Go fuck yourselves FSG

[waddy78]

If it is middle east as some papers are saying today then let's be classy about it.. NO wearing the wife's best tea towel on our heads and definitely NO waving false money around with the owners face on we are not City or Newcastle.

 

Seriously tho if we are sold its likely to be state owned or oil barron maybe hedgefund they are the only players who could afford £3.5 billion sadly the days of a moores family type buying a local club has gone even fucking Wrexham are owned by Hollywood superstars.

[Harry's Lad]

6 hours ago, FrenchEyeGlass said:

 

good lord. I dont even have kids for fucks sake stop being so sensitive. 

If you think that was ok that's up to you.

I don't. 

Sensitivity doesn't come into it.

 

[Guest]

7 hours ago, FrenchEyeGlass said:

 

good lord. I dont even have kids for fucks sake stop being so sensitive. 

[Pete]

23 minutes ago, waddy78 said:

If it is middle east as some papers are saying today then let's be classy about it.. NO wearing the wife's best tea towel on our heads and definitely NO waving false money around with the owners face on we are not City or Newcastle.

 

Seriously tho if we are sold its likely to be state owned or oil barron maybe hedgefund they are the only players who could afford £3.5 billion sadly the days of a moores family type buying a local club has gone even fucking Wrexham are owned by Hollywood superstars.

We should get John Oliver, Daniel Craig, Jason Isaacs, Samuel L Jackson, John Lithgow, and any other LFC supporting A Listers on board.   

[Scott_M]

From the FT…

 

[HBenn]

7 hours ago, TheHowieLama said:

Who?

It was reported for about 3 weeks about those that made the shortlist of buyers before they announced their preferred bidder. Ratcliffe was a late one, Ricketts family, Broughton and a couple of others. Mostly American.

 

Instead of keep asking me to list them all though just go and look if you are that interested. It's easy to find. 

[joe_fishfish]

Yeah they're not getting anywhere near that much, Forbes, sorry.

[Numero Veinticinco]

I wonder if Mo Salah being the biggest start in the Arab world will have given us that extra level of exposure that could trigger somebody from that region to buy us. 

[El Rojo]

Given another thread where most on here would be happy for Man City to win the league because Arsenal fans aren’t very nice to us, I wouldn’t foresee huge issues with any kind of ownership.

[Sugar Ape]

Latest from Ornstein et al.

 

 

Liverpool for sale: Why are FSG doing it, who could buy and what now for Klopp?

 

 

Fenway Sports Group’s decision to put Liverpool up for sale — which was revealed exclusively by The Athletic on Monday — has triggered shockwaves well beyond Anfield.

 

The chance to own one of world football’s blue riband clubs is likely to trigger a deluge of interest from across the globe, with any deal having the potential to reshape the landscape of the English game.

 

But why have FSG decided to act now? Who could be in the frame to buy? And what could be the implications for Jurgen Klopp, the Liverpool manager who has transformed the club’s fortunes since his appointment in 2015?

 

We analyse these questions, and more, in an effort to make sense of one of the biggest stories of the year.

 

What do we know so far?

 

The Athletic broke the story on Monday that FSG had put Liverpool up for sale. 

 

It is unclear whether or not a deal will eventually be done, but a full sales presentation has been produced for interested parties and Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley have been retained to assist with the process.

 

A statement from FSG to The Athletic read: “There have been a number of recent changes of ownership and rumours of changes in ownership at EPL clubs and inevitably we are asked regularly about Fenway Sports Group’s ownership in Liverpool.

 

“FSG has frequently received expressions of interest from third parties seeking to become shareholders in Liverpool. FSG has said before that under the right terms and conditions, we would consider new shareholders if it was in the best interests of Liverpool as a club.

 

“FSG remains fully committed to the success of Liverpool, both on and off the pitch.”

 

 

Why has FSG decided to explore the potential sale of Liverpool now?

 

It’s always been a question of when, not if, FSG would sell Liverpool. There was no big emotional pull when they completed their £300million ($344.1m) takeover in 2010. It was viewed as a fantastic business opportunity given that one of the most fabled clubs in European football with a vast global fanbase had fallen on such hard times and was available at a knock-down price. They saw huge potential in transforming Liverpool both on and off the pitch. 

