Liverpool nearly went out of business claims UEFA

[Istvan Kozma]

Liverpool nearly went out of business claims top UEFA official

 

The previous ownership at Liverpool was a classic example of why new financial fair play rules have to be introduced, a top UEFA adviser has warned.

 

William Gaillard, adviser to UEFA President Michel Platini, told a Parliamentary hearing into English football that Liverpool had come close to going under after Tom Hicks and George Gillett loaded it with debt before the club was taken over by American tycoon John Henry's New England Sports Ventures (NESV) company.

 

"Leveraged buy-outs for many clubs end in disaster," said Gaillard.

 

"Just take Liverpool where you have owners who came, contracted debt, bought out the previous owners and saddled the club with the debt.

 

"What brought them down were two failed banks, one British, one American, that had been nationalised.

 

"They suddenly found themselves being owned by two failed banks that had been taken over by Governments - RBS by the British Government and Wachovia by the US government.

 

"The club has now been rescued and thank God because it has tremendous heritage - but it was a close call."

 

UEFA's new rules are designed to force clubs to break even after an initial period of flexibility.

 

Gaillard was asked why it was wrong for clubs to be given fresh investment to fulfill their ambition of climbing through the leagues.

 

"There is nothing wrong with it but what we've seen is that when you get an investor who invests his own money at a loss it drives transfer prices up and drives wages up," he said.

 

"It pushes other clubs who cannot afford it to try to match the club who has suddenly become rich, and creates an imbalance.

 

"We've seen more than 80 clubs in Europe in 10 years going into administration."

 

Gaillard cautioned against sudden massive investment by unpredictable and untrustworthy parties.

 

"We at UEFA feel if a person brings equity, that is much better sit than if he brings debt," he said.

 

"But even if a person brings equity, if he loses interest suddenly and finds it more attractive to invest in baseball for example, the club will be left with a wage bill it will never be able to pay even couple months after the sugar daddy has gone.

 

"We feel that model based on sugar daddies not sustainable."

[janmolby]

we were staring into the abyss and so many fans didn't have an inkling

[lifetime fan]

Liverpool nearly went out of business claims top UEFA official

 

The previous ownership at Liverpool was a classic example of why new financial fair play rules have to be introduced, a top UEFA adviser has warned.

 

William Gaillard, adviser to UEFA President Michel Platini, told a Parliamentary hearing into English football that Liverpool had come close to going under after Tom Hicks and George Gillett loaded it with debt before the club was taken over by American tycoon John Henry's New England Sports Ventures (NESV) company.

 

"Leveraged buy-outs for many clubs end in disaster," said Gaillard.

 

"Just take Liverpool where you have owners who came, contracted debt, bought out the previous owners and saddled the club with the debt.

 

"What brought them down were two failed banks, one British, one American, that had been nationalised.

 

"They suddenly found themselves being owned by two failed banks that had been taken over by Governments - RBS by the British Government and Wachovia by the US government.

 

"The club has now been rescued and thank God because it has tremendous heritage - but it was a close call."

 

UEFA's new rules are designed to force clubs to break even after an initial period of flexibility.

 

Gaillard was asked why it was wrong for clubs to be given fresh investment to fulfill their ambition of climbing through the leagues.

 

"There is nothing wrong with it but what we've seen is that when you get an investor who invests his own money at a loss it drives transfer prices up and drives wages up," he said.

 

"It pushes other clubs who cannot afford it to try to match the club who has suddenly become rich, and creates an imbalance.

 

"We've seen more than 80 clubs in Europe in 10 years going into administration."

 

Gaillard cautioned against sudden massive investment by unpredictable and untrustworthy parties.

 

"We at UEFA feel if a person brings equity, that is much better sit than if he brings debt," he said.

 

"But even if a person brings equity, if he loses interest suddenly and finds it more attractive to invest in baseball for example, the club will be left with a wage bill it will never be able to pay even couple months after the sugar daddy has gone.

 

"We feel that model based on sugar daddies not sustainable."

 

The article would carry more weight if their 'top adviser' wasn't that prick.

[Istvan Kozma]

The article would carry more weight if their 'top adviser' wasn't that prick.

 

true enough, I suppose on previous form he will be saying the complete opposite tomorrow, he is a total joke cunt of a walking abortion.

That aside, uefa will know, one would assume, just how close we were taken to disappearing with huge huge debts left unpaid.

the high court would never let that happen, the government know that the masses need football to be kept in their place.

[piscinin]

The article would carry more weight if their 'top adviser' wasn't that prick.

 

Being quite bored I watched the select committee proceedings on the bbc site and TBH he was the only one in the room that came across as though he had a clue about football.

 

That minister of sport guy reminded me of my days in consulting where you'd be told on a Friday you were due at a client on Monday, as a SQL*Net expert, when in fact you didn't even know what SQL*Net was. Lots of buzzwords and conversation management trips and tricks to stay away from anything that might reveal your total ignorance. When the "regulatory architecture" buzzword came out and he was unable to explain the meaning of government policy on supporter ownership his goose was cooked.

 

Staggering really that whatever the deal is with Gaillard, he's a fucking genius compared to the guy running sport in the UK.

[lifetime fan]

Being quite bored I watched the select committee proceedings on the bbc site and TBH he was the only one in the room that came across as though he had a clue about football.

 

That minister of sport guy reminded me of my days in consulting where you'd be told on a Friday you were due at a client on Monday, as a SQL*Net expert, when in fact you didn't even know what SQL*Net was. Lots of buzzwords and conversation management trips and tricks to stay away from anything that might reveal your total ignorance. When the "regulatory architecture" buzzword came out and he was unable to explain the meaning of government policy on supporter ownership his goose was cooked.

