Ownership Saga: Are we sold, again? [R]

Re: Balague on Benitez rumours (8.1.2008.)

I don't think the Press will force him out. The owners might.

For years the Press have been trying to tell Rafa how to pick his team and he has just ignored them and gone about it his own way. He is a strong-willed manager and is happy and settled at the club. He has re-iterated this constantly.

He may be unhappy with some of his treatment by the bosses but he will take encouragement from his support by the fans (which will be seen again against Luton). The owners need to back the manager publicly and resolve any differences with him in private. If they do wish to replace him they should do so in the off-season and behave with dignity and professionalism.

 

Re: Balague on Benitez rumours (8.1.2008.)

Spot on.

 

Re: Balague on Benitez rumours (8.1.2008.)

the press can stir up trouble, but, there was obviously plenty of trouble to begin with in this case

impressed to see so many Anfield legends publicly supporting Rafa and bashing The Americans

Dalglish, Rush, Hansen, Lawrenson . . .

something to cheer ya up (WMP) Crisis

 

Re: Balague on Benitez rumours (8.1.2008.)

Things have settle down now even with recent admission by the stupid owners, but present isn't what I am concerned about. I am much more concerned about the future. Hicks has only been here for less than a year and he has already caused too much trouble for the club. We have a capable manager who can't concentrate on his job but constantly worry about his future because his bosses are making stupid remarks to the press. How long can this go on? Pressure is expected when you're managing LFC but having the owners breathing down on your neck and every little move getting magnified is not the sort of "healthy" pressure you want in a manager. Characters like Hicks isn't good for the club. I sadly feel this is only the beginning of Hicks stupidity. Rafa is a proven manager and there are clubs lined up to pick him up and rightfully so. Hicks is going to take this club backwords if he doesn't wake up and understand that club is bigger than he is.

 

Re: Balague on Benitez rumours (8.1.2008.)

Guillem Balague told Sky Sports News he finds it 'laughable' that Liverpool considered replacing Rafael Benitez with Jurgen Klinsmann

 

Re: Balague on Benitez rumours (8.1.2008.)

I think almost everyone who isn't American thinks the same.

Problem is, in America we LOOOOVE our ex-pros - especially in soccer. Like someone told me once: "I can speak Spanish, but that doesn't mean I can teach it." Just b.c Jurgen could play, doesn't mean he can coach.

 

Re: Balague on Benitez rumours (8.1.2008.)

In a twisted sort of way the press might actually help Rafa keep his job. From what seems to be coming out of Anfield right now, the biggest problem for G&H is that they can't refinance their loan onto LFC, because RBS think it might be to big off a risk. So with all this crap getting printed in the papers right now it can't be helping their case, which will hopefully mean they will have to sell and Rafa can keep his job.

Now that really is a long shot, but my fingers are numb they've been folded for so long. And I just can't see Rafa staying for much longer if the yanks stick around.

 

Re: Balague on Benitez rumours (8.1.2008.)

That's what pisses me off the most about professional and collegiate coaching opportunities in sports.

In America if you didn't play past high school in any sports you have a very rare chance to coach or assistant coach or manage a team at the collegiate or professional level. Even if you go through the appropriate certification and experience channels.

Look at all the coaches/managers of professional teams, almost all are ex-pros or ex-college players. Very few are like Rafa who weren't that good at their sport and worked their way up.

 

Re: Balague on Benitez rumours (8.1.2008.)

Very true. Ex-professionals also get passes on their USSF coaching licenses [or UEFA/FA abroad] until the very highest levels.

Remember that even Mourinho and Benitez had decent ability and played to a much higher level than you or myself have.

But, the only way to break these trends is to be THAT MUCH better than the competition. You need to work twice as hard as everyone else. Hey, that's life.

 

Re: Balague on Benitez rumours (8.1.2008.)

well I'm American and I have consistently stated that the Klinsman thing was, and is, absurd. Everybody I know who knows anything about soccer feels the same way and most of them are Americans. This is why I hate the fact that an ass wipe like hicks gets to buy my club when I would do such a better job.

