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

Discussion in 'Liverpool' started by mariebannerlfc, Jan 15, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Red Bird

    Red Bird Member+

    Sep 30, 2003
    Oxford
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    football365.com has increasing become unreliable, depending as it does on the tabloids. Too many liberties are being taken here. Accroding to the Echo, which is more reliable, discussions are still taking place.
     
  2. Samarkand

    Samarkand Member+

    May 28, 2001
  3. YNWAYNWA

    YNWAYNWA New Member

    Feb 26, 2005
    New York
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    very strange stuff indeed

    today one reliable source reported
    (a subscription is required to access that)


    while over at Legalweek, they are publishing all the details of G&T's refinancing
    legalweek


    did DIC take a chance that G&T would not be able to acquire the financing, and are they now having to accept The Americans' terms?

    and how would this change things at Anfield, and New Anfield?

    would DIC cover the interest expense?

    and as for Rafa . . .
    link
     
  4. Liverpool_SC

    Liverpool_SC Member

    Jun 28, 2002
    Upstate, SC
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    I agree. Hicks and Gillett have not been the sharpest tools in the shed, but why potentially marginalize an entire nation (or a chunk of it) with many potential fans, due to the actions of a few? The flag thing would be a trifle xenophobic if you ask me.

    Especially considering the presumptive next owners are going to be from Dubai. It is not like DIC is noted for their humility, ability to judge a room and determination to be culturally accommodating wherever they do business. They are going to be looking to make a buck off the team as much as these guys, and leveraging the team with debt is a common tool for investment groups to use to increase (not reduce) valuations.

    Honestly, it is one thing for the fans to like the owners. It is another thing to have expectations about how the owners exercise stewardship over the team, but it is going a bit far for the fans to suggest the optimal financing the owners should pursue. You cannot have it every which way. If you are going to be that dictatorial about the club ... it needs to be a plc.
     
  5. GoHawks4

    GoHawks4 Member

    Apr 24, 2002
    Chicago
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    I agree with all of this. I really, really hope it doesn't happen.

    And I'm far from the most patriotic yank you'll meet.
     
  6. YNWAYNWA

    YNWAYNWA New Member

    Feb 26, 2005
    New York
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    if Brits and others want to get anti-American, it doesn't bother me (and I've got some ancestors that fought on the rebel side a few centuries ago) -- hell, it can't be worse than stuff we see in the USA anyway

    it's just an asinine, kneejerk reaction -- why blame an entire country for the actions of one or two businessman (who BTW aren't breaking any laws that we know of)? ******** it

    I just think these people are demonstrating some tunnel vision

    what exactly will be better under DIC?

    we don't know, do we?

    from all reports I've read, the financing arrangements are likely to be similar

    and other reports claim DIC is also growing disenchanted with Rafa

    so if DIC takes over -- we could be in a similar position

    HOWEVER, what would be different is that instead of being own by two independent billionaires, LFC would be owned by a foreign state

    and, in place of the anti-American protests, we could have Amnesty International, workers unions, etc. demonstrating

    and we might still find a dodgy old yank hanging out at Anfield -- Bubba's got some serious ties to Dubai

    oh, yeah, and Yossi won't be able to travel with the team when they go to the UAE for training or matches -- and will we have to leave all the Carlsberg-emblazoned gear at home?
     
  7. revelationx

    revelationx Member+

    Jun 5, 2006
    London
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    The DIC story is done by the Mirror. So hardly reputable. Of course the story has been picked up by all the blogs etc but it's just one tabloid journalist talking. Until I hear a development from a reliable source I am not going to pay it any credence.
     
  8. luciusmagister

    luciusmagister New Member

    Feb 23, 2004
    7th Heaven
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    The Mirror? :D
    It could be worse, it could be the News of the World.
    http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/1301_pennant.shtml
    Ridiculous.
     
  9. CCSC_STRIKER20

    CCSC_STRIKER20 New Member

    May 14, 2005
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    Yeah, I am sure the father of a really wealthy footballer is selling crack cocaine in a crime-ridden area of England.
     
  10. luciusmagister

    luciusmagister New Member

    Feb 23, 2004
    7th Heaven
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    Don't believe the Faux, eh? What kind of American are ya? :D
    If the Faux sheik said it, it must be true...right?
     
  11. Matt Clark

    Matt Clark Member

    Dec 19, 1999
    Liverpool
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    Actually, this is old news. Anyone who knows Nottingham at all knows that Gary Pennant is a sad old smackhead. The NOTW have (inevitably) made it out to be a bit racier than that ("evil empire", etc), but it's undeniably true. The only surprising thing here is that it's taken a national tabloid this long to do this.

