Quantcast
Kenny Huang linked to Liverpool takeover - Page 216 - FF - Football Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content
Wor Horse

Kenny Huang linked to Liverpool takeover

Recommended Posts

Being sacked by Chelsea and being a bit of a shithead doesn't mean a guy can't do a job. Mourinho for example.

 

he was sacked for being shite. he was brough in to raise the corporate profile of the club and increase turnover to such an extent that the club became self-sufficient. He failed - chelsea lose as much money now as they have ever done, thanks to the financial mismanagement of Peter Kenyon. Mourinho was sacked because he fell out with Roman. Very, very different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I want new owners. I don't want just any owners. It's like there are lots of people who thought Hodgson is the right manager for us, not because of what he is as a manager, but because he is not Benitez. Huang appears to have one thing going for him right now, he's not C&A. There have been plenty of other people interested, but it seems from where I am sitting they don't feel the need to commit right now. There is a deadline about 6 weeks away which will help them, so why would they jump now?

 

I've believed for a very long time, our way out of this mess is RBS. If RBS pull the plug (or at least make G&H believe they will pull the plug) in October, there will be more than just Kenny Huang at the table. I want the best owners for Liverpool, not just any owners. That's how we ended up in this position in the 1st place. Moores and Parry felt they were over a barrel as the club had to move on the new stadium there and then, so when DIC walked away, instead of being considered and performing genuine due diligence on C&A, they shit one and jumped at the perceived only option available - it didn't matter if they were wrong, they were there. We can't afford to repeat that mistake. To me every move Kenny Huang has made in the last 3 weeks or whatever it is makes me believe we will be doing no more than repeating that mistake.

 

As my Mum always says, it will all come out in the wash!

 

We obviously disagree about Huang's behaviour, I don't think he has done too much wrong, to me this is all being played out in the press and he is far from being the worst culprit in that aspect. You don't, but we are not going to agree on that.

 

I won't be judging any owner until they have fulfilled their promises, so to me, the need to judge them now is moot, I will be judging them in two or three years time.

 

I think the point regarding Hodgson is a fair one, but slightly different in so far as that is a footballing decision and can always be rectified a lot quicker and easier than the situations involving the owners, at this moment we need them gone! There are no two ways about it, they have to go by hook or crook and if that means taking a chance then so be it.

 

It is galling that we spent years searching for investment and ended up with two chancers, but that is what you get when your hopes lie with a no mark who thinks an extra 8 million is worth something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As my Mum always says, it will all come out in the wash!

 

Didn't your mum ever tell you not to put it in the wash in the first place?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He was very good at what he did. He is seen as the main business reason for Man Utds huge commercial push that made then so self sufficient. He commercially exploited every little thing possible and brought in huge revenue. To say he wasn't good at his job is nonsense. It was this very good job that got him the CEO's position at Chelsea.

 

I heard he was sacked by Chelsea for constant arguments with Abramovitch with how the club should move forward (same reasons as Mourinho basically and would you say Mourinho was bad at his job?) Certainly it's not as if Chelsea have taken off as some commercial force since he left.

 

But again, my point is that it's daft to not want the bid because Kenyon is a cunt. The only reason a bid should be ruled out is if it is shown that the bidders do not have the financial muscle to follow through with Broughtons demands.

 

You're talking about the work he did at Man U like it was yesterday. Of course he increased Chelsea's turnover, I could have managed that, they went from no marks to the richest club in the world over night. I tghought the reason for him going was simple - his role was to make sure the running of Chelsea did not forever come out of Roman's pocket. He was sacked almost as soon as Chelsea declared they were not going to be self sufficient at their planned date. You are right they have not moved on leaps and bounds since - however, Kenyon clearly sold Abramovich the story that it was achievable. What is noticeable is chelsea seem to be in a period of wage reduction, something which didn't seem to be on the agenda in Kenyon's time - so while turnover may not be up, they are working to reduce costs. A fundamental aspect of any CEO's job.

 

As for Broughton ruling one way or the other on the existence of Kenyon, I would not think he would care too much one way or who Huang hired - although considering Broughton's close ties to the current Chelsea owner, his view of Kenyon may be severely coloured and it could be said this is not the smartest move Huang has made.

 

I am not telling Broughton what to do, I am following this as a fan and everything Huang does to me stinks of him not being right for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As my Mum always says, it will all come out in the wash!