 

Re: Balague on Benitez rumours (8.1.2008.)

You're not American; you're Irish-American. There's a difference - kind of like how British and Irish are different.

 

Re: Balague on Benitez rumours (8.1.2008.)

a superior brand of American, but American none the less

 

Q And A On Our Situation

Fresh doubts have been cast over Liverpool regarding the uncertainty of George Gillett's and Tom Hicks's futures as co-owners of the famous club.

The American duo are attempting to secure a £350m loan to repay previous loans and begin work on a new stadium, while Dubai International Capital - the investment arm of the Dubai Government - are ready to make an offer to buy the club outright. by Gordon Farquhar, BBC Radio 5 Live sports news correspondent

So what exactly is going on off-the-pitch at Anfield?

WHAT DOES REFINANCING MEAN?
Refinancing a bit like remortgaging, or consolidating loans.

It is a chance to get rid of some more punitive debts with high interest rates in the short-term for lower repayments over a longer period.

It helps viable businesses facing cash flow problems, for instance like a successful football club needing to build a new stadium!

WHY IS THE CLUB BEING REFINANCED?
Hicks and Gillett need to spread the risk.

They have got a stadium to build and need money at a time when the global "credit crunch" is making borrowing expensive - and in some cases, impossible.

It's quite normal for businesses to do this - the Glazers did it with Manchester United. It is down to the judgement of the directors as to how they want to run their finances.

DO HICKS AND GILLETT WANT TO SELL? IF SO, AT WHAT PRICE?
It is very difficult to give a straightforward answer to that. The Americans are businessmen, who are ultimately looking for a return on their investment.

When they take that return might be influenced by any number of things. Hicks is adamant that talk of selling is out of order, he has not been negotiating on a deal and is committed to the club.

On the face of it, that is unequivocal. But we know there have been talks at some level.

Some might view this as just playing "hard to get".

There are offers that cannot be refused, but at the moment it seems Hicks and Gillett are giving the impression they are not desperate to sell, and DIC do not want to overpay.

If those positions shift, then things will probably happen quite quickly.

WHO CONTROLS THE CLUB? HICKS AND GILLETT OR THE BANKS WHO LENT THE MONEY?
Again, it is a bit like the mortgage on your house.

You own a bit, the banks own a bit and if you cannot make the repayments, then the banks hold the security of your property up their sleeves.

Normally, a bank would not get involved in the day-to-day running of a business, unless they stopped getting the monthly payments.

As long as Hicks and Gillett keep making them, they will keep calling the shots.

WHAT FINANCIAL STATE ARE LIVERPOOL IN?
They are a successful club, benefiting from unprecedented payments from the Premier League's TV deal with strong match-day revenue streams.

The new 60,000 stadium is central to the Americans' future aspirations
However, Liverpool are not as strong as Manchester United, Arsenal, who have bigger stadiums or Chelsea, who are bankrolled by owner Roman Abramovich.

And now the club is loaded with debt associated with the purchase by Hicks and Gillett.

Moving to the new home in Stanley Park is a crucial part of their future business growth plans. It is all about risk.

They could stay put, take the TV money and try and make the most of 40,000 bums on seats each week.

Moving is a longer term investment, much as Wembley is for the Football Association - lots of cash upfront, but in the end, it gives you a better return.

The question is, how long are Hicks and Gillett prepared to wait for payday?

IS THIS USUAL BUSINESS PRACTICE FOR HICKS AND GILLETT?
They have made their money through a number of different business models, among them by getting into business with debts, restructuring and reorganising, making them profitable then selling them on.

Gillett bought the NHL side the Montreal Canadiens in 2000 and there are no signs of them being offloaded. But they are risk takers and risk calculators.

WHAT IS THE OUTLOOK FOR THE TEAM WITH THIS UNCERTAINTY?
It's a bit of a cliche to suggest the players and manager get distracted by this sort of thing.