    Anyhoo, back on topic: I don't see why people construe the idea of upside-down flags as anti-Americanism in the blanket sense. It's not. Remember the Kop flew dozens of US flags on 9/11 when we played Boavista in the CL that evening and the original reception to the new owners was marked by obvious enthusiasm, so the notion that there's latent anti-Americanism at work is silly. No, this is an act of symbolism. The owners are American, an obvious way to show displeasure is to do something with a symbol of America that will attract their attention (I can imagine Hicks getting quite pissy about it, actually, he strikes me as the sort). It's not anti-American. It's anti-these-Americans.

    There's a forgotten fact at work here: you Yanks are quite unique in the western world (and far beyond to be honest) in the extent to which you imbue your little piece of coloured cloth with a significance that most other nations have long since discarded. So I can agree that doing this may be detrimental to the average Yank's perception of Liverpool fans (particularly if it's some 15-second piece in the final segment of a Fox News update or something), but that, quite frankly, says more about the Yanks than it does about us. We're secure in our affection for all things American (minus two very specific chaps, naturally).
     
  12. Gandalf The Red

    Gandalf The Red BigSoccer Yellow Card

    Sep 23, 2006
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    I like the USA, especially watching
    you people over From Here, but in describing the actions of our fans, you are pretty much describing yourselves, from what we see of you.
     
  13. liverbird

    liverbird BigSoccer Supporter

    Sep 29, 2000
    Mars
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    Matt's quite right in most of what he says (as ever). I have found that people in England quite like American culture and individual Americans. They, for the most part, don't like our current government and they also have an understanding of America that is fueled by movies and television. Of course most Yanks have an idea of the UK driven by Hugh Grant, Trainspotting, and Hard Days Night. That means the common people are misinformed worldwide. My only point was that conflating Yanks and America with these two idiotic specimens does have a bit ot resentment against americans in general -- not unlike the reaction to the Glazers at ManUre.

    Finally, I am not convinced that the DIC would be any better. The simplistic idea that the world contains another financial imbecile like Abramovich willing to spend a couple of hundred million quid without hope of return on Liverpool is frighteningly pollyanna-ish. The DIC will secure their bid with the club as its asset, not with the personal fortune of some sheik. They will also make decisions based upon financial considerations for the most part. However, they may also force the club to sell Benayoun out of anti-Isreali sectarianism. This possibilty is something that is really contrary to the open culture of Liverpool. Noises have been made that they plan on firing Rafa and bringing Jo-say. Perhaps we need to be careful what we wish for as our wishes may come true.

    YNWA!
     
  14. Red Bird

    Red Bird Member+

    Sep 30, 2003
    Oxford
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    My sentiments exactly. Something suggestive of jumping into the fire here. That's why I think the alternative, the seemingly bird-brained idea of a member/fan-owned club, must not be abandoned at all but must be pursued until it founders.
     
  15. YNWAYNWA

    YNWAYNWA New Member

    Feb 26, 2005
    New York
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    firstly, I'm not worked up about this -- just concerned that SOS etc could be heading into a PR mess -- thirty seconds of video gets picked up by a few shows over here and 'pool's value in the states could be trashed (many won't care, but, this IS all about money)

    secondly, I still believe they're directing their protests at the wrong symbols -- if they wanted to demonstrate their disdain for Hicks (and George has been MIA for months so I'd leave him out at this point) it would make a helluva lot more sense to use a more personal symbol such as a Texas flag -- then it would clearly indicate a protest against Slick Hicks

    thirdly, I think the focus of the attacks purely on The Americans (i.e., G&T) is also misguided -- I think the supporters should also hold Moores and Parry responsible and put pressure on them as well -- they've been accepting G&T's maneuvers

    and isn't that the critical point?

    from what I've read, the directors have to agree to any LFC funding arrangements -- the fans should be demanding that if DIC take over, the entire debt service burden is not placed on the club -- the fans are upset that G&T "lied" -- well, the directors have to get it right next time and make certain that any changes are for the better

    otherwise, what's the benefit in ousting G&T?

    the financial situation could remain the same, Rafa could be out (it does make sense (as reported) that Rafa's speaking out publicly against his owners did not sit well with the anti-free speech orientation of Dubai's potentates)

    and finally, as yesterday's rich list pointed out: LFC is in need of a serious financial upgrade to remain an elite club -- and that will require a new stadium which will require significant debt . . . which, to some extent is going to wind up on the club -- IMO the supporters should be focused on alleviating LFC's debt burden as much as possible (and budgeting for transfers), not simply on removing two Americans
     
  16. illusion

    illusion Member+

    Aug 26, 2005
    From Hell
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    Nat'l Team:
    Argentina
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    YOu guys consider yourself lucky if this deal go through, it will definitely make Liverpool a dominant club in Europe.
     