 

We obviously disagree about Huang's behaviour, I don't think he has done too much wrong, to me this is all being played out in the press and he is far from being the worst culprit in that aspect. You don't, but we are not going to agree on that.

 

I won't be judging any owner until they have fulfilled their promises, so to me, the need to judge them now is moot, I will be judging them in two or three years time.

 

I think the point regarding Hodgson is a fair one, but slightly different in so far as that is a footballing decision and can always be rectified a lot quicker and easier than the situations involving the owners, at this moment we need them gone! There are no two ways about it, they have to go by hook or crook and if that means taking a chance then so be it.

 

It is galling that we spent years searching for investment and ended up with two chancers, but that is what you get when your hopes lie with a no mark who thinks an extra 8 million is worth something.

 

We clearly see things differently. I want new owners. I want them as soon as is practical. But I want the right owners. As you said yourself, we can't just change them again, so the decision needs to be right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We clearly see things differently. I want new owners. I want them as soon as is practical. But I want the right owners. As you said yourself, we can't just change them again, so the decision needs to be right.

 

I think you have misunderstood what I was trying to say. I agree we need the right owners, what I am getting at is that all you will be getting at this juncture is new owners who have behaved correctly up to this point! As opposed to a bid like Huang that you don't think is being conducted correctly.

 

If Broughton gives the backing to Huangs bid, how would you feel?

 

Either way, we will only know in a year or two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're talking about the work he did at Man U like it was yesterday. Of course he increased Chelsea's turnover, I could have managed that, they went from no marks to the richest club in the world over night. I tghought the reason for him going was simple - his role was to make sure the running of Chelsea did not forever come out of Roman's pocket. He was sacked almost as soon as Chelsea declared they were not going to be self sufficient at their planned date. You are right they have not moved on leaps and bounds since - however, Kenyon clearly sold Abramovich the story that it was achievable. What is noticeable is chelsea seem to be in a period of wage reduction, something which didn't seem to be on the agenda in Kenyon's time - so while turnover may not be up, they are working to reduce costs. A fundamental aspect of any CEO's job.

 

As for Broughton ruling one way or the other on the existence of Kenyon, I would not think he would care too much one way or who Huang hired - although considering Broughton's close ties to the current Chelsea owner, his view of Kenyon may be severely coloured and it could be said this is not the smartest move Huang has made.

 

I am not telling Broughton what to do, I am following this as a fan and everything Huang does to me stinks of him not being right for us.

 

I meant Broughton's demands on the new owners being fit and proper. I too doubt he gives less of a shite about Kenyon being involved, and that's the way it should be. Each bid should be judged on it's merits, not on some broker or other.

 

As Huang has said fuck all to the press, I will only judge on actual press releases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kenyon's involvement isn't ideal, but then neither are our owners, the fact we have a Chairman who supports Chelsea, and that we have to sell top players and replace them with players who aren't as good.

 

We've been up the shitter since Moores sold us out. We aren't going to get wonderful owners, there aren't any out there, so the next best thing is owners that aren't going to pile loads of debt on the club, will build a new stadium and give us cash to spend in the transfer market.

 

If Huang can do this, then I don't really give a shit who brokers the deal. It's not the same Liverpool Football Club as it used to be, and I doubt it will be again. There's just too much greed in the game now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you have misunderstood what I was trying to say. I agree we need the right owners, what I am getting at is that all you will be getting at this juncture is new owners who have behaved correctly up to this point! As opposed to a bid like Huang that you don't think is being conducted correctly.

 

If Broughton gives the backing to Huangs bid, how would you feel?

 

Either way, we will only know in a year or two.

 

I would feel zero. My view is we'll have moved from American cunts to Chinese cunts until proved otherwise. To some extent I will think that no matter who takes over, but the Huang bid worries the shit out of me, but not as much as the Kirdi bid does. But I am hoping there are one or two people, trying to do things the right way who we don't really know about and will come out and tell us their plans once they have the club rather than some sort of PR campaign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of interest apart from mere words what contractual obligations are Broughton and the board aiming to implement to ensure we have the right owners. It has been mentioned on a few occasions by Broughton and Purslow they are looking for the right owners.

 

However can they really ensure we have the right owners or are their meaning and the fans meaning of right owners different things?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I want new owners. I don't want just any owners. It's like there are lots of people who thought Hodgson is the right manager for us, not because of what he is as a manager, but because he is not Benitez. Huang appears to have one thing going for him right now, he's not C&A.