 

John W Henry, like the other venture capitalists in charge of football clubs, also understood the sport’s reach, along with the opportunities for growth.

 

They have never taken money out of the club, knowing their big payday would arrive when they ultimately decided to cash in their chips.

 

FSG have quietly admitted for a long time that the club was “at play” regarding takeover and investment opportunities. This has led to numerous conversations with interested parties from all over the world.

 

In 2015, a delegation visited China to discuss possibilities around the naming rights for Anfield’s new Main Stand, but this did not lead anywhere.

 

The following year, Sinofortone, the Chinese construction conglomerate, approached Henry about a buyout, but FSG’s principal owner did not consider the offer to be serious and so ignored the opportunity to engage.

 

In 2018, Tom Werner, the second biggest shareholder, held discussions in New York with Abu Dhabi-based Sheik Khaled Bin Zayed Al Nehayan about a proposed £2billion takeover. However, it didn’t get past the vetting stage as proof of funds wasn’t forthcoming. It was never put to Henry because the offer wasn’t judged to be credible.

 

While there have been other occasions when interested parties have approached FSG, there have been times when Liverpool’s owners have led the search, albeit without expectation. This semi-casual approach has helped FSG claim plausible deniability whenever questions about these conversations from the media have come their way.

 

It has always been in FSG’s interest to understand what the market holds. The information they have received from such discussions has been useful – even if, ultimately, only a dead end has been reached.

 

 

So why now? For a start, FSG’s initial investment has multiplied more than tenfold over the past 12 years. In May, Forbes valued the club at £3.6billion.

 

It is fair to say that had the European Super League got off the ground, FSG probably wouldn’t be looking to sell now. And even if they did consider that option, they’d probably be able to command even more money.

 

Henry wanted the certainty of Champions League riches, regardless of performance. He felt the full backlash from supporters when those plans emerged in April 2021 and subsequently issued a grovelling apology when the Super League collapsed.

 

Werner told The Athletic in May: “It is certainly off Liverpool’s agenda. We have acknowledged that it was a mistake. Beyond that, it’s in our rear-view mirror.”

 

One growing source of frustration for FSG in recent years has been the failure to properly enforce financial fair play rules (FFP). When they bought Liverpool they believed the governing bodies would come down hard on clubs who exceeded spending limits. That hasn’t happened.

 

Manchester City’s ban from the Champions League was overturned by the Court of Arbitration for Sport in 2020 after UEFA had previously concluded they were guilty of “serious breaches”.

 

“We certainly made it clear that part of the reason we came into this over 10 years ago was that FFP would be with us,” said Werner in the same interview.

 

The new £80million Anfield Road Stand, which will open its doors next summer, will complete the redevelopment of the stadium, lifting capacity to 61,000. Throw in the £50m training complex at Kirkby and there’s been massive investment in the club’s infrastructure – all attractive to a prospective buyer.

 

A tough start to this season has also opened eyes both in Boston and Kirkby to the fact that a major rebuild is on the horizon and that won’t come cheap. It will be even harder without Champions League qualification. No wonder FSG are looking for fresh investment. 

 

That might come in the form of selling a minority stake. However, they’re also open to selling up completely and that’s telling. Previous statements from FSG on this issue have always been accompanied by the caveat ‘Liverpool FC is not for sale’. Not this time. They are prepared to walk away if the price is right. 

 

 

How much might Liverpool be worth?

 

If you talk to people in the industry about how you value football clubs, it can seem there are as many different ways of doing it as there are clubs. Every banker, broker and candlestick-maker has their own secret sauce, which is why the numbers often vary so widely in annual club valuation reports.

 

The safest answer is any club is worth what someone will pay for it and most people value things they like by benchmarking them against other things they like. If your heart is set on the smart house in the middle of the street, you look at how much the last smart house in that street went for and then add or detract from that number based on your hunch about the state of the market.

 

Now, as luck would have it, one of the other nice properties in the Premier League was sold only six months ago for the princely sum of £2.5billion.

 

So, are Liverpool worth more or less than Chelsea? Forbes, the American business title that tries to pin these jellies to the wall, believes they are, as it valued Liverpool at $4.45bn in May, which was £3.6bn at the time but is now more like £3.85bn due to the dollar’s strength in recent months. That, of course, makes assets priced in pounds cheaper for Americans, a point we shall return to in a moment.

