Kenny Huang thread - part 2

[cochcaer]

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.

 

You believe QSL could run Liverpool FC?

 

Go to their website and revel in their undoubted wealth and professionalism:

 

About QSL Sports

[bornared]

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.

 

You are quite right, while many would love to believe the Chinese were right for us, we can't be sure because we dont know the details.

The only thing that reassured me about them was that RBS and the board were allegedly confident they had the money.

 

If CIC are the backers, then there may have be a political motivation for them, as the British and US governments have been hammering the Chinese to invest in the UK and the US.

If they were not then there is serious doubt about him imo.

 

 

The thing that really scares me is that a bid will front the money in an escrow account just to gain control of the club, then the money disappears and we are leveraged again.

 

Or come Oct 6th, someone will buy the club and only just have enough money to cover the RBS debt, as would appear to be the case with the Rhone group.

 

Even scarier is the thought of being in a Leeds situation where do not know who the owners actually are.

 

While we might agree there should be radio silence during the negotiations, after this we need full disclosure.

I don't appreciate the Purslow attitude that the fans should shut up and keep their noses out.

 

It's our fucking club not his.

[Red Hot]

Just back from the far East after a month, was hopping to hear a deal had been reached. Have the feeling Kenny Huang believes he is the only real offer on the table and has pulled out, rather than bid against himself, at this stage.

I wouldn't be too surprised to see him return to the table, at the time of RBS pulling the plug on G+H.

All this tosh that the club will be sold to the best buyer for the club, rather than the highest bidder. With the two snakes involved G+H, that is never going to happen.

[Antynwa]

It wouldn't surprise me one iota if we have bidders in the double figures come October.

 

We'll be sold for comparative peanuts come October, and personally, personally I feel the Sheikh will be back.

[bornared]

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?

 

 

Yeah, it's one deadline after another, a never ending nightmare.

 

I really wouldnt be surprised if this is still going on next summer.

[Captain]

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

 

I'd like to know as well.

 

That said, I'm not so sure it is significant. I can honestly see the club spiralling downwards until RBS pulls the plug on G&H.

[StevieH]

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

 

So Huang has walked. Picked up his ball and gone home. But why? And what does that mean for us?

 

SLOW PACE?: Some parties would have us believe that Huang grew "impatient" and "frustrated" with the LFC Board because things were seemingly progressing so slowly. What tosh! If Huang was really sincere about wanting to buy the club and invest in it’s future - and about having the necessary capital to do so - the speed at which the transaction was (not) progressing would not have prompted him to pull out. And certainly not now.

 

CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT: Some parties would have us believe that Huang’s exit was linked to him apparently having refused to sign a confidentiality agreement. More tosh! Huang had to have signed some form of NDA as soon as he’d asked the Board for any information from them – if he indeed did at all - or had asked them to have engaged in any kind of serious discussions with him.

 

SO WHY PULL OUT: Probably because he realized he would not ultimately prevail, and to thus save face. Either because someone else out there has a stronger chance (we hope!) or possibly because the Board had (or were about to) see his bid for what it really is: just a bottom feeding LBO play. Note that in his press release last night Huang gave no reason as to why he is pulling out.

 

IS THE LFC BOARD AT FAULT? No. Did they drive him away? Probably. Why? Because they’re trying “to sort the wheat from the chaff”. They're doing their job! They're doing precisely what Moores and Parry failed to! Huang probably realized he’d been rumbled (or was about to be). And so he first bleated to the media about being frustrated by the Board’s lack of speed (who does that during an acquisition process?), which was his tee-up, and he then swung his one-wood and exited stage left.

 

“TAKEN SERIOUSLY”: One or two journalists are saying this development is“a huge setback for LFC” because the board had been taking Huang “very seriously”. Really? Were they? Where? When?

 

PROOF OF FUNDS: Some people think Huang had provided required proof of funds to the board. Don’t think so! He may well have secured expressions of interest (from third parties) for the cash required to buy the club for assumed debt (GBP300M) meaning that H&G would have made nothing on the deal. (Good!) But despite his claims to have had a "plan", there is no way he ever had the money needed to build a new stadium (GBP500) and to invest in the future of the club (GBP200).

