Rafael Benítez on the brink of leaving Liverpool over Anfield rift

[zigackly]

Histrionics? Just stop it.

 

"pulling baseless percentages out of your arse"

 

"your mad theory"

 

"madness"

 

Like I said, disagree with me by all means but try not to have a cow.

[WaltonRed]

Time for a demo on St.George's in town I reckon.

 

SOS should get on to it.

 

Get people like John Power and Pete Wylie to sing and get some speakers up to drive the message home.

[Delmar]

I don't know where the money went, I've already said that. I've no clue how the owners got that money, whether it was their own cash, from player sales or whether it is in the form of another loan placed on the club.

 

Why not simplify your thought process a bit. We know for a fact (a bad word here these days) that the Alonso money did not go towards buying new players. Then it is simply fair to assume that the money went towards whatever the club spends money on. The timing of the deals and the reported structure of the Alonso transfer payment suggests that the money went towards the refinancing. You know, cash flow and all that stuff.

 

Overall the only relevant thing in this whole episode is that it was a clear case of asset stripping. Nothing unexpected, and it will happen again with these owners.

[Steve Holt]

Why does this forum think there are more posts in this thread, and more pages, than there are?

 

This happens in loads of threads with more than a few pages.

[Guest Pistonbroke]

The Americans have backing from the banks – potentially – for another three years, and if they stay for that long, then there will be little left of the club as we know, given the current rate of growth of debts, year on year.

 

Three years? Wtf does this come from?

 

I haven't seen a single shred of evindence pointing at those two cunts being able to hold on to the club for three more years.

 

Which is of course why Broughton has come in to speed up the process.

 

They wouldn't have put the club up for sale if it was the case. Instead they would have rode out the global storm and tried to cash in after things picked up.

[zigackly]

Why does this forum think there are more posts in this thread, and more pages, than there are?

 

This happens in loads of threads with more than a few pages.

 

Usually this happens when posts have been deleted, because the database has IDs running up to say 100 but there are now only 88 posts (for example). Therefore if it works out how many pages based on highest ID not post count it will display that it needs more pages, then when it comes to fetch them there are fewer posts. This is really a bug in the forum software.

 

The longer a thread is of course, the more likely some bellend has spammed it up before getting banned and a mod deleting their posts.

[Delmar]

The longer a thread is of course, the more likely some bellend has spammed it up before getting banned and a mod deleting their posts.

 

I think it's a conspiracy. And the mods are Nazis. Could be both.

[zigackly]

Sorry you're right, I should have given a TLW answer, not a work one ;)

[Delmar]

They wouldn't have put the club up for sale if it was the case. Instead they would have rode out the global storm and tried to cash in after things picked up.

 

You are using common sense to argue against a journalist. That is forbidden. Or pointless, anyway.

[Steve Holt]

Usually this happens when posts have been deleted, because the database has IDs running up to say 100 but there are now only 88 posts (for example). Therefore if it works out how many pages based on highest ID not post count it will display that it needs more pages, then when it comes to fetch them there are fewer posts. This is really a bug in the forum software.

 

The longer a thread is of course, the more likely some bellend has spammed it up before getting banned and a mod deleting their posts.

 

Cheers. Been wondering that for a while.

[Delmar]

Sorry you're right, I should have given a TLW answer, not a work one ;)

 

Try the TLW answers at the office, that makes life interesting..

[dirty_sanchez]

Shit sucking up from Maddock after his TLW podcast appearence.

[Mitch]

I see the fat fraud is confident of bringing quality signings to the club in the summer, one thing i am certain about is this fraud should'nt be allowed spend another pound of liverpool money. Can't be trusted. Hopefully one of the big Milan clubs are foolish enough to hire him.

[Guest ShoePiss]

I thought Purslow said (I'm paraphrasing here before anyone asks me for proof) something along the lines of having a 3-year deal agreed in principle with RBS, but it required £100m of investment to be in place first.

 

In the SOS minutes I think.

 

EDIT:

 

"CP - I have got a conditional agreement for a 3/4 year loan deal. At the last re-financing agreement, Hicks and Gillett paid down the debt with their own money. A new investor will pay down the £100 million needed now. The banks want us reducing debt and being cautious. RBS are annoyed and unhappy with Hicks and Gillett and they want a change of ownership. The £100 million pay down is compulsory, it has to be done. I will not agree to a deal that is unworkable for us, but we need to have the owners own and the managers manage."

