Hicks on the offensive

[Kopite Pete]

Read it and weep fat Texas cowboy

 

Liverpool Articles of Association:

 

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4746910/LFC%20company%20articles.pdf

 

REMOVAL OF DIRECTORS

 

81)

 

Each director appoionted to the office of chairman of the board of directors may appoint any person as a director of the company and may remove any director (other than Thomas O Hicks and/or George Gilett Jr). Any appoinment or removal will be made in writing and signed by the then current chairman

 

See points 48 onwards regarding voting rights.

 

 

Bottom line Cancer & Aids havent got a leg to stand on. '

 

Yeah, but that's is LFC.

 

It is the board of KF which G&H claim to have altered.

[piscinin]

Yeah, but that's is LFC.

 

It is the board of KF which G&H claim to have altered.

 

Do you have a link to that? Because I've been wondering myself. Broughton made a point of saying that he had an undertaking from the owners that the sale would be conducted at the Kop level. Which kind of muddies the waters a bit!

[PaulMcC]

I really hope Broughton has got this spot on.

[Kopite Pete]

Do you have a link to that? Because I've been wondering myself. Broughton made a point of saying that he had an undertaking from the owners that the sale would be conducted at the Kop level. Which kind of muddies the waters a bit!

 

I don't but Someone on RAWK is saying that MB says the covenants were written into the necessary articles about him changing the board, But according to Companies House records, only the LFC articles were amended since April 2010. KF and KFH have been the same since Feb 2008. So I hope MB has got this spot on.

[Royal Family]

D.R. Moores - Hon Life President

 

He should be stripped of that title.

 

Or be sent a bill for £88m for the privilege of continuing to hold it.

[piscinin]

I don't but Someone on RAWK is saying that MB says the covenants were written into the necessary articles about him changing the board, But according to Companies House records, only the LFC articles were amended since April 2010. KF and KFH have been the same since Feb 2008. So I hope MB has got this spot on.

 

We'll find out real soon.

[Simbo]

I don't but Someone on RAWK is saying that MB says the covenants were written into the necessary articles about him changing the board, But according to Companies House records, only the LFC articles were amended since April 2010. KF and KFH have been the same since Feb 2008. So I hope MB has got this spot on.

 

Must say that after seeing MB's interview yesterday I was feeling pretty confident.

 

What you've now said about LFC and Kop Holdings has got me slightly worried.

 

If MB has got this wrong it would be a pretty big fuck up if you ask me. Lets just hope he's got this right.

[karl1987]

Look guys Hicks has been trying to refinance the debt for months yet each time the board have blocked his attempts.. Why the hell would he not have sacked them then?? Why leave it a week before deadline???

 

He's a desparate man, doing desperate things... As far as im concerned he hasnt got a leg to stand on.

[Dirk]

Henry isn't trying to buy Kop Holdings is he, he's trying to buy Liverpool Football Club. I don't see how it would make much of a difference. They tried to remove Purslow and Ayre from the board of LFC.

[TheDrowningMan]

Henry isn't trying to buy Kop Holdings is he, he's trying to buy Liverpool Football Club. I don't see how it would make much of a difference. They tried to remove Purslow and Ayre from the board of LFC.

 

Exactly. Were Ayre and Purslow EVER on the Kop board?

[Major Tom]

This seems far from over. One saving grace - albeit with a bitch of hindkick - is that Hicks no longer owns the club after next Friday.

[piscinin]

Exactly. Were Ayre and Purslow EVER on the Kop board?

 

Yes they are.

 

The question isn't which company is being bought but which company has to approve the sale. I haven't seen anything which makes it clear one way or the other. All I remember is hearing is Broughton making a point of saying the sale would be conducted at the Kop level which makes me wonder? Do they have an out?

[Randy Marsh]

Maybe I'm missing something but this is how I basically see it.

 

- The club board have agreed a sale 3-2 in favour. Hicks and Gillett have contested that. The courts will decide whether or not they have a right to do so. If they rule that they have no right, the club will be sold (subject to an appeal obviously)

 

-If the courts rule in favour of Hicks and Gillett, the sale would not go through. To my understanding, this would leave 2 options:

 

1; Hicks and Gillett find the £280m-ish they need to refinance. Given that the deadline is a little over a week away, and with the court process still to go through with no refinancing deal in place up to now ( to the best of everyone's knowledge ) it looks massively unlikely that they will do this. If they where to do so, they keep the club.

 

2; RBS call in the loan, Hicks and Gillett fail to provide the funds. RBS put the club in to administration and sell to NESV anyway

 

That's how I see it. I think that the yanks probably know that they are totally fucked but they're just being the squirming awkward cunts that we know they are. They where never going to go down quietly where they? I reckon Broughton has tied them up in knots, hence his bullish confidence over the past 24hours. He also says that there is a contingency plan in place should Plan A fail. They are fucked, Broughton has their heads on the block here and they know it.

[piscinin]

Well let's hope atk is wrong and they don't have refinancing in place.

[Major Tom]

Well let's hope atk is wrong and they don't have refinancing in place.

 

What thread is that in? Nightmare scenario.

[Dirk]

Broughton said they have other options if this doesn't bring the result we're hoping for. If Hicks remains in control, though, the only way forward is complete boycott, imo.

[Jim MM]

I'm fairly confident that the chairman understands the legal workings of the club better than some guy on RAWK.

[piscinin]

What thread is that in? Nightmare scenario.

 

Sorry dunno, I lost track in the deluge. He mentioned Hicks had financing secured on Melwood etc. Obviously the board blocked it, but if the board gets reconstituted, what then?

[TheHowieLama]

What thread is that in? Nightmare scenario.

 

I think the nightmare scenario (and the one Hicks is banking on) will be that RBS is reluctant (and maybe unable) to enforce the deadline while they're (H&G) in litigation. This buys more time.

[GJM]

Even if they do have some jerry built refinance package in place, the only thing that matters is that Broughton's sale of the club is upheld in court. I don't have the sophisticated understanding of company law required to take a judgment on how likely this might be, but Broughton doesn't come across to me as a chancer.

[el-jazz]

D.R. Moores - Hon Life President

 

He should be stripped of that title.

 

Agree. Ban him for life.

[PaulMcC]

I'm fairly confident that the chairman understands the legal workings of the club better than some guy on RAWK.

 

You would think someone on the board would know the League's homegrown rules, but they didn't.

 

They thought we needed homegrown when we we just had to have no more than 17 foreign players.

[Dirk]

You would think someone on the board would know the League's homegrown rules, but they didn't.

 

They thought we needed homegrown when we we just had to have no more than 17 foreign players.

 

There's a difference between understanding the rules of football and company law. Broughton is the current deputy president of the CBI, its former president, as well as the chairman of British Airways. Whilst this doesn't necessarily mean the ruling will fall in our favour, the bloke clearly knows his business onions.

[PaulMcC]

There's a difference between understanding the rules of football and company law. Broughton is the current deputy president of the CBI, its former president, as well as the chairman of British Airways. Whilst this doesn't necessarily mean the ruling will fall in our favour, the bloke clearly knows his business onions.

 

Good point.

[R2 D2]

Im sure he said in his interview yesterday he was appointed by h & g

 

He didn't specify H&G he just said them, that could also mean the RBS.

 

 

The man said the conditoions were included as he didn't want to be treated as some patsy by Hicks.

 

So basicaly what it is the man has a reputation for being a big balled bastard and he isn't going to have some classless cunt like hichs making a fool of him.