lfc The Official Liverpool FC Thread

[MrJibbles]

The simmering war in the Liverpool boardroom between the American owners, Tom Hicks and George Gillett, and the three other directors, broke dramatically into the open last night after Hicks and Gillett turned down two bids, described as "credible", to buy the club and attempted to remove two directors from the board.

One of the bids is understood to have come from John W Henry, the multi-millionaire owner of the Boston Red Sox Major League Baseball team, and the other from business interests in Asia.

An official statement from Liverpool, surely unprecedented in the history of a club which has always prided itself on keeping internal disagreements private, said the board was preparing to approve the sale yesterday. However, Hicks and Gillett sought to block that decision by ousting the managing director, Christian Purslow, and commercial director, Ian Ayre, and appointing instead Hicks's son and a close ally.

The three directors opposed to the owners – Purslow, Ayre and the chairman, Martin Broughton – who can outvote Hicks and Gillett, clearly approved the release of the statement. It suggested they believed both bids were solid enough to approve because they would "repay all [Liverpool's] long-term debt" and they were preparing to do so.

However, Hicks and Gillett, the statement said, not only opposed the offers, apparently because they would not provide them with a satisfactory enough profit for their shares, but tried to replace Purslow and Ayre with Hicks's son, Mack, and Lori Kay McCutcheon, the financial controller at the Texan's company Hicks Holdings. That would have given the Americans a majority on the board.

The other three clearly resisted and Purslow and Ayre remained on the board last night, finally at odds publicly with Hicks and Gillett. The statement said of the balance of power in the boardroom: "The matter is now subject to legal review."

The statement left no doubt that Broughton, Purslow and Ayre, the majority, were in favour of accepting one of the offers and selling the club. "The board of directors have received two excellent financial offers to buy the club," it said. "A board meeting was called today to review these bids and approve a sale."

The clear implication was that, while both offers committed to clearing the £237m Liverpool owe Royal Bank of Scotland and Wachovia, which is due for repayment in nine days' time, they were not preparing to give Hicks and Gillett much for their shares. One source said the bids would repay Hicks and Gillett the money they have loaned into Liverpool, which stood at £144m at 31 July last year, but not pay them a personal profit for transferring ownership.

Gillett and Hicks have been holding out for a significant payment, even though Liverpool are sinking into crisis while they do not appear to be in a position to repay to the banks. One informed source described Henry as "extremely interested" in buying Liverpool, saying he has the means and expertise required, evidenced by Boston's two championships under his ownership and the iconic Fenway Park stadium.

Liverpool supporters will, however, be naturally suspicious of any US bid after the bitter experience with Hicks's and Gillett's "leveraged buy-out".

A source close to the discussions said Broughton, Purslow and Ayre would not approve any bid which brought more debt to the club. In a clear act of defiance by those three non-owner directors, the board statement concluded: "Martin Broughton, Christian Purslow and Ian Ayre continue to explore every possible route to achieving a sale of the Club at the earliest opportunity."

Hicks and Gillett responded with a statement late last night confirming their "commitment to finding a buyer" but saying they will not accept bids which in their view "dramatically undervalue" the club which they said had nearly doubled its revenues since they took over.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/oct/05/boston-red-sox-owner-offer-liverpool

[Davicious X]

Oh dear, so there selling the club from one bunch of dodgy yanks to another bunch of dodgy yanks. This could get silly

[Mr. Gayle]

How you know he is dodgy?

[Mr. Gayle]

Liverpool are ready to sell flop Ryan Babel in order to fund an audacious move for Valencia's Juan Mata.

Roy Hodgson is under pressure at Anfield to produce results, having seen his side slip into the relegation zone following a nightmare start to the season.

With sections of the Kop chanting for Kenny Dalglish following Liverpool's shock 2-1 defeat to Blackpool last Sunday, it appears Hodgson is already losing the fans.

But according to Spanish radio, Hodgson is planning an audacious move for talented midfielder Mata in a bid to placate the irate Liverpool fans.

Babel has failed to settle at Anfield following his move from Ajax in 2007 and he is heading towards the exit door.

Hodgson wants to offer the 23-year-old Dutchman - who moved to Liverpool for £11.5m - as well as £10m cash to land Mata, who has become a star at the Mestalla following his move their from the Real Madrid B team three years ago.

The Liverpool manager cannot afford to buy players without selling but he hopes a part exchange offer would suit cash-strapped Valencia, as they would receive money as well as a replacement for Mata.

President Manuel Llorente claims the club's debt was just under £500m at the end of last season but that it has now been reduced to around £350m.

The La Liga club still have money worries and Hodgson - if he is still there in January - hopes to capitalise on that by making his move for Mata, 22.

[TF S4DK]

So Liverpool are still owned by Yanks? Legendary.

[The King]

pmsl @ mata going pool.

pmsl.

[Greens]

wow, passed out around 10 last night to wake up to this madness.

[Mame Biram Diouf]

pmsl @ mata going pool.

pmsl.

truss woke my dog up laughing so hard

Must of meant this one

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mario_Suárez_Mata

[Guest haze-e]

You lot killed Babel mehn.

