ali]

That was kind of what I was getting at

 

That Telegraph article isn't far off the mark

 

I took note of what you said at the outset and treated it as a ruse, not meaning that it wasn't genuine. Tried to research from what was available on the internet about the players involved and previous history, particularly the links from Rhone to Eden Park. Could be a bit of revenge going on as well, setting dates, keeping people spinning, getting nearer to brink deadline. The US media bang on about Hicks need cash badly and quick. Sprat to catch a mackerel, going to the edge, depends whether there's jumpers or not or being saved. There must be a Plan B if Plan A doesn't come off, maybe that's the respossession bit which is not administration.

 

Expecting Dave K and Nicky A to have a book and film at the ready ;)

[Chinandeler Bong]

Forgive my ignorance here but has anyone ever wondered that IF new owners want the club or investors want 40% etc etc that the sticking point could be Benitez ?

Im sure its crossed the minds of many but I think its viable .

Rhone for example, may want their own man in charge if the tumours dilute their sharehold , where as the tumours know pretty much with Rafa, with the exception of this season is were pretty fuckin good in European Football - The MoneyMaker. And that is suffice for them to make a few million here and there and feed their other ' more important ' business ventures . They need that stability, a man who seems content to hunt in the bargain basement for now and make do but still get some decent runs in European Competition. A man who seems to hold on to what he has instead of going that little bit further, both in tactics and transfer transactions.

Rafa's a fucking dream for the tumours in my opinion.

 

I dont know, just a thought.

[The Special One]

Forgive my ignorance here but has anyone ever wondered that IF new owners want the club or investors want 40% etc etc that the sticking point could be Benitez ?

Im sure its crossed the minds of many but I think its viable .

Rhone for example, may want their own man in charge if the tumours dilute their sharehold , where as the tumours know pretty much with Rafa, with the exception of this season is were pretty fuckin good in European Football - The MoneyMaker. And that is suffice for them to make a few million here and there and feed their other ' more important ' business ventures . They need that stability, a man who seems content to hunt in the bargain basement for now and make do but still get some decent runs in European Competition. A man who seems to hold on to what he has instead of going that little bit further, both in tactics and transfer transactions.

Rafa's a fucking dream for the tumours in my opinion.

 

I dont know, just a thought.

 

Do you reckon he's a dream after today's performance, clearly foregoing the opportunity to be in Europe next season?

 

Time's up for Rafa. He needs to go, whoever is in charge. Gillett wants him gone and hopefully Hicks will see that come end of of May when the fans turn on him as well.

 

A man can't perform in Europe or in Africa if he's lost the dressing room.

 

Either that or we have brand spanking new owners who send him on his way anyway. A girl can dream.