It is not a given. Some, like Jamie Carragher, are clearly upset at what is been going on, but that doesn't mean he is playing worse or better as a result.

A lot of players probably do not give two hoots.

Fans are upset because their feelings for the club and its history transcend the short term issues of profit, loss and ownership.

That said, Manchester United had a dip in form during the Glazer takeover wrangling. Perhaps that was a co-incidence, but maybe not.

On balance, you would say that stable ownership with a hands-off approach to team affairs from the owners - take Randy Learner at Villa for example - probably makes for the best climate.

WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR LIVERPOOL MANAGER RAFAEL BENITEZ?
If Gillett and Hicks stay, their differences of opinion over transfers and the Jurgen Klinnsman gaffe would make you question Benitez's long-term position.

If DIC take over, then it would not be unusual for the new owners to change the management around.

If they come in promising a transfer war chest for the summer, they might want someone different to spend it for them.

But Liverpool might have won the Champions League by then!

 

Re: Q And A On Our Situation

I think the author is missing a key point (based on the reportage I've been reading): this isn't about refinancing at more favorable rates; G&T's original loan for their LFC purchase was short-term and reportedly expires in a matter of weeks (~2-6 weeks depending upon the source)

they must repay the loan in the short-term -- which requires new financing

BTW do we have any information on what the structure of a DIC deal might look like? how much debt would LFC be left with?

and, just to complicate matters further:

http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk...its-a-snag-claim-city-sources-64375-20379100/

 

Re: Q And A On Our Situation

Well if they can't get another loan there is no way Liverpool fans will allow their club to get plunged into debt. The downturn of the global markets may force the hand of Hicks and Gillett.

 

Re: Q And A On Our Situation

To do what exactly? Haven't they already rejected selling the club?

 

Re: Q And A On Our Situation

They have two choices if their loan is rejected. Put the debt on the club or sell the club. Am I correct? I hardly understand math, so all this crap is new to me.

 

Re: Q And A On Our Situation

as I understand it, if G&T defaults on their loan, RBS would take control of the club

no one wants that to happen, so either G&T and RBS (and reportedly Wachovia) -- or whatever source will loan the money -- work out a new loan for G&T

or

DIC steps in and buys out G&T's interest

press reports claim that DIC will not buy the club if G&T secure new financing first

of course, if DIC buys out the dicks, LFC could still wind up burdened with debt

Dubai's Government Debt/GDP is 41.8%, four times the average among Persian Gulf states (source: Standard & Poor's; reported in WSJ) -- i.e., they are not shy about utilizing debt

 

Re: Q And A On Our Situation

I wish I could close my eyes and ears to everything but the matches. This is miserable to even think about.

 

Re: Q And A On Our Situation

on the face of it, it doesn't look great does it?

the £300mill they borrowed is to be re-paid by the 5th february. and at this minute in time there is no re-finance deal in place.

gillette/hicks believe they can raise £350mill of new loans, with the royal bank of scotland as the main player. on top of that they want to get another £300mill for the new stadium, which could raise the borrowings to around the £650mill mark.

now at the current borrowing rate of 7% wouldn't that make the interest payments per annum about £45mill!!

correct me if i'm wrong but hicks and gillette have been clear that they have invested in the club to make a profit, so covering interest payments alone is unlikely to be the limit of the money leaving the club (and supporter’s pockets) to fund their requirements.

the consequences of these type of actions will have a major effect on LFC.

 

Re: Q And A On Our Situation

on the bright side, if these media reports are accurate at all, G&T will be pumping in as much as £80-110m of their own money this time and accepting £190m of the debt

if they wanted to make a quick buck, they could have sold out to DIC for a nice profit right now

if they remain as owners, they know they need to build up the team as much as possible (to maximize revenues), and they need to build a new stadium -- I really don't think their goal will be to siphon off LFC's cashflow in the short term -- that would jeopardize their fairly large investment