Jump to content
I am no longer developing resources for Invision Community Suite ×
By fans, for fans. By fans, for fans. By fans, for fans.

lfc4eva99

Sponsors
  • Posts

    2,470
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by lfc4eva99

  1. I dont think his shares have been taken over. The PL cant just let such transfers happen can they? Plus, the bulls*** Dallas order had his name on it, not Mill. Edit - Maybe they have some sort of an agreement, this is ours now George, but you remain on paper till we see money in this?
  2. tariqpanja :Last little update for now. Gillett is in London consulting with his lawyers. May be nothing left to consult about. We'll see. #LFC Fingerscrossed.
  3. Thanks a lot David Moores and Rick Parry, Hope you rot in hell. Parry deserves it more imo, b*****d took 4m with him as a severance package, wonder if G&H gave him some side money to push their offer through back then. c****.
  4. Irrespective, for them to own a premier league club, even if its for a short period, they need to pass the so called fit and proper test right? Otherwise whats the f***ing point of it all?
  5. True. Bang on. I feel its just his Ego and Greed taking these steps for him. Im keeping all fingers crossed as to see what happens today and tomorrow. YNWA!
  6. If they want to pay it back, they dont need to wait for anything like RBS calling it in. Hicks can initiate repayment himself.
  7. That would be some turn around.
  8. Anyone think Hicks will use Bush's contacts in this? Its a good chance imo that Bush would have the necessary clout to turn a few things on Hicks's side if we go to courts in the USA.
  9. @danroan Hearing US billionaire Dwight Schar, owner of Mill Financial (who own Gillett's shares) and co-owner of Wash Redskins about to play key role
  10. Maybe I'm in the minority, But at this time, id rather RBS takeover us and we get the penalty if it comes to that. But, according to that document in the Texas court, it forbids RBS and the Board to sell the club without the Hicks's permission.. well, thats what it said. WTF.
  11. http://www.scribd.com/doc/39284612/Liverpool-TRO - Thats the actual doc it seems...
  12. Is this because their main holding company is registered in the US? Isn't it registered in Delaware though?
  13. Fingers Crossed all over....
  14. RT @neiljjones: Keith Edelman (former director at Arsenal) has also shown up at the #LFC board meeting
  15. Any videos of the fans chanting, singing outside the court?
  16. "Liverpool fans might enjoy knowing that on Margaret Thatcher's 85th birthday she'll be watching nothing but celebrating scousers and miners all day on TV."
  17. Thanks mate
  18. Can you type some of it here? Dont get SSN where I am..
  19. 11.02am: Broughton wants a board meeting by 8pm today to sort out the sale and there is a dispute over whether the owners will be able to communicate via phone. The owners' QC is asking for the meeting to take place at ten o'clock tomorrow. Judge rules that it should be at 8 today.
  20. 10.28am: While we continue to wait for Mr Justice Floyd's judgement, (which, experience tells me will be long and complicated), I just need to tell you that we have had to turn off the autorefresh component of this page because there are so many readers. So you will need to hit refresh or F5 to update the page.
  21. How can he prove the latter though?
  22. ROFL... expected!
  23. Just imagined our QC hitting out at Hicks and then he Admits: YES, I DID ALL THIS JUST TO SCUPPER THE SALE!
  24. 3.08pm: In Hicks's letter/witness statement to the court he writes that during telephone meeting the board had at the start of last week (the one which broke down at adjournment), Hicks Jr was involved. Lord Grabiner questions why this happened as "Hicks Minor" is not on the board.
  25. 2.32pm: From Sachin Nakranioutside court: Hicks