 

CIC (CHINA INVESTMENT CORPORATION): Were CIC backing him? No! Or at least, not likely. If they had been, Huang would have had to have guaranteed them of absolute confidentiality during the entire process. CIC are 'grown ups' not chancers. When it was leaked out (by Huang?) that they might be involved, they denied it. So did Huang’s colleague Marc Ganis who was quoted saying CIC “were not committed in any way”. Interestingly, Ganis subsequently parted ways with Huang shortly after having made that comment.

 

OTHER BACKERS?: So who else was with him? Huang (or at least his people) pointed to Guang Yang, EVP of Templeton Global Equity Group. Unfortunatley Franklin Templeton also swiftly issued a statement denying any interest or involvement.

 

“IN THE OPEN”: Certain quarters of the press are now yelling about how they think the entire sale process should be conducted "out in the open". In public? You what? Did Abramovich blab to the press before he acquired Chelsea? Did he fuck! Did Sheik Mansour have his PR firm issue a sequence of press releases and “50/50” statements before buying Citeh? No! If you’re a serious, grown up player, you want to do all your negotiating - and all of your due diligence etc - in private! Indeed, as soon as Huang started using the media, that was it for me. All talk, no substance! Empty vessels and all that…

 

DID WE DODGE A BULLET: Yes! Emphatically, yes! Huang is not a billionaire. Or even a “mogul”. Or a “tycoon”. We don’t even know if he’s a millionaire. He’s a former stockbroker who now enjoys wheeling and dealing in the sports industry. Nothing wrong with that. And I’m sure he’s a very nice guy to have a beer with. But he’s a middle man. Hardly credentials enough to be the next owner of LFC. And putting all those accusations of purported smear tactics aside, there are still some lingering issues about his honesty and credibility. (See previous blog on here.)

 

STALKING HORSE?: Some people are asking why Broughton didn’t “laugh off” Huang’s credibility. Probably because (1) Broughton loved the fact that some muppet was distracting attention from the grown ups quietly going about their business, and because (2) Huang was driving a sense of competition into the market. The problem with the second point though is that the grown ups knew immediately that he was full of shit.

 

HAUNG’S MOTIVE: So what was Huang’s motive in all this? That's easy! Look at the colossal amount of worldwide publicity he and QSL have generated from this “bid”. They will now be much better known in the sports industry, and the private equity and investment banking circles. You can’t buy that kind of publicity! And his reputation will not have been tarnished for having seemingly failed. If asked, he can just blame the board for having been "too slow".

 

WILL HUANG BE BACK?: No. Not in any grown up kind of way.

 

ARE THERE ANY GROWN UPS INTERESTED?: Yes. But I have no intelligence that any of them will prevail.

 

FINAL COMMENT: Remember Broughton’s first words about this entire process: "Ignore all the rumors, ignore all the subjective journalism, and let us do our job. It wont be in the press. There will simply be an announcement."

[coop]

Sure it will all become clear in the next few weeks.

[hamstrung]

"Poor Scouser Tommy" couldn't even see through Fat Dunc, not sure he's best placed to lecture anyone of the merits (or otherwise) of Huang.

[zigackly]

"Poor Scouser Tommy" couldn't even see through Fat Dunc, not sure he's best placed to lecture anyone of the merits (or otherwise) of Huang.

 

Is that blog not Mike Jefferies who tried to buy the club off Moores and Parry and produced the film "Goal!"?

 

You would think he would be able to afford a decent website.

[hamstrung]

Is that blog not Mike Jefferies who tried to buy the club off Moores and Parry and produced the film "Goal!"?

 

You would think he would be able to afford a decent website.

 

Aye.

[Barrington Womble]

So Huang has walked. Picked up his ball and gone home. But why? And what does that mean for us?

 

SLOW PACE?: Some parties would have us believe that Huang grew "impatient" and "frustrated" with the LFC Board because things were seemingly progressing so slowly. What tosh! If Huang was really sincere about wanting to buy the club and invest in it’s future - and about having the necessary capital to do so - the speed at which the transaction was (not) progressing would not have prompted him to pull out. And certainly not now.

 

CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT: Some parties would have us believe that Huang’s exit was linked to him apparently having refused to sign a confidentiality agreement. More tosh! Huang had to have signed some form of NDA as soon as he’d asked the Board for any information from them – if he indeed did at all - or had asked them to have engaged in any kind of serious discussions with him.