 

The Athletic has spoken to several club valuation soothsayers since the news of FSG’s willingness to talk turkey was confirmed on Monday, and they all agree that Liverpool are worth more than Chelsea but perhaps not £1billion more.

 

On one side of the scale, you would put Liverpool’s bigger fanbase (here and abroad), their larger annual turnover, their trophy cabinet, a larger stadium (which FSG is still improving) and Jurgen Klopp; on the other, you would put Chelsea’s London postcode, the potential upside of a bigger stadium (minus the cost of building it), the price of tickets in the capital (particularly posh ones) and the fact that while Liverpool have more fans than Chelsea overall, the gap between the two probably is not as broad among Generation Z, who only know Chelsea as a global power, not the Division Two outfit they were in the 1980s.

 

Who could buy Liverpool and how long could it take?

 

Once more, it is a case of let Chelsea be our guide. 

 

We know it was only three prime ministers ago but — just in case anyone has forgotten — when Roman Abramovich was forced to sell Chelsea earlier this year, a cosmopolitan long list of African gold miners, English property developers, Korean corporate raiders, Saudi media funds and Turkish entrepreneurs was screwed up and thrown in the bin, and a short list of four American bids was drawn up. Four soon became three, only for a late, late bid from an English petrochemicals billionaire to briefly make it a quartet again, before the Todd Boehly-led group of US private-equity whizzes won the beauty contest.

 

The Athletic does not gamble on these things but if it did, its fiver would be on something very similar happening at Liverpool. After all, FSG bought the club from two American investors, they sold 11 per cent of the group to US-based fund Redbird Capital in March 2021 and they have appointed two large American banks to run the sales process. This looks like a production made in America, by Americans, for Americans.

 

But, and it is a big one, Liverpool will not be short of suitors. They have been very famous and successful, by and large, for a long time. There are Liverpool fans in every country on every continent. 

 

Could, for example, a billionaire from the Far East buy them? Absolutely, although they will not come from China, as China has completely withdrawn from the buying European football clubs business for a while. Maybe this is India’s time? It has been coming.

 

 

Might a European plutocrat fancy a run at them? Why not. Southampton were recently purchased with money from a rich Serbian, while Czech billionaire Daniel Kretinsky bought a large and expensive stake in West Ham.

 

But what about the other type of new owner the European game has seen in recent years? The one with government ministers on the board, airline sponsors in their pockets and large fossil-fuel deposits to spend? Could Liverpool go state-owned?

 

Well, one of Dubai’s funds kicked the tyres at Anfield in 2008, two years before FSG bought the club, but failed to close the deal and there has been talk of renewed interest from the Emirate more recently. Bahrain is another Gulf state that is often rumoured to be looking for a football partner.

 

So, it is possible, of course, but it just does not feel likely. Liverpool fans have spent a decade defining themselves as supporters of a club run on normal business principles, not the economics of nation-building and soft power. The Kop as the sports subsidiary of Gulf State Inc just does not seem like a great fit.

 

Does the deal make business sense?

 

There really is no easy or definitive answer to this one.

 

Does it make sense for a group of American investors, with no previous link to Liverpool or English football, to sell a business they bought in 2010 for £300million for 10 times that amount 12 years later?

 

Let us return to that smart house again. Are there any more home improvements you can make? Is it already the best house on the street? Might you be better off buying a house on a better street?

 

The Athletic has spoken to several sources with skin in this game – if not this particular club – and they are divided on this question.

 

For some, this makes total sense, as Liverpool are already one of the smartest houses on the street and there are some concerning signs that keeping them that way is going to cost a lot of money. It might only be six months since Klopp’s men almost won it all, but there is a good chance they do not win anything this season or even earn a visit to European football’s fill-your-boots buffet, the Champions League.

 

When you add those concerns to wider worries about the state of the global economy, the cost of redeveloping Anfield, the unlikelihood of being able to raise ticket prices as much as the financial director might like and the age of some of Liverpool’s best players, you start to get loud “sell now” vibes.

 

However, if you look at how far Liverpool have come under FSG, the resilience of the Premier League in the face of COVID-19, the clamour to buy Chelsea, the most recent sale of international broadcast rights and the fact that football is the world’s most popular sport but not the top sport in China, India or the US, well, things quickly take on a rosier complexion and the sensible option is “hold”.