 

Very true. I'm puzzled as to what many of those trumpeting Huang are basing this on? His bid seems to be smoke and mirrors with a lot of vague talk but no mention of where the finances are coming from. Ok, CiC understandably may not wish to talk for political reasons but where's the rest of the money coming from? We may swap one leveraged buyout for another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would feel zero. My view is we'll have moved from American cunts to Chinese cunts until proved otherwise. To some extent I will think that no matter who takes over, but the Huang bid worries the shit out of me, but not as much as the Kirdi bid does. But I am hoping there are one or two people, trying to do things the right way who we don't really know about and will come out and tell us their plans once they have the club rather than some sort of PR campaign.

 

That is what I am trying to get at! But to me we will have moved from American Cunts (cos they are proven to be cunts) to Chinese (cost they have no proved they are cunts, nor have they proved they are not).

 

Very true. I'm puzzled as to what many of those trumpeting Huang are basing this on? His bid seems to be smoke and mirrors with a lot of vague talk but no mention of where the finances are coming from. Ok, CiC understandably may not wish to talk for political reasons but where's the rest of the money coming from? We may swap one leveraged buyout for another.

 

Well the same question is put to those who have a problem with Huang as well, what are you basing your reservations on! 'Seems to be' not exactly the most concrete of arguments is it?

 

That you don't know who is backing him? You don't have to know, Broughton does, does ever bid have to list all those who are involved ?

Why do they need to highlight anyone who is involved if they have not taken over the club, at this moment it is a bid, if they are successful and we still don't know then that is a different matter, but at this moment we don't need to know that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Very true. I'm puzzled as to what many of those trumpeting Huang are basing this on? His bid seems to be smoke and mirrors with a lot of vague talk but no mention of where the finances are coming from. Ok, CiC understandably may not wish to talk for political reasons but where's the rest of the money coming from? We may swap one leveraged buyout for another.

 

that is my worry - we go from 270m worth of debt to a legit british bank and another 100m to the cunts, to 400m to some shady chinese version of wonga.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is what I am trying to get at! But to me we will have moved from American Cunts (cos they are proven to be cunts) to Chinese (cost they have no proved they are cunts, nor have they proved they are not).

 

 

 

 

When Parry left, everybody was made up. However, in general I would say Purslow is even more unpopular than Parry. Just because something is unknown doesn't make it better, in fact it can make it a whole lot worse. Hopefully Broughton will do his job, but my instincts tell me Huang will be no good for our club and we will be no better and quite possibly worse than under the current regime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When Parry left, everybody was made up. However, in general I would say Purslow is even more unpopular than Parry. Just because something is unknown doesn't make it better, in fact it can make it a whole lot worse. Hopefully Broughton will do his job, but my instincts tell me Huang will be no good for our club and we will be no better and quite possibly worse than under the current regime.

 

Not much I can say to that!

 

If it is unknown it can be many things, better, worse, the same, but at this moment it is unknown.

 

This isn't aimed at you, but people coming out with moral proclomations about how they won't stand by whilst the club is sold down the river, is based on nothing at this moment and comes across as patronising bollocks. If you are going on your instincts and how you feel about Huang, fine I can fully understand that, and agree, but they are not mine, and I don't see why I should feel less of a Red if I don't share the more pessimistic view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shankslegend just posts whatever daydream he has just had. bullshitter of the highest order

 

Maybe, maybe not. He claims he has seen 'in advance' a press release from KH's consortium, saying this to be so. He's going to look a complete bullshitter if it doesnt subsequently materialise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe, maybe not. He claims he has seen 'in advance' a press release from KH's consortium, saying this to be so. He's going to look a complete bullshitter if it doesnt subsequently materialise.

 

I saw that - but I'm not sure that's what he meant. Somebody on RAWK had earlier produced a mock-up of what a Huang press release might look like -or should look like. It seems to me that Shankslegend was referring to that - apparently making the mistake of thinking it was a genuine press release. He was probably reinforced in this mistake by the Echo claim that Huang would be making a statement today.

 

SL does play games and milk his so-called "inside information" but in so far as he has any at all it seems to be very low level third-hand chatter among employees at Melwood or Anfield. So its feasible he might known someone who knows about arrangements to meet Huang next week - even though he could not even nail whether it was in Liverpool, Manchester or London.

 

RAWK is very sensitive about SL and is liable to ban anyone who questions his often laughable ITK posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×