  17. Liverpool_SC

    Liverpool_SC Member

    Jun 28, 2002
    Upstate, SC
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    That is all well and good, but perception can trump intention and cause a whole big mess. If LFC fans don't want a club dependent on debt leveraging to compete with the Arsenal's, Man Utd's and such of the EPL - it is going to be tough to do if they unnecessarily turn-off potential fans by blowing the nationality of a couple nitwits out of proportion. Especially when so many of the signs are based on the notion of DIC saving LFC from the Yanks. Why not something like "Take back the Kop from Kop Holdings" or just "Take Back the Kop"? Why unnecessarily complicate the situation by bringing the other factors into it?

    If LFC fans want ownership that can drive the team back to the happy side of the Top 4 ... it is stupid to run this campaign in such a way that the creme de la creme of sports business investors see the club as a hopeless proposition due to fans getting all jingoistic/hyperchondriac when they don't agree with the owners' approach to the team management or they disagree with their financing approach. Be invested emotionally in the team on the pitch, to be sure. And to the culture of the club to be sure. But there are no trophies on offer for the fans vs ownership table. It is self-defeating to loathe the owners.

    I don't think Hicks and Gillett are the right fit for the club, but Rafa is not unimpeachable in this mess (which is what a <4th place finish would be). Paul Tompkins wrote a nice enconium about Rafa's results so far relative to any manager since King Kenny and drew parallels between SAF when he came to the club and Rafa, but the fact remains that Houllier got higher league placements than Rafa did with a far more limited team. And it is also true that Houllier had LFC in a better position when Rafa took over than SAF inherited from Atkinson.

    I am beginning to wonder myself (since Pako Ayesteran left) if Rafa would not be more suited to a continental style technical director role (which he would never accept) more than he might be suited to an English style manager role.

    I for one prefer to see Rafa stick with the club, at least for a few more years (at which time he is going to want to move on anyway), but I would like to see him spend a bit more time watching the game from the stands, as a solid first-team coach directs the team from the technical area. I believe that Rafa is a bit like a top-tier conductor who overestimates his importance in a concert. The core work is done at the training pitch and it is up to the players once the game starts. When things aren't going as he likes, he starts with the constant chatter and hand-motions and what-not and the harder he shouts or waves, the greater his effective impact diminishes. Goodness knows there have been fantastic LFC managers who sat in the stands before (and I know that with video available they get that perspective in other ways then were previously available) but the team needs some distance from Rafa as well now - at least during the match itself.

    I suppose the bottom line is ... if improved ownership is the desire, the fans are going to have to appreciate that proper stewardship may involve changes that not everyone likes. And the best owner from the club may be another American as much as it may be an Arab or European investor. So why act out in ugly fashion in such a way that a good owner decides to say "No thanks?" I don't want LFC to become the next commercialized brand anymore than the next guy, but the Glazer/Man Utd model is far more likely and - quite honestly - more appealing to me than the Abramovich/Chelsea model. And Hicks/Gillett have as much in common with the Arsenal model as could be expected, if only the Americans had relied upon David Moores having a bigger role as a minority chairman.

    On the other hand, the reason that Arsenal is in such a good position in the league is that Wenger is better than Rafa at signing players who have a major impact, at an earlier age and for less money - and he is better at managing (even a small) squad over a long EPL campaign. Finally, he knows how to build a team that inevitably controls the tempo and flow of games and bends other teams to its will.

    For LFC to come top, one of the following will have to happen:

    + Ownership that spends enough to make up for talent deficit relative to (in 2 - 3 years time) Man Utd and Arsenal. Commercially we are weakest of the big 4 and those other three teams are not making bad enough decisions/we are not making good enough decisions for us to overtake them without more spending.

    + Improved management (Rafa needs to learn new 'tricks' or at least abandon some that don't work) that enables us to overcome the better-motivated Man Utd and better-performing Arsenal side (because Wenger is not so much a tactician as a manager who builds a team and lets them play). Manchester United and Arsenal are more effectively managed than LFC, and we still are not out-performing CFC despite injury troubles that are just as pronounced as ours and upheaval that makes our tempest look like a teapot.

    LFC fans are going to have to accept that item 1 will require an owner with a freer hand than they are willing to give, apparently. Item 2 may require either sacrificing Rafa for a coach who will take the side he has actually built pretty well (someone ruthless fellow like Del Bosque or someone in his mold) or standing up to Rafa and having him adjust some of his personal preferences where they are hurting the team.
     
  18. Matt Clark

    Matt Clark Member

    Dec 19, 1999
    Liverpool
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    Lots of long responses to my post and I will get back to them in more detail tomorrow (you're not worth my Friday night :eek:) but I did want to quickly go for something that jumped out at me.

    We're the eight-richest club in the world.