Do you lot want another American taking over?

[Mr Q]

Boy, cautious about ANYONE taking over the club right now, but...

S.I list of best 5 baseball owners and worst 5...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/baseball/mlb/05/08/mlb.owners/index.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/oct/06/john-w-henry-liverpool-owner

[Mame Biram Diouf]

It's hard to fault Hicks for trying, because he really is. But the stain of signing Alex Rodriguez for $252 million

[Mr Q]

Hicks so so f*ck*ng clueless, signing a player for that much and then practically giving him away

[Guest haze-e]

I see that and burst out laughing. Joketing.

[Mr Q]

Liverpool Football Club today announces that the Board has agreed the sale of the Club to New England Sports Ventures (NESV).

New England Sports Ventures currently owns a portfolio of companies including the Boston Red Sox, New England Sports Network, Fenway Sports Group and Roush Fenway Racing.

Martin Broughton, Liverpool FC Chairman, said:

"I am delighted that we have been able to successfully conclude the sale process which has been thorough and extensive. The Board decided to accept NESV's proposal on the basis that it best met the criteria we set out originally for a suitable new owner. NESV's philosophy is all about winning and they have fully demonstrated that at Red Sox.

"We've met them in Boston, London and Liverpool over several weeks and I am immensely impressed with what they have achieved and with their vision for Liverpool Football Club.

"By removing the burden of acquisition debt, this offer allows us to focus on investment in the team. I am only disappointed that the owners have tried everything to prevent the deal from happening and that we need to go through legal proceedings in order to complete the sale."

Note to editors:

The sale is conditional on Premier League approval, resolution of the dispute concerning Board membership and other matters.

[Flojo]

No talk of a new stadium but the debt will be gone so we'll be operating at a profit which should mean money available to be invested in the squad.

He owns the red Sox and was in a similar situation regarding the need for either increasing the capacity of their stadium or building a new one, he chose to increase the capacity which I think would be a better option for Anfield as well.

/

If this goes through the only downside will be that Roy Hodgson will have money in a transfer window. Remember this is a man who bought Kevin Davies for £7.5 million.

[Mr Q]

If he carries on performing like he is, then he won't be there in January. Don't think they will give him that long to turn it around especially if they feel hostility to him, he is after all, H&G/Purslows man.

[MetaFives]

This is ridiculous.

A club is grossly mismanaged, heading towards adminstration they then get bought by SOME MORE Americans and end up in a better state than other well run clubs. As a result, they may have a lot more money to spend in the next window.

What's going on with Platini's new financial rules?

[Mr Q]

Was never heading towards administration.

And it is not like we will be in Chelsea/City money,"just no debt" meaning the profit we have been making will not be going to pay debts of H&G

Some more Americans who appear to be a lot more successful at running a sports team. Doubt Platini would have much of a problem.

[TF S4DK]

Thee is no charity in business, no club becomes debt free.

[MetaFives]

So you neg me because the truth hurts?

You have a manager who is out of his depth who has admitted that you are in a relegation battle.

You have rubbish owners.

You can't increase your capacity or agree/finance a new site for a stadium.

You have no money to buy quality players.

All down to awful management and now you're seemingly being rewarded for this by getting some new owners who have money to spend, who can wipe your debt.

I say if a club gambles for paradise, they should pay the price. Let them sink.

FIFA's new rules can't come quick enough, stop this sh*t happening.

/

You won't have any operating profit by Jan to spend, it will come straight out the new owners pocket.

[Flojo]

wtf are you talking about?

So what you're saying is that if someone buys a club and they can't take it forward they shouldn't be able to sell it?

The debt you're talking about was placed on the club by the owners who lied about their intentions when they bought the club, this wasn't just a failing of the previous owners who sold to H&G but of the Premier League as well who are supposed to oversee club sales to determine the integrity of potential buyers. Before they came in the club debt was £44 million which is perfectly manageable.

The new owner isn't going to pump 100's of millions into the club a la Abramovich at Chelsea or Al Nahyan at City, he's going to provide us with stability if anything.

You always manage to slip in your pro Arsenal agenda, always using what Arsenal have done as a yard stick for everyone else even when it's not relevant.

[MetaFives]

To be honest, I am f*ck*ng with you.

My only real gripe is if you end up having lots of money to spend this window (or in the summer) which comes directly from the new owners.

[Mr Q]

Nah, negged you because its too much hype, if you had read other things, we wouldn't go into administration if RBS took us over. (and I am emotional)

Bad management leads to change, in any business. As if you sit and let it die.

Where would FIFA's rules stop us from doing that?

Some absurd notion, that we are being rewarded.

/

The guy isn't even that rich though. More Randy Lerner than Abra/or City owners, and I am happy with that.

[Flojo]

I need to take a break from this room, I''ve tasted a variety of bait over the past few weeks.

[Mr Q]

I need to take a break from this room, I''ve tasted a variety of bait over the past few weeks.

LOL.

Same.

Can't help it, like I said, I'm emotional about this.