 

SO WHY PULL OUT: Probably because he realized he would not ultimately prevail, and to thus save face. Either because someone else out there has a stronger chance (we hope!) or possibly because the Board had (or were about to) see his bid for what it really is: just a bottom feeding LBO play. Note that in his press release last night Huang gave no reason as to why he is pulling out.

 

IS THE LFC BOARD AT FAULT? No. Did they drive him away? Probably. Why? Because they’re trying “to sort the wheat from the chaff”. They're doing their job! They're doing precisely what Moores and Parry failed to! Huang probably realized he’d been rumbled (or was about to be). And so he first bleated to the media about being frustrated by the Board’s lack of speed (who does that during an acquisition process?), which was his tee-up, and he then swung his one-wood and exited stage left.

 

“TAKEN SERIOUSLY”: One or two journalists are saying this development is“a huge setback for LFC” because the board had been taking Huang “very seriously”. Really? Were they? Where? When?

 

PROOF OF FUNDS: Some people think Huang had provided required proof of funds to the board. Don’t think so! He may well have secured expressions of interest (from third parties) for the cash required to buy the club for assumed debt (GBP300M) meaning that H&G would have made nothing on the deal. (Good!) But despite his claims to have had a "plan", there is no way he ever had the money needed to build a new stadium (GBP500) and to invest in the future of the club (GBP200).

 

CIC (CHINA INVESTMENT CORPORATION): Were CIC backing him? No! Or at least, not likely. If they had been, Huang would have had to have guaranteed them of absolute confidentiality during the entire process. CIC are 'grown ups' not chancers. When it was leaked out (by Huang?) that they might be involved, they denied it. So did Huang’s colleague Marc Ganis who was quoted saying CIC “were not committed in any way”. Interestingly, Ganis subsequently parted ways with Huang shortly after having made that comment.

 

OTHER BACKERS?: So who else was with him? Huang (or at least his people) pointed to Guang Yang, EVP of Templeton Global Equity Group. Unfortunatley Franklin Templeton also swiftly issued a statement denying any interest or involvement.

 

“IN THE OPEN”: Certain quarters of the press are now yelling about how they think the entire sale process should be conducted "out in the open". In public? You what? Did Abramovich blab to the press before he acquired Chelsea? Did he fuck! Did Sheik Mansour have his PR firm issue a sequence of press releases and “50/50” statements before buying Citeh? No! If you’re a serious, grown up player, you want to do all your negotiating - and all of your due diligence etc - in private! Indeed, as soon as Huang started using the media, that was it for me. All talk, no substance! Empty vessels and all that…

 

DID WE DODGE A BULLET: Yes! Emphatically, yes! Huang is not a billionaire. Or even a “mogul”. Or a “tycoon”. We don’t even know if he’s a millionaire. He’s a former stockbroker who now enjoys wheeling and dealing in the sports industry. Nothing wrong with that. And I’m sure he’s a very nice guy to have a beer with. But he’s a middle man. Hardly credentials enough to be the next owner of LFC. And putting all those accusations of purported smear tactics aside, there are still some lingering issues about his honesty and credibility. (See previous blog on here.)

 

STALKING HORSE?: Some people are asking why Broughton didn’t “laugh off” Huang’s credibility. Probably because (1) Broughton loved the fact that some muppet was distracting attention from the grown ups quietly going about their business, and because (2) Huang was driving a sense of competition into the market. The problem with the second point though is that the grown ups knew immediately that he was full of shit.

 

HAUNG’S MOTIVE: So what was Huang’s motive in all this? That's easy! Look at the colossal amount of worldwide publicity he and QSL have generated from this “bid”. They will now be much better known in the sports industry, and the private equity and investment banking circles. You can’t buy that kind of publicity! And his reputation will not have been tarnished for having seemingly failed. If asked, he can just blame the board for having been "too slow".

 

WILL HUANG BE BACK?: No. Not in any grown up kind of way.

 

ARE THERE ANY GROWN UPS INTERESTED?: Yes. But I have no intelligence that any of them will prevail.

 

FINAL COMMENT: Remember Broughton’s first words about this entire process: "Ignore all the rumors, ignore all the subjective journalism, and let us do our job. It wont be in the press. There will simply be an announcement."