 

 

After all, the world is still minting billionaires but it is not making many more elite sports franchises. If you’re lucky enough to have one, you might be better off keeping it.

 

Or maybe you just sell a little bit of it. You cash some of your chips in. You spread your risk and you lock in some gains. As we have already pointed out, FSG has already sold a stake to Redbird Capital and it has seen Abu Dhabi sell stakes in City Football Group, first to the Chinese and then to US-based private equity firm Silver Lake.

 

To some observers, the latter looks like the ideal scenario for FSG.

 

But for others, Monday’s news is the beginning of the end for the current custodians at Anfield, as they have effectively told their partners this marriage is not working anymore and they want to leave: words that are very hard to walk back.

 

What does this mean for Jurgen Klopp?

 

The Liverpool manager’s main ally at FSG is Mike Gordon, the organisation’s president and “my man”, as Klopp refers to him. They talk at least once every day. From afar, Gordon has had control of the day-to-day running of Liverpool for the best part of a decade. He has control of the purse strings. Any major financial decision needs the green light from him. 

 

It was his decision to promote Michael Edwards to the role of sporting director after the former data analyst helped him better understand player performance and how this related to contractual temptations. Edwards stepped down last summer and was replaced by his deputy Julian Ward, but he remains close with Gordon.

 

When Klopp was appointed in Manhattan in 2015, Gordon was in the room during the interview and the pair struck up an immediate rapport. A friendship developed that went beyond business and there is confidence it will outlast their time at Liverpool.

 

FSG had been resigned to the idea of Klopp stepping down after nearly seven years in charge at the end of his contract in 2024.

 

However, back in April, Klopp informed Gordon that he would be willing to extend his stay following a chat with his wife Ulla at their kitchen table in Formby. A two-year extension was swiftly drawn up. For FSG, it was the most welcome of surprises.

 

“I want to give some credit to Ulla. She was very helpful in suggesting to Jurgen that he should extend his tenure at Liverpool,” says Werner. “Mike Gordon talks to Jurgen a number of times every day. He kept us updated on the fact that Jurgen was considering an extension. But until it happened I just held my breath. It’s wonderful that he’s going to be with us for a few more years. I was so pleased because there’s such a sense that nobody wants to think of the day when Jurgen is no longer manager of this club.”

 

 

One of the reasons Klopp signed that contract was because he was told FSG were in it for the long haul. It remains to be seen how he would react to a change of ownership given his bond with Gordon is so strong.

 

Klopp has been outspoken on the issue of nation states bankrolling clubs, recently saying that “there are three clubs in world football who can do what they want financially”. He was talking about Manchester City, Newcastle United and Paris Saint-Germain. 

 

The Athletic understands Klopp was made aware in October of FSG’s intention to either seek a complete sale or new investment through selling a minority stake. 

 

In order to avoid any distractions, Gordon had hoped to avoid it entering the public domain until after the domestic season was halted this weekend ahead of the World Cup in Qatar. That did not happen.

 

What are fans saying?

 

FSG have long divided opinion among Liverpool supporters. Hence why news of The Athletic’s exclusive story on Monday about a potential sale got contrasting reactions.

 

The Boston-based owners appointed Klopp, they found a solution to the stadium dilemma and they brought back the glory days with the Champions League triumph followed by the end of the 30-year wait for the Premier League title.

 

However, they have also made some high-profile blunders along the way, like trying to increase ticket prices to £77, trying to trademark the name ‘Liverpool’, furloughing staff during the pandemic and signing up to the doomed Super League. 

 

FSG have also stood accused of not backing Klopp enough in the transfer market, seeking to balance the books when the squad was in need of greater investment. Not least last summer: the folly of not signing another elite midfielder then has since been laid bare. Klopp, too, has admitted he would like to take “more risks” at times.

 

 

The idea of a takeover that leads to Liverpool having greater spending power is alluring for many fans after years of the club having to balance the books, especially given the overhaul that Klopp’s squad needs.

 

However, for many diehard supporters, it’s a question of where this fresh investment is going to come from. There’s a lot of uncertainty. Are we talking about another hedge fund or the wealth of a nation state?

 

You can’t criticise the human rights records of Abu Dhabi and Saudi Arabia as they plough cash into Man City and Newcastle, then celebrate a similar sportswashing arrangement at Liverpool.

