Hus

Can we concentrate on getting rid of the current owners before we start digging up the dirt on the new ones?

That wasnt what i was expecting, we all know they want more money the feckers. But I thought there maybe something about the board being reshuffled etc, its all bravado atm...if he cant remove the board then he should be powerless to stop this now

f*** Expecting the worst, we have rejected any offers, dont intend to sell Liverpool - we are here for the long term b****x

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/650f57d0-d0cf-11df-a426-00144feabdc0.html?ftcamp=rss Baseball team pitches for Liverpool FC By Roger Blitz, Leisure Industries Correspondent Published: October 5 2010 23:35 | Last updated: October 5 2010 23:35 Open warfare broke out at Liverpool FC after the club announced that plans for directors to discuss two “excellent” offers to buy the Premier League club, including one from the owners of the Boston Red Sox, were preceded by the current US owners’ efforts to remove two independent board members. New England Sports Ventures, the holding company for the baseball team, tabled an offer to cover the £280m of debt owed by Liverpool owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett to Royal Bank of Scotland and Wachovia. The offer on the table is believed to be £300m. In a statement on the club’s website on Tuesday night, Liverpool FC said: “The board of directors have received two excellent financial offers to buy the club that would repay all its long-term debt. “A board meeting was called today to review these bids and approve a sale. Shortly prior to the meeting, the owners – Tom Hicks and George Gillett – sought to remove managing director Christian Purslow and commercial director Ian Ayre from the board, seeking to replace them with Mack Hicks and Lori Kay McCutcheon.” Mack Hicks is a son of Tom Hicks and a vice-president of his father’s Hicks Holdings sports and real estate group. Ms McCutcheon is also a vice-president of Hicks Holdings. The statement added that the matter was subject to legal review and that the three independent board directors – chairman Martin Broughton, Mr Purslow and Mr Ayre – would continue to explore the club’s sale at the earliest opportunity. According to people with knowledge of the protracted and bitter sale process, the independent directors had planned to discuss the offers with the owners on a conference call, and hoped to move the discussion onto details about which of the two to accept. But the owners, who have placed a much higher valuation on the club, were said to have rejected both offers, a response that was said by one person to have been expected by the independent board members. Mr Hicks is believed to remain determined to refinance the debt, although he has had one proposal rejected by the independent board members in June after they took legal advice. The deadline for the repayment of the owners’ loan is Friday week. “The owners are trying to block this sales process,” one person said. According to another person with knowledge of the situation, NESV’s owner John Henry is in the UK with senior management figures with the intention of “closing the deal”. While NESV has been interested in Liverpool for some weeks, the Far East interest is believed to have become known only in the past week. NESV’s thinking is that Liverpool would be another iconic sports brand to go with the Boston Red Sox and Roush Fenway Racing, one of the pre-eminent teams in Nascar racing. But given the hostility of Liverpool fans to the Gillett-Hicks ownership, NESV is believed to be sensitive to any anti-US sentiment from supporters.

Another spin on the matter, the Board have accepted the "asian" bid and the US contingent are leaking it to get some media attention/pressure on the board to change there mind? I know its flaky but who knows

Wouldnt he stay till the sale was ratified and confirmed? If they have already approved the sale (huge f***ing if there) then it makes sense to some degree but wouldnt he need to be present for the outcome of any legal challenge? Who knows, my head is spinning atm

I reckon they could do if it was secured on the club, future income etc etc...the board are key in this as we all know

RIght this is useful - Jenny Kulshaw (some financial bod) is ask Rogan Taylor about how the board is set up...tell us something new ffs Great thats exactly what i wanted to hear - though now i am really worried about the rumours re MB resigning...

On r5 now -

From: http://blogs.news.sky.com/kleinman/Post:71fcbf72-08c6-47ac-8dc5-90a1535f7124 I also have a little more on the NESV proposal. I understand that Robert Tilliss, one of the partners of Inner Circle Sports, the New York-based investment and advisory firm which is advising NESV, helped secure control of Liverpool for Hicks and Gillett back in 2007 hmmmmmmmm

True - I reckon Cecil will leak it at some point, though Tariq Panja on twitter reckons the US bid has been accepted...maybe thats why its out in the open. Who knows

Apparently some more updates on the LFC situ on R5 after the news in a few mins

Well I guess they wanted exposure...definitely getting that now!

Re-reading the statement this one part catches my eye: Meanwhile Martin Broughton, Christian Purslow and Ian Ayre continue to explore every possible route to achieving a sale of the Club at the earliest opportunity." Does that mean the board can still sanction the sale even with the challenge to both CP & IA? Could it be that the guy from Bloomberg is on the money, they have accepted the bid and are moving along with the process? I know its a very glass half full way of thinking but I could do with a bit of that tonight!

Also, does the legal challenge prevent RBS from calling in the loan, it would obviously stop the club being sold before then.

Agree, but we have been questioning and doubting whether it was true or not...I wonder if the reason G&H havent challenged MB was because him being instilled was part of the last refinancing deal?

Dan Roan on R5 - saying he is being told by a source at the club that the US bid is from the Red Sox guy...Cecil is leaking imo, i missed the rest of the interview

Not imo, its a clear statement from the board saying they are working against the owners.

It all comes down to if G&H can oust CP & IA, if so then I think we are royally screwed as they will look to refinance secured against club assets. If they are unsuccesful then you would think that the current board will approve the sale to one of the bids (if they exist). Wiki - Board Members Election / Removal The link above is based on American law - I am sure UK law would be different (it usually is) but its impossible to know how our board is made up and there "responsibilities".

Exactly, they wanted it out in the open...all the negative press directed at MB, IA & CP...they have come out and said "we are not the bad guys and do actually want to sell the club"

It all comes down to whether they can do it legally or not, can G&H oust CP & IA from the board? I would think this would only be possible if they were seen not to be acting in the best interest of the club...or more importantly the shareholders who in this case are H&G, but i am not sure if its in the best interest of club. The matter is definitely not sorted - it requires a legal ruling as to whether IA and CP can be ousted or not

Yes, the reason H&G are trying to get rid of IA and CP is because they are going to vote for the sale. CP doesnt have many fans on here but it does appear he is trying to do the right thing atm.

The question is can they oust two members of the board, what type of approval do you need for that to happen? Can the other members of the board veto any such request? If they are challenging two members can they contest this? Or is it down to the members who are not under threat...ie Hicks, Gillette and MB

WTF