Kenny Huang thread - part 2

[Moo]

I've always thought a takeover was never going to be done cleanly. The Texas Rangers went into bankruptcy before Hicks' hands were off them. G&H don't care what it takes, but if you want them to fuck off without a profit, you'll have to take the club off their dead hands (here's hoping anyway).

 

They're holding the club hostage in their game of brinkmanship and it appears that Broughton does not have the power (or maybe the bottle) to force a sale against their will like it's been reported.

 

RBS won't put the club into administration, they'll get another refinance, from either them or another bank who will be happy to pocket the interest without doing anything.

 

Broughton has no ties to this club, the only reputation he cares about is his reputation amongst the sharks, leeches and thieves he works with on a daily basis, not the fan on the streets. It's naive to think he's come in here to "save" the club from two people who have agreed to his appointment.

 

Potential buyers aren't lining up in numbers because they prefer to take the club when it will be cheaper and are willing to wait for G&H to fuck up.

 

For people who still think there are some shadow bidders on the horizon with pockets full of money, think again. We've been here before, and if I were a betting man, I'd say we'll still be here in January for some several more "most crucial week in the history of the club" nonsense.

 

That's the way I see it anyway. The club is either going to continue to be leeched off until it goes bankrupt, and only then will we be saved from those two tumors, or some nutcase will come up with the cash that will satisfy them.

 

Exactly. We've struggled to attract new owners in the past, that's why we ended up with those fuckers, so why all of a sudden is there going to be someone decent waiting in the wings? The club is no less expensive and the economic times more troubling.

[StevieH]

Don't really see the point in posting an old article it's only relevant at that time?

 

I only saw the date after posting it. My mistake.

[rome 84]

Neither did the Gosport Hobby Store.

 

Good point but I doubt they've ever been asked if they were involved in any way in a bid to buy Liverpool. Although part of me wishes they would throw a bid in just cos I reckon their motives would be more pure than those of the venture capitalists who are stalking the club.

[Sinos]

"Lynch mob" is about on par with "God like status" for exaggeration.

 

 

Question for anyone with far more understanding of the financial situation than me:

When did LFC become unable to service the debt?

I fully understand that not qualifying for the CL means profit took a huge hit, but I don't recall (or perhaps not understood) any figures or genuine suggestion that we couldn't afford the standard repayments???

 

My understanding is that it's not that they aren't able to service the debt, but that there's no way for them to keep hold of the club without continually taking on more debt until it becomes unserviceable.

[StevieH]

I wonder if the Sahara Group will return nearer to the 6th of October date?

[HJohal]

Obviously penalty charges are going to ramp up as a result - we can almost make an assumption now that the full £60m will be applied.

 

However will this imply that the RBS debt will move from 237M to 297M?

 

I am sure i read reports that stated that Hicks & Gillett will be directly liable for these penalty charges - however if this is the case why is the debt increasing from the £237M?

[TheHitman]

Anyone remember at the time when Barcap and Broughton came on board all the papers carried reports of refinancing and Barclays. Along the lines of they would wipe out the RBS debt or something similar. This was April 11/12.

 

Ever since, we never heard anything as all people have been discussing is the takeover new manager etc. This may well have been misinformed reporting or maybe considering there has beeen rumours over the past 24 hrs it may be the plan B.

[Reacher]

Is it just me or does there always seem to be an important date, it passes and we move on the next one kidding ourselves that something will happen with this deadline?

[ODZ]

I wonder if the Sahara Group will return nearer to the 6th of October date?

 

Their statement certainly suggest that, and I think there are several potential suitors who are doing exactly the same thing. Why in your right mind would you buy something that could be half as expensive in two months? Unless you're a Liverpool fan desperate to save the club and have no interest in making money of course.

 

But again, we'll probably see a new "deadline" come up before that date, like it always does.

 

The problem for us though, is that the club will have to be in completely dire states, far worse than it is today, for it to change ownership without the approval of cancer and aids. This means that things will get far worse for us before they get better, if at all.

 

If cancer and aids have a choice between losing the club for nothing now, or possibly making a profit at the risk of damaging this club beyond repair, it's not hard to come to a conclusion regarding the near future.

[StevieH]

BBC - David Bond: How serious was Huang about buying Liverpool?

 

Just three weeks after he emerged as the latest Liverpool saviour, Kenny Huang vanished from the scene on Friday night.

 

During that time we never heard from him in person, saw him at a game at Anfield or got any real sense of who might be backing him.

 

And yet ask any football follower who Huang is and they would probably be able to tell you - such is the publicity he has received.