 

Staggering really that whatever the deal is with Gaillard, he's a fucking genius compared to the guy running sport in the UK.

 

 

Was this Jeremy ©Hunt?

 

The minister for sport who claimed Hillsborough was caused by Liverpool fans?

[BurtReynolds]

An eye opener that. Thanks Moores

[lifetime fan]

I've always wondered who wrote that letter, because it certainly wasn't Freddy Fucking Boswell.

[murphy]

we were staring into the abyss and so many fans didn't have an inkling

 

Course they didn't. The cunts were still too busy blaming Rafa

[piscinin]

Was this Jeremy ©Hunt?

 

The minister for sport who claimed Hillsborough was caused by Liverpool fans?

 

No it was Hugh Robertson but he would have been similarly ignorant of the facts I'm sure.

[Guest TK-421]

Prick or not I agree with every word from Gaillard.

[Lee909]

There is only one Gaillard for me

[YOUTUBE]GAONkS06LFU[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]7_VTH52TGOQ[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]pIrvpn3k9A4[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]81szj1vpEu8[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]MytfhzcSF-Y[/YOUTUBE]

[emryscb]

it is amazing to think only a few months ago, we have gone from the verge of bankruptcy, Cancer and aids were asset stripping us, a yes man manager, purslow playing football manager and flirting with relegation to where we are now -

 

we were days away from ending up like leeds.

[ritchie]

it is amazing to think only a few months ago, we have gone from the verge of bankruptcy, Cancer and aids were asset stripping us, a yes man manager, purslow playing football manager and flirting with relegation to where we are now -

 

we were days away from ending up like leeds.

 

The scariest thing for me was how most fans couldn't even see it and had their heads in the sand.

[magicrat]

The scariest thing for me was how most fans couldn't even see it and had their heads in the sand.

Fortunately enough fans did realise the danger and help thwart much of H&G efforts to cling onto the club. True we were very close to administration and a points deduction. Whether that would have pre-empted a Leeds style implosion , probably not as the Bank would have quickly flipped the club in a pre pack sale to either NESV or one of the others. Certainly would have been an even more dreadful season battling against relegation and trying to hang on to our best players.

[Istvan Kozma]

There is only one Gaillard for me

thanks lee, they made me piss my self, what a total fucking dude.

 

Magicrat, I am not so sure. That was the way it was being painted at the time, but if what fifa are saying is true it could have been all over. Leeds were not bought out with a leveraged buy out for one.More importantly, if RBS were not nationalised they may have just called the debts in, sold Anfield to Tesco and built luxury flats on Melwood. H & G, backed into a corner showed they would try anything to walk away with a profit.

sounds impossible but closer than we thought it seems.

[satansmutt]

I can remember only days before the takeover I was screaming abuse at my brother who just didnt get it that we were so close to going into administration.He kept saying the reason we were signing players for next to nothing or on free transfers like degen voronin cole maxi etc was because benitez had spent all the money and not because we had paid out 100 million in interest payments and were being slowly and methodically asset stripped by the yank cunts.

[zigackly]

William Gaillard in "even stopped clocks are sometimes right" shocker.

[Kevin D]

I can remember only days before the takeover I was screaming abuse at my brother who just didnt get it that we were so close to going into administration.He kept saying the reason we were signing players for next to nothing or on free transfers like degen voronin cole maxi etc was because benitez had spent all the money and not because we had paid out 100 million in interest payments and were being slowly and methodically asset stripped by the yank cunts.

 

I take it your brother posts on here, then.

[satansmutt]

No he doesnt post on here he struggles with computers and the internet baffles him. He still looks behind the tv to see where the little people climb in.

[magicrat]

There is only one Gaillard for me

thanks lee, they made me piss my self, what a total fucking dude.

 

Magicrat, I am not so sure. That was the way it was being painted at the time, but if what fifa are saying is true it could have been all over. Leeds were not bought out with a leveraged buy out for one.More importantly, if RBS were not nationalised they may have just called the debts in, sold Anfield to Tesco and built luxury flats on Melwood. H & G, backed into a corner showed they would try anything to walk away with a profit.

sounds impossible but closer than we thought it seems.

RBS would have face a shitstorm had they tried to do as you suggest and would not have gone down this route imo. The damage to their image and protests would have made it commercial suicide. Banks may be inherantly greedy but they are not stupid.

 

Thankfully it's an academic argument now and if NESV stump up some cash in the summer, give Kenny a proper contract we can move on in the knowledge that in the final analysis it was the two leeches that didnt have a chair when the music stopped.

[migs]

The problem, despite how right Gaillard is, is that UEFA - and Platini in particular - have an agenda where English football is concerned. Straight away, that devalues anything they have to say, as everybody is immediately suspicious about their motives and timing.

 

When viewed in the cold light of day, most of what UEFA say is spot on, but they need to broaden their target sites. Many of the biggest European teams are in the same never ending swirl of interest payments and spiralling costs, yet seem impervious to Platini's critical financial eye.

 

All we can hope for, frankly, is that football implodes soon enough that the damage is merely significant, rather than catastrophic.

[ritchie]

I take it your brother posts on here, then.

 

Ha ha

 

Far too many fans concentrated on blaming the manager last year and what the owners were doing to the club was overlooked.

 

Benitez's time was up, but it was a nothing issue compared to the prospect of administration.

[Section_31]

They say you have to go through the bad times, so the good ones feel even better.

 

 

I look forward to matches now.

[the walsh]

i remenber talking to a mate and saying where in serious trouble and all he,s reply was it just the papers i lost the plot with him and told him to get he,s head out of the fucking air. so many fans where in denial it was scary thankfuly the futre looks brighter onwards and upwards.