 

and who better to see through a publicity seeking hollow bid than mr mike jefferies of L4 fame.

[Redder Lurtz]

So why are we only hearing about his "damaged" reputation today then? Why haven't any of the papers (including the Times) ever reported him as a businessman with a damaged reputation (in fact precisely the opposite all the press have been calling him respected).

 

 

Because Tony Evans is a drama queen gobshite. I don't understand the support he seems to get on here considering his reporting style and the strengths of his "facts" are up there with the likes of Alan Brazil.

[ngogswilly]

"Poor Scouser Tommy" couldn't even see through Fat Dunc, not sure he's best placed to lecture anyone of the merits (or otherwise) of Huang.

 

 

hes stating alot of his opinions almost as fact. Im sure its not his intention but he could do with saying in my opinion now and again

[redphil]

So Huang has walked. Picked up his ball and gone home. But why? And what does that mean for us?

 

SLOW PACE?: Some parties would have us believe that Huang grew "impatient" and "frustrated" with the LFC Board because things were seemingly progressing so slowly. What tosh! If Huang was really sincere about wanting to buy the club and invest in it’s future - and about having the necessary capital to do so - the speed at which the transaction was (not) progressing would not have prompted him to pull out. And certainly not now.

 

CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT: Some parties would have us believe that Huang’s exit was linked to him apparently having refused to sign a confidentiality agreement. More tosh! Huang had to have signed some form of NDA as soon as he’d asked the Board for any information from them – if he indeed did at all - or had asked them to have engaged in any kind of serious discussions with him.

 

SO WHY PULL OUT: Probably because he realized he would not ultimately prevail, and to thus save face. Either because someone else out there has a stronger chance (we hope!) or possibly because the Board had (or were about to) see his bid for what it really is: just a bottom feeding LBO play. Note that in his press release last night Huang gave no reason as to why he is pulling out.

 

IS THE LFC BOARD AT FAULT? No. Did they drive him away? Probably. Why? Because they’re trying “to sort the wheat from the chaff”. They're doing their job! They're doing precisely what Moores and Parry failed to! Huang probably realized he’d been rumbled (or was about to be). And so he first bleated to the media about being frustrated by the Board’s lack of speed (who does that during an acquisition process?), which was his tee-up, and he then swung his one-wood and exited stage left.

 

“TAKEN SERIOUSLY”: One or two journalists are saying this development is“a huge setback for LFC” because the board had been taking Huang “very seriously”. Really? Were they? Where? When?

 

PROOF OF FUNDS: Some people think Huang had provided required proof of funds to the board. Don’t think so! He may well have secured expressions of interest (from third parties) for the cash required to buy the club for assumed debt (GBP300M) meaning that H&G would have made nothing on the deal. (Good!) But despite his claims to have had a "plan", there is no way he ever had the money needed to build a new stadium (GBP500) and to invest in the future of the club (GBP200).

 

CIC (CHINA INVESTMENT CORPORATION): Were CIC backing him? No! Or at least, not likely. If they had been, Huang would have had to have guaranteed them of absolute confidentiality during the entire process. CIC are 'grown ups' not chancers. When it was leaked out (by Huang?) that they might be involved, they denied it. So did Huang’s colleague Marc Ganis who was quoted saying CIC “were not committed in any way”. Interestingly, Ganis subsequently parted ways with Huang shortly after having made that comment.

 

OTHER BACKERS?: So who else was with him? Huang (or at least his people) pointed to Guang Yang, EVP of Templeton Global Equity Group. Unfortunatley Franklin Templeton also swiftly issued a statement denying any interest or involvement.

 

“IN THE OPEN”: Certain quarters of the press are now yelling about how they think the entire sale process should be conducted "out in the open". In public? You what? Did Abramovich blab to the press before he acquired Chelsea? Did he fuck! Did Sheik Mansour have his PR firm issue a sequence of press releases and “50/50” statements before buying Citeh? No! If you’re a serious, grown up player, you want to do all your negotiating - and all of your due diligence etc - in private! Indeed, as soon as Huang started using the media, that was it for me. All talk, no substance! Empty vessels and all that…

 

DID WE DODGE A BULLET: Yes! Emphatically, yes! Huang is not a billionaire. Or even a “mogul”. Or a “tycoon”. We don’t even know if he’s a millionaire. He’s a former stockbroker who now enjoys wheeling and dealing in the sports industry. Nothing wrong with that. And I’m sure he’s a very nice guy to have a beer with. But he’s a middle man. Hardly credentials enough to be the next owner of LFC. And putting all those accusations of purported smear tactics aside, there are still some lingering issues about his honesty and credibility. (See previous blog on here.)