 

(From the SOS version of the meeting minutes)

 

"CP - One of our key priorities is to reduce the debt by £100 million. This is a requirement from our bankers and will allow us to look at a more flexible and longer term refinancing with our bankers when this investment is brought in. Ideally we would like a three or four year refinancing deal rather than the shorter ones we have had recently. The targeted reduction in borrowings was agreed by the bank, CP and the owners when I was appointed. "

(From the Purslow version of the meeting minutes)

 

 

Minutes from Christian Purslow and SOS Meeting – Spirit Of Shankly – Liverpool Supporters' Union

 

Yeah and I can see the bank agreeing to that when 100m is slapped on the table but the situation now is simply a statement of intent. "we'd like to sell the whole club". I can't see the bank offering 3 years on the strength of that.

[Captain]

In short; no 3-year deal then.

[SCOUSE TAPAS]

Yeah and I can see the bank agreeing to that when 100m is slapped on the table but the situation now is simply a statement of intent. "we'd like to sell the whole club". I can't see the bank offering 3 years on the strength of that.

 

I find it a bit odd,he does not mention the £350 million loan off C+A with the nice 10 per cent interest.

[Delmar]

In short; no 3-year deal then.

 

Unless there's 100m investment by the owners, based on what Purslow said about the conditions of the deal. Do you think they have put down another 100m?

[hamstrung]

Why does this forum think there are more posts in this thread, and more pages, than there are?

 

This happens in loads of threads with more than a few pages.

 

[Captain]

The longer a thread is of course, the more likely some bellend has spammed it up before getting banned and a mod deleting their posts.

 

I think this is a shit practice, if indeed it is the case.

[SCOUSE TAPAS]

Unless there's 100m investment by the owners, based on what Purslow said about the conditions of the deal. Do you think they have put down another 100m?

 

I would say with Broughton getting them a 12 month extension on the RBS loan,they havent put another £100 mill into the club.

 

Lets hope that is the case.Another £100 mill loan off them alongside the original £144 mill loan from the owners,would see us going under pretty quickly.

[Delmar]

I would say with Broughton getting them a 12 month extension on the RBS loan,they havent put another £100 mill into the club.

 

Lets hope that is the case.Another £100 mill loan off them alongside the original £144 mill loan from the owners,would see us going under pretty quickly.

 

I agree. Anyway, Maddock qualified his claim about a 3 year deal with "potentially". Which means whatever he wants it to mean. The only obvious answer is to listen to Broughton's words about the sale and media :

 

"Expect to see all sorts of names in there - ignore the whole lot."

 

I'd reduce it pretty much to "ignore the whole lot".

[ali]

17:19 pm - 18/5/2010

 

SOME 18.5 MILLION

An employer will be almost half of the transfer of Villa

The ultimate beneficiary of the transfer of Villa, "in addition to the player and the club-will be the employer Eugenio Calabuig

 

Sport.es

 

According to the newspaper 'The Provinces', the Valencian businessman would transfer 50% of the Asturian striker at Barca.

 

The 50 million that the company Fomento Urbano de Castellón, Calabuig-owned, "loaned by Valencia were a respite for the battered club coffers 'che'. However, this credit must be returned and the sale of Villa will partly solve the debt.

 

As agreed at the time, if the club ends by signing David Villa for 42 million euros, 18.5 billion going into the hands of Eugene Calabuig, 23'5 million while the remaining will be the club Valencia.

 

 

 

 

If RBS are still expecting 100m off the debt, the example above is fairly pertinent, there's been nothing to say they do or don't. The Sunday Times is the only paper which has suggested Broughton has RBS extending the loan for 12 months. The Sunday Times also previously said BarCap had re-financed the loans, which proved to be totally erroneous.

 

 

Inter technical director Marco Branca, tonight, has refuted any contact with Rafa, Moggi suggested yesterday in an interview that Rafa would be used as a smokescreen for other candidates.

[Torvald Utne]

I don't think it's mods deleting posts, I'm not sure if they can anyway (usually posts get edited when there's a WUM running amok).

 

But some WUMs get sent to Coventry, and I think that puts the page numbers out of sync.

 

Shit! You OLD!

[zigackly]

BolshieBastard's posts all disappeared from at least one thread, which I thoroughly approve of.

 

And some posts have to be deleted for legal reasons or because they are too offensive, surely.

 

Anyway it's not a democracy Cap, it's Dave's site, so if you don't like it ...

Edited May 18, 2010 by zigackly

[Original202]

How long can someone be on the brink for? He's been on the brink for nearly 3 weeks. I think he's blatantly abusing the word brink now.