    And whilst the jump from eigth to first is substantial, I don't think we're in any danger of being left out of the elite in financial terms. Sure, a stadium is important and sure, we want to make sure we don't alienate big markets (although I don't think we would, even with protests of this kind that may be spotted by the more reactionary and jingoistic elements of the American media), but equally I don't think we should repeat the mistakes that left us with G&H in the first place and start acting like we're Luton Town and need some cash, now, from anyone. Let's focus on getting these twerps out of our club, then let's worry about global rich lists and whatnot. I'd rather have a club that remains true to its roots (in whatever dissipated way the modern era mandates) then a club that holds back from striking out at the manifestly wrong because it might harm our market profile.

    The DIC thing is another angle of course - it could well be out of the frying pan and into the fire - but again, let's not worry for now. G&H out - by whatever means. Then let's worry about the bigger picture.
     
  19. GoHawks4

    GoHawks4 Member

    Apr 24, 2002
    Chicago
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    I disagree wholeheartedly with this.
     
  20. usscouse

    usscouse BigSoccer Supporter

    May 3, 2002
    Orygun coast
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    Went to see a Sunderland of season match here in Seattle a couple of years ago. Part of the 5 hour pregame show was the "Old flag ceremony" No, I won't go into how I feel about that, or the Pledge of Allegiance. Trying too hard maybe?

    But one of the guys near us turns across to me to ask me anyway. I told him it was a nice gesture but would have meant more if they'd have flown my flag the right way up. He said, it's the same, isn't it?

    Sure. How can one get annoyed at that.

    Just my two pennies worth of another thread that's turned to crap........:rolleyes:

    LB is right by the way don't let anything in the media let you think "Yanks" (US Americans) are Not welcome. Some of these silly Brits thinks I'm a Yank for christs sake!!!!
     
  21. YNWAYNWA

    YNWAYNWA New Member

    Feb 26, 2005
    New York
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    does it strike anyone else as odd that the Liverpool supporters "union" is so enthusiastic to jump in bed with DIC?

    guess the times they are achangin'

    the old days:
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]


    today's reality:

    Building Towers, Cheating Workers
    Exploitation of Migrant Construction Workers in the
    United Arab Emirates

    (more)

    and a reminder (posted earlier):
    Why Liverpool fans are wrong to suck up to DIC
    DIC is part of one of the world's most undemocratic regimes - does the Kop really want that on its conscience?
     
  22. YNWAYNWA

    YNWAYNWA New Member

    Feb 26, 2005
    New York
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    one other little reminder

    from Dubai's Debt Cloud (WSJ, 12/14/07)

    [​IMG]

     
  23. Matt Clark

    Matt Clark Member

    Dec 19, 1999
    Liverpool
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    Well, we're a broad church, are we not? ;)

    Look, I'm not blind to the potential significance of DIC and neither are any of the people who are currently calling for them to be brought in to replace G&H. If anything, it's a measure of how loathed those two are, that many people are willing to consider their removal paramount to a degree where the potential alternatives are worries for another day.

    We sold any chance we have to be realistically worried about that when we first sold the family silver in any case. Many of you will recall that I argued consistently on here (usually alone) that we didn't need to sell the club out in any case and that the chances of it significantly improving our fortunes were debatable at best. But sell we did, that's a reality. And if we get shot of G&H, then we may end up with a different flavour of shit, rather than roses and perfume, true (although at least this one is a bona fide LFC fan of long standing). The age of supporter activism has finally reached Liverpool. In many ways, we've enjoyed a cosseted past, the family-run club with the quiet, simple ways of going about things. We've been cocking up our handling of the modern era from the last days of White, never mind the last days of Moores. But the bigger picture is upon us, there's no point pretending otherwise. When you've sold the family silver, you become something different - and the outlook is never more than tactical, we've sold our right to the long-term vision because we're no longer in control of our own destiny (unless 100,000 of us do stump up five large each, which I think we can all agree is unlikely).

    G&H out. Then we'll see where we are and deal with that. It may be a case of rinse and repeat, it may turn our club into a basket case for generations, but at least it remains our club. I'm proud of activities such as Shareholders United, no matter how naive and idealistic. It shows we still have a pulse. Likewise, the street-level revulsion and revolt against the Yanks (and, if necessary, their replacement when the time comes) is a sign of health in crisis, not paralysis to fate.

    There will inevitably be a schism between local and more distant perspectives on this, but that's cool. We'll also have such debates punctuated by the regular and welcome interruptions of a football match to moan about. :)
     
  24. YNWAYNWA

    YNWAYNWA New Member

    Feb 26, 2005
    New York
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    a look at DIC at work

    http://www.ameinfo.com/138399.html

    any accountants or bankers out there with an opinion on the looks of that balance sheet?

    and what are the interest rates, LIBOR + XXX bps?
     
  25. Clint Eastwood

    Clint Eastwood Member+

    Dec 23, 2003
    Somerville, MA
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    Re: Ownership Saga [R]

    The grass is almost never greener on the other side.
     

Share This Page