 

STALKING HORSE?: Some people are asking why Broughton didn’t “laugh off” Huang’s credibility. Probably because (1) Broughton loved the fact that some muppet was distracting attention from the grown ups quietly going about their business, and because (2) Huang was driving a sense of competition into the market. The problem with the second point though is that the grown ups knew immediately that he was full of shit.

 

HAUNG’S MOTIVE: So what was Huang’s motive in all this? That's easy! Look at the colossal amount of worldwide publicity he and QSL have generated from this “bid”. They will now be much better known in the sports industry, and the private equity and investment banking circles. You can’t buy that kind of publicity! And his reputation will not have been tarnished for having seemingly failed. If asked, he can just blame the board for having been "too slow".

 

WILL HUANG BE BACK?: No. Not in any grown up kind of way.

 

ARE THERE ANY GROWN UPS INTERESTED?: Yes. But I have no intelligence that any of them will prevail.

 

FINAL COMMENT: Remember Broughton’s first words about this entire process: "Ignore all the rumors, ignore all the subjective journalism, and let us do our job. It wont be in the press. There will simply be an announcement."

 

That is the best summary on this debacle since the Jacky Chan thread started.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

"Poor Scouser Tommy" couldn't even see through Fat Dunc, not sure he's best placed to lecture anyone of the merits (or otherwise) of Huang.

 

I managed to read the entire first paragraph before deciding that I thought it was bollocks and didn't want to read anymore.

[Kopite Pete]

I don't like the sound of G&H trying to refinance the deal elsewhere, or even getting a consortium together to buy the club. If the board did try to stop them, then surely a court would over turn that. Seeing as H&G are the owners, they can do what they want, and RBS wont give a shit as long as they get their money back.

[Royal Family]

CIC never denied anything.

 

Yet Tony, according to Mark Ganis in an interview on 10 August about the bid:

 

"There were many reports about CIC, yet at no time to [any] party, whether [to] the media, Sir Martin [broughton] or Barcap, have we ever identified that CIC was an investor.

“We have not identified any investors and I offered only one point about CIC in the AP story, and at that I made it clear they were not committed in any way."

 

That was from Huang's own PR man and consortium spokesman in North America. The story that your sports editor ran in the Times simply didn't stack up and Huang wasn't properly scrutinised or his claims checked (and it seems to me that you're now in the utterly invidious position of having to defend and being blamed for a story you didn't write!!).

[ali]

 

 

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

 

Hester in the Post

[waddy78]

We all know Jack Shit and just piecing together snippets of information that we choose to be 'credible.' So here is my guesswork.....

 

Huang thought he could get the club for a low-ball offer i.e. paydebt and no profit for owners. Business model based on the additional revenue from Asia and possibly new TV deal in future.

 

He played the PR game to get 'right' on his side, including fans.

 

The problem for Broughton et al is that they have to show that this is the best offer for the owners not the football club ( try as they may on the balancing act to please everybody). We can criticise them all we like but reality is that they have to be 100% squeky clean otherwise opening themselves up to future litigation.

 

They were probably trying to get a better deal from Huang to appease the owners. Huang know he is in a strong position given the looming 4th October deadline. He knows there is nothing else out there for them to consider so, rather than go through painful negotiation (guessing maybe not the way they do things in China) he withdraws to the high ground waiting for the 'final' battleground to be struck early October.

 

I can not fathom why any bank would want to refinance the current owners unless they have put together a business plan similar to Huang (although their chances of executing to the same success are slim). Otherwise, bringing nothing else to the table will not make it attractive to re-fianance as 'same old same old.'

 

My guess is that there is an element of indirect collusion between bank and Huang and he will be back in a few weeks when the bank really holds all the cards.