 

Anfield regulars won’t stand for that. They don’t want success at any cost. They won’t turn a blind eye. The owners of the club and their motivation for being at the helm matters.

 

Fans’ union Spirit of Shankly’s statement read: “We expect both the Supporters’ Board and SOS to be engaged in some part of the process so that supporters are front and centre of any sale and the first thoughts of prospective owners.”

 

If FSG care about their legacy, they need to think twice about who they sell to. 

 

What now for FSG?

 

They do nothing. They let Goldmans Sachs and Morgan Stanley earn their commissions.

 

If the bankers and their sales brochure do the trick, Henry and co should have some pleasant problems to solve: whose money do we like and how much of it do we want?

 

Some eyebrows within football’s merger and acquisitions industry have been raised at FSG’s choice of estate agents, as neither has a great track record of selling English football teams, although that is largely because there are not many English football teams they would bother trying to sell.

 

Liverpool are very much one of those teams, though, and, in theory, they should not require too much selling.

 

As far as anyone can tell, FSG is in no rush to sell. Unlike Chelsea, or when FSG bought Liverpool, there is no hard deadline caused by the risk of the club running out of money.

 

But FSG cannot let this drift, either. Football clubs require clarity of purpose. If FSG do not like the numbers they are shown, they should take the club off the market and knuckle down again. 

 

Because nobody thinks FSG, or certainly the key players in the syndicate, are pulling out of the sports business. It is an open secret that it would like to complete the set of North American sports franchises at some point, adding NBA and NFL teams to the portfolio. Those franchises do not come around very often and while there are two currently for sale – basketball’s Phoenix Suns and the Washington Commanders of the NFL – they have probably come around too quickly for FSG to pounce.

 

More likely is a move for the next NBA expansion franchise, with Seattle and Las Vegas considered to be the next in line, although Pittsburgh, home of FSG’s ice hockey team, is in the mix, too. The NFL has not added any teams since the Houston Texans in 2002, but the prospect of leaping from 32 to 40 franchises has been mooted.

 

If FSG’s main actors are still talking to each other when that happens, it would be a major shock if they do not try to get in on that action.

 

But will that team, or the NBA one, or the Boston Red Sox or Pittsburgh Penguins, be as big as Liverpool?

 

Hold that thought. It could be priceless. 

[Le Duan]

20 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

I wonder if Mo Salah being the biggest start in the Arab world will have given us that extra level of exposure that could trigger somebody from that region to buy us. 

Egypt? Muslim Brotherhood? Dunno 

[Bobby Hundreds]

This shit better not keep us in some kind of transfer purgatory like a lot of fsg transfer windows.

[Aventus]

4 minutes ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

This shit better not keep us in some kind of transfer purgatory like a lot of fsg transfer windows.

Saw a bit of the bantz on twitter comparing FSG's statement to the ones Mike Ashley used to regularly throw out so he could perpetually have an excuse for not buying players for 12 years. 

 

Wouldn't put it past FSG to be fair. 

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

This shit better not keep us in some kind of transfer purgatory like a lot of fsg transfer windows.

Business as usual…

[Preston Red]

Turning Billionaires into Customers (FSG, 2022)

[etho]

18 minutes ago, Aventus said:

Saw a bit of the bantz on twitter comparing FSG's statement to the ones Mike Ashley used to regularly throw out so he could perpetually have an excuse for not buying players for 12 years. 

 

Wouldn't put it past FSG to be fair. 

Not quite as bluntly as Ashley but it does have a bit of a feel of that. We need to spend lots of our own money? Ah we can't lads, clubs up for sale sorry

[HBenn]

26 minutes ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

This shit better not keep us in some kind of transfer purgatory like a lot of fsg transfer windows.

Think it already impacted the summer one. Cannot believe they just decided to sell the club last month when Jürgen was informed.

Interesting perhaps that Gordon wanted to wait until after the Southampton game, wonder what triggered it to happen sooner.

[Dave D]

What a conundrum. Be all righteous or sell to the oil states. 

 

Spirit of Shankly are no doubt a good bunch but to demand to be at the forefront of any potential sale is a bit mad 

[HBenn]

Just now, Dave D said:

What a conundrum. Be all righteous or sell to the oil states. 

 

Spirit of Shankly are no doubt a good bunch but to demand to be at the forefront of any potential sale is a bit mad 

Yeah, a load of billionaires decide against selling the club for a £3.5bn profit because SOS want the one offering £500m less. 

 

One thing is for sure, if they do sell the club we will see by who they sell it to if they really take their role as "custodians" seriously

[Numero Veinticinco]

15 minutes ago, Dave D said:

What a conundrum. Be all righteous or sell to the oil states. 

 

Spirit of Shankly are no doubt a good bunch but to demand to be at the forefront of any potential sale is a bit mad 

I thought SOS's statement was quite funny. It basically read 'we contacted the club and they told us to read the statement, we will tell you if we hear more'. 

[joe_fishfish]

23 minutes ago, HBenn said:

Think it already impacted the summer one. Cannot believe they just decided to sell the club last month when Jürgen was informed.

Interesting perhaps that Gordon wanted to wait until after the Southampton game, wonder what triggered it to happen sooner.

 

I reckon the City 21/22 accounts being announced yesterday had an effect. Largest ever commercial income in the Premier League, £309m. All from Emirati businesses like Etihad, Etisalat, Emirates and the like.

[Sugar Ape]

Don’t know if these are reliable or not. 
 

I think this from the article is interesting. Getting pegged does show a level of commitment to seeing the purchase through. 
 

Besides a buyer from Dubai, other Middle Eastern and American investors have also been pegged as potential buyers, given their strong appetite for exposure to the UK’s Premier League – the world’s richest football league.

[Dr Nowt]

1 minute ago, Sugar Ape said:

I think this from the article is interesting. Getting pegged does show a level of commitment to seeing the purchase through. 

Depends who it is. NV will let you peg him for no fiscal or strategic gain whatsoever.

[Sugar Ape]

2 minutes ago, Dr Nowt said:

Depends who it is. NV will let you peg him for no fiscal or strategic gain whatsoever.

He actually pays people to peg him. Man just loves Dildos. 

[Barrington Womble]

14 hours ago, No2 said:

There will have been quite a few people involved in preparing the sales documentation. I'd be surprised if FSG aren't in charge of this story but it's possible someone involved in that process told someone else etc and they had to get ahead of it.

The story somes from ornstien. Whenever FSG want to deliver a bit of financial news, that's the way they leak it. I'd bet my life this has been done to generate more interest. 

 

 

11 hours ago, m0e said:

 

1- They do it practically every year and then wait for the offers to come in before rejecting them:

 

2013:

https://amp.ibtimes.co.uk/liverpool-sale-fenway-sports-group-henry-494950

 

2017:

https://tribuna.com/amp/en/news/liverpoolfc-2020-05-29-15bn-deal-to-sell-liverpool-fc-turned-down-by-fsg/
 

2018:

https://www.theweek.co.uk/premier-league/96056/liverpool-2bn-takeover-shock-fsg-want-investment-not-a-sale?amp

 

2020:

https://www.republicworld.com/amp/sports-news/football-news/liverpool-owners-fsg-are-in-talks-over-a-6-pounds-billion-investment-deal.html

 

2021:

https://www.sportbible.com/football/news-liverpools-owners-fsg-have-rejected-bid-of-almost-3-billion-from-mi-20210424.amp.html

 

2- Where has anyone from those countries' governments/royal families ever shown any interest in a football club?

 

3- Makes sense

Not got time to read through those links now, will check back later. But I don't recall us getting to the point where we've hired 2 investment banks, the origin of the story coming from FSGs little golden child journalist and the story being backed up and expanded on in both the FT and the Boston globe (John Henry's newspaper!). This feels very different to the tyre kicking they've done before and as an investment group, I would imagine they're always willing to listen to suitable investors. 

 

As for countries, Bahrain have certainly been linked with clubs in the past. But I don't think Abu Dhabi where before they bought city, or Dubai before they failed to buy us. 

 

11 hours ago, m0e said:

Only one journalist set the wheels in motion and that is Ornstein. Every other piece is a copy of that.

I think that is telling myself. I think this tells us they're serious. It obviously doesn't mean we'll be sold because clearly whoever is at the table right now hasn't hit the magic number, or this would all be getting done quietly. They're either trying to push that bidder or drum up greater interest. I'm sure the public nature of the Chelsea sale will have certainly helped it.