 

Two weeks ago I went to Anfield to cover the story and was amazed to find a fan had already gone out and adapted his club shirt to reflect the possible arrival of Huang. The story had only broken two days earlier.

 

That supporter was no doubt seeking publicity on television for his efforts, something we duly gave him. But there are plenty of people who are wondering whether Huang was any different, just chasing his moment in the spotlight or using the media to encourage people with money to get behind him and back his idea.

 

It wouldn't be the first time. The Premier League is now so high profile and a club like Liverpool so famous, that linking your name to a possible takeover is a sure-fire way of seeing it in headlines around the world.

 

Liverpool were initially put up for sale by their American owners George Gillett and Tom Hicks in April with debts of £351.4m.

 

Their largest creditor, the Royal Bank of Scotland, are thought to be owed in the region of £237m and will invoke a £60m penalty fee is it is not repaid, or renegotiated, by 6 October.

 

Now I am not saying Huang was not a credible bidder for Liverpool. Barclays Capital and Liverpool chairman Martin Broughton, who are handling the protracted sale of the club, said they were treating him as one.

 

He may have had the Chinese government's China Investment Corporation behind him, but we are all still waiting for confirmation one way or another and, in such a hazy environment of claim and counter-claim, it is virtually impossible to know the truth of that one.

 

He may have had the backing of a gentleman called Guang Yuang of United States finance house Franklin Templeton Investments, although a spokeswoman for Franklin Templeton was very quick to go on the record and dismiss the suggestion.

 

He may also have had the help of former Chelsea and Manchester United chief executive Peter Kenyon. It is certainly true Huang and Kenyon know each other but the idea that a man who ran Old Trafford was now involved with a bid to rescue Liverpool may not have gone down well among those fans on the Kop Huang was trying to woo.

 

There is, of course, the possibility that all this is just a scare tactic, and that when Huang says in his statement, "I am now considering my future options", he is fully expecting Broughton to come rushing to find him clutching a sale contract.

 

But if he was the only real bidder, why take that chance? Why not sit tight and complete the deal?

 

The first we all knew about the Roman Abramovich and Abu Dhabi takeovers of Chelsea and Manchester City was when the deals were done. Abramovich didn't threaten Ken Bates across the back pages before closing his deal to buy Stamford Bridge. It just happened and any bid which makes as much noise as Huang's without anything apparently behind it has to be treated with a serious measure of suspicion.

 

There are plenty of people who may now wonder whether all the talk of frustration at delays is a smoke screen to disguise the fact that he simply didn't have the money. His advisers claim otherwise, saying he had provided proof of funds and every piece of paper required by Barclays Capital.

 

The club don't deny this, but they insist that just because he may have submitted a bid, they still have a duty to explore all the other offers on the table and that if Huang can't bide his time, then so be it.

 

So what happens now?

 

Broughton and Barclays Capital will continue to talk to those bidders still in the auction. There were said to be five last Friday so one assumes there are now four. But there are question marks over how serious they are.

 

The Syrian-born Canadian businessman Yahya Kirdi, the Rhone Group from New York and the Al Kharafi family of Kuwait are all said to be interested but so far we have seen no evidence of any progress with their bids.

 

It is known Broughton wanted to choose a preferred bidder last Friday but Liverpool were only able to issue a holding statement saying they were continuing the process and that a sale would be completed soon.

 

Christian Purslow, the club's managing director, went on Sportsweek last Sunday to say a deal was not close and the briefing from the club's advisers is 'don't expect anything any time soon'. Does that mean that no one wants to buy the club or is the problem that the American owners won't budge unless they get a profit from their three years in charge?

 

However, the clock is ticking. Hicks and Gillett have six weeks to repay or refinance their hefty loan with RBS. They are incurring hefty penalties as each month passes and they fail to agree a sale.

 

RBS are desperate for them to find a buyer to take on or pay off the debt while Liverpool know they risk falling further behind if this uncertainty continues.

 

But Broughton and Barclays won't be rushed and have repeatedly insisted they not only want to find a buyer but the right owner too.

 

It could be some time until that fan at Anfield has a new name to put on his shirt.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

I wonder if the Sahara Group will return nearer to the 6th of October date?

 

I'm wondering who else will raise their heads in October, to be honest.

[bornared]

When did LFC become unable to service the debt?

 

I don't have the last set of accounts in front of me, but the auditors basically said the current situation is not sustainable. They said that in the previous report also.

 

The club is now in negative equity, worth far less than the debts, if Bascombe is correct the debt to RBS and KF exceeds 400m now and set to increase by a further 60m in the coming weeks.

 

We wont know for sure until the accounts are published next year but we do know it wont be pretty reading.

 

The big question I want answered is what did G+H spend 50m on in terms of the new stadium. Basically we have only a few jpegs to show for that 50m.

Where did the money go?

 

 

One question, who originated this October 6th deadline, was it the two TE and TB or was this a Purslow leak?

[Red Phoenix]

Still can't believe how close we've come to having a truly great team. If we'd have kept (he's gone get over it.) Alonso and been able to build on the squad with some money we could've either landed a title by now or been due one this year. Profit for two cunts and maybe a bank or two, and millions of peoples dreams are shattered. Am on the verge of just fucking football off completely, it's not what it used to be at all.

 

Can see me just watching the odd Barca or Liverpool game in a few years and not really giving a shit anymore. Clubs are being destroyed and the people that saw the Liverpool of the 70's and 80's are the truly lucky ones. At least they have the memories of what football is supposed to be about.

[Royal Family]

If we have learned one thing - just one thing in the past three years - it is that we should be sceptical about anyone proclaiming to be our saviour and promising us the world. Gillett and Hicks with their spade in the ground; Rafa Benitez and the 'guarantee' of fourth place; Purslow and Broughton on the sale process; RBS and their claims to represent the best interests of the club. All empty promises.

 

So it is staggering that people are hysterical about the Huang withdrawal. Why is he hailed as our new messiah and saviour? Why should we believe his promises? And more to the point what evidence is there that he was offering what he claimed? Let's examine his credentials shall we?

 

Is there evidence that he has dealt with CIC in the past and been the front for their investments? None at all. he's a tiny fish in China. Noone has provided any evidence that he has done deals with CIC investment before.

 

Does he have a track record for investment in global sporting brands? None at all.

 

Does he have experience of managing sports 'franchises'? None at all, apart from a second-division chinese basketball team.

 

Does he have a track record for exaggerated claims that are later back-tracked or denied? Absolutely. What about his early PR claim to have part-owned the Cleveland Cavaliers basketball team?

 

Has he recently relaunched his QSL company and is he seeking to raise its profile and brand? Absolutely. And what better way than presenting yourself as a bidder for Liverpool?

 

So what are his credentials? Why should we trust him, and suspend disbelief? Why do we believe the PR spinners (he had at least THREE PR companies briefing on this, and none of them with the same story!) and the carefully placed stories in the press? Do you not think that the original story in the Times ought to have, at the very least, asked some of these sceptical questions?

 

Why do we do this to ourselves - do we learn nothing?

 

Jim Boardman has already done an excellent demolition of the Syrian Pizza-Boy too by the way. As far as I'm concerned, none of the bidders we know about are genuine thus far, and there is simply no point in getting rid of the two cowboys, hailing a new messiah, and then going through this all over again.

[Sinos]

I wonder if the Sahara Group will return nearer to the 6th of October date?

 

That Roy fella is dodgier than the pair of twats we've got now

 

BBC NEWS | South Asia | 'Missing' Indian tycoon surfaces

 

Businessworld - Saving Sahara

[TheHitman]

Oh interestingly the 300million refinancing figure from Barclays means it would cover the 60 million penalty figures to RBS. I hope this is inaccurate but the owners have been exceedingly quiet.

[Moo]

I don't have the last set of accounts in front of me, but the auditors basically said the current situation is not sustainable. They said that in the previous report also.

 

The club is now in negative equity, worth far less than the debts, if Bascombe is correct the debt to RBS and KF exceeds 400m now and set to increase by a further 60m in the coming weeks.

 

We wont know for sure until the accounts are published next year but we do know it wont be pretty reading.

 

The big question I want answered is what did G+H spend 50m on in terms of the new stadium. Basically we have only a few jpegs to show for that 50m.

Where did the money go?

 

 

One question, who originated this October 6th deadline, was it the two TE and TB or was this a Purslow leak?

 

The reason I am asking is that I believe for as long as the club can service the debt to the banks, and I actually don't know either way whether they can, they will get further refinancing.

Penalty charges aside, as they are not the typical bank interest rates, I can't see how the club is worth less than the £237/£290m debt to outside creditors.

 

I'm half convinced further re-financing will go ahead with the full co-operation of Broughton. Previously I thought he was here to help them asset strip and sell low, now I think it could be even worse than that and the refinancing will help them cling on for years to come.

[rome 84]

There's no way a fan just happened to be going into the club shop to get a Liverpool shirt with Huang on the back just as the TV cameras turned up. Oldest trick in the book that. The thing that keeps bugging me about the idea that Huang was just in it for the publicity, apart from the fact that he went to the lengths of providing proof of funds, is that the Chinese government has been dragged into it and if they were in any way embarrassed by being dragged into such a high profile failed takeover bid then surely that'd be the death knell for his career as a businessman?

[George Costanza]

This is how i see it unfolding based on nothing more than guesswork and a bout of depression

 

RBS will take control of the club

G&H will go to the courts to stop this happening/have the move overturned

Months will pass as a decision is made

RBS win

RBS then sell the club to some foreigner

 

bloody sausages seem to be taking forever to cook. i'm starving

[Moo]

If we have learned one thing - just one thing in the past three years - it is that we should be sceptical about anyone proclaiming to be our saviour and promising us the world. Gillett and Hicks with their spade in the ground; Rafa Benitez and the 'guarantee' of fourth place; Purslow and Broughton on the sale process; RBS and their claims to represent the best interests of the club. All empty promises.

 

So it is staggering that people are hysterical about the Huang withdrawal. Why is he hailed as our new messiah and saviour? Why should we believe his promises? And more to the point what evidence is there that he was offering what he claimed? Let's examine his credentials shall we?

 

 

These people are few and far between, the majority have been sceptical but excited. I would put the bad/over reaction to Huang pulling out down to fear, that there really is no-one decent out there waiting for us, and I think that's a reasonable fear.

[cochcaer]

If we have learned one thing - just one thing in the past three years - it is that we should be sceptical about anyone proclaiming to be our saviour and promising us the world. Gillett and Hicks with their spade in the ground; Rafa Benitez and the 'guarantee' of fourth place; Purslow and Broughton on the sale process; RBS and their claims to represent the best interests of the club. All empty promises.

 

So it is staggering that people are hysterical about the Huang withdrawal. Why is he hailed as our new messiah and saviour? Why should we believe his promises? And more to the point what evidence is there that he was offering what he claimed? Let's examine his credentials shall we?

 

Is there evidence that he has dealt with CIC in the past and been the front for their investments? None at all. he's a tiny fish in China. Noone has provided any evidence that he has done deals with CIC investment before.

 

Does he have a track record for investment in global sporting brands? None at all.

 

Does he have experience of managing sports 'franchises'? None at all, apart from a second-division chinese basketball team.

 

Does he have a track record for exaggerated claims that are later back-tracked or denied? Absolutely. What about his early PR claim to have part-owned the Cleveland Cavaliers basketball team?

 

Has he recently relaunched his QSL company and is he seeking to raise its profile and brand? Absolutely. And what better way than presenting yourself as a bidder for Liverpool?

 

So what are his credentials? Why should we trust him, and suspend disbelief? Why do we believe the PR spinners (he had at least THREE PR companies briefing on this, and none of them with the same story!) and the carefully placed stories in the press? Do you not think that the original story in the Times ought to have, at the very least, asked some of these sceptical questions?

 

Why do we do this to ourselves - do we learn nothing?

 

Jim Boardman has already done an excellent demolition of the Syrian Pizza-Boy too by the way. As far as I'm concerned, none of the bidders we know about are genuine thus far, and there is simply no point in getting rid of the two cowboys, hailing a new messiah, and then going through this all over again.

 

I tend to follow your sceptical line and Jeremy Paxman's maxim:

 

Why is this lying bastard lying to me?

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

There's no way a fan just happened to be going into the club shop to get a Liverpool shirt with Huang on the back just as the TV cameras turned up. Oldest trick in the book that. The thing that keeps bugging me about the idea that Huang was just in it for the publicity, apart from the fact that he went to the lengths of providing proof of funds, is that the Chinese government has been dragged into it and if they were in any way embarrassed by being dragged into such a high profile failed takeover bid then surely that'd be the death knell for his career as a businessman?

 

Maybe not just his career!

 

I think we've got a while to go before this shit plays itself out. The damaged caused by the mistake Moores and Parry made - whether intentionally out of greed, or purely due to ignorance - is being played out every single day. The same mistake can't be made by Broughton.

 

Tony Evans is getting a lot of criticism, some of which is more warranted than others in my opinion, but the point he makes about the social and cultural significance of football clubs is one that changed my mind on this. At first, it was clearly professional to do things quietly and try to get the preferred bidders in without a fuss, but the longer that goes on the less professional it is and the more seedy it becomes.

[ODZ]

Huang's only sin in my opinion was his underestimation of G&H's ability to stop/slow down his effort to get the deal done quickly and with little fuss. I think he pulled out once he saw it wasn't the case and he needed to give the Yanks a profit.

[Trucker Paddy]

POOR SCOUSER TOMMY: HUANG: ALL TALK, NO SUBSTANCE!

[zigackly]

There's no way a fan just happened to be going into the club shop to get a Liverpool shirt with Huang on the back just as the TV cameras turned up. Oldest trick in the book that.