 

Between now and then we will hear of lots of other phantom bids and the owners about the re-finance but nothing will happen. A ploy to try and bring Huang or others to the table (remember statement from Indian group who said ' not bidding/interested for now' or something similar). They will be trying to tempt somebody to break from the pack of baying wolves, who are waiting to pick the club up on the cheap come 4th October.

 

Huang is aware that if he leaves it to late September then he will have stiff competion so was trying to do a deal now on a similar basis.

 

This is all pure guesswork on my part but no better or worse than what I have seen from 'respected journalist.'

 

Not a bad suggestion all that,these are experienced business men if hanging on 4-5 weeks can save them x amount of millions then they will wait i'm hoping this is the case and its not all been a ploy to get refinanced (isn't it 6th October tho.

[thompsonsnose]

Is that blog not Mike Jefferies who tried to buy the club off Moores and Parry and produced the film "Goal!"?

 

You would think he would be able to afford a decent website.

 

Shittest.

Film.

Ever.

[Timão]

If its such an impossible task you've got to wonder why he bothered taking the job. Still, I suppose "Liverpool FC chairman" looks nice on the CV doesnt it whether he fails or not.

 

You are so fucking tedious.

 

Why would Broughton care about having 'Chairman of Liverpool FC' on his CV?

 

He clearly thinks there is a possibility of a deal being done, he will be trying to do so. Whether he succeeds, who knows?

 

It is incredible that people like yourself (and many others) still keep going on about the chairman and criticising him for the fact that no deal has been done in this time. Fuck me, big Red DM took years to do one, and look were we ended up.

 

We have to get this right, otherwise we are finished as a football club, it is that simple. Despite this, people are more concerned about timelines than the actual deal, about the fucking transfer window of August 2010, about who supports whom on the board etc.

 

It really is fucking depressing that one cannot have a debate about anything without someone taking things to extremes. Who ever said Broughton was 'God-like'? You were the only one to ever mention that phrase. Fine not to trust him - who'd trust anyone in the club at present?- but the alternative would be our esteemed owners as chairmen, and how great they were.

 

Last night some clown condemed the Huang for not 'paying a few hundred million extra' to get the deal done. Great contribution.

 

Unfortunately this is the level of debate to be had here (and elsewhere).

 

One can but hope that Broughton takes all the time needed and that he can pull it off. I wont hold my breath, but there are few alternatives out there.

[usernameunknown]

 

It is incredible that people like yourself (and many others) still keep going on about the chairman and criticising him for the fact that no deal has been done in this time.

 

He's the one who said a maximum of a few months in mid April, not me.

 

And you arent really in a position to criticise the lack of debate on here to be honest, all you do is throw abuse around and mock people's opinions!

 

If you want to accuse others of adding nothing to the forum its probably best to start adding something yourself.

[redrosetints]

Sadly our love of football is what these cunts ability to squeeze money out of us is predicated on.

 

Their whole plan is based on that love, Hicks even mocked us in the very early days by admitting as much. Its now at the stage where we have to realise that our love is best shown by walking away from the club, or at least turnign our back for now. Of course, I realise how difficult that is for ST holders, not easy at all. None of this is helped by the knowledge that even if we are sold, put into administration or whatever, there is no guarantee things will get better. bout the only thing Parry ever got right was his famous 'you only sell the family silver once'. Nice one Rick.

 

I fail to understand why some think protesting against the parasitical banks who are feeding off us via Hicks and Gillett should not happen, based on the fact that they might tell us a story though. Someone care to explain that to me in a way that might make sense?

 

I think the issue, for me at least, is what are you going to achieve ?

 

For all the positive noise RBS make, they are sitting on a very nice yearly interest payment, which arent in danger at the moment plus, if latest reports are correct, nice short term PIK loans which are another nice little earner.

 

Then you have Barclays, again, they make the right noises, but the reality is, their presence gives the two owners leverage against RBS. Either they make money on the sale, or they can offer the owners better terms on a refinance deal.

 

If you are the owners, you have two huge financial institutions fighting to win your business, hardly the time to sell up ! If RBS threaten to tall the loan in, they just get a deal from Barclays, to pay off RBS and we start again.

[Trumo]

He's the one who said a maximum of a few months in mid April, not me.

 

Actually, and I don't have the quote to hand, Broughton said he HOPED a deal could be concluded within a matter of months. He was clear in his aims for the final solution, but non-committal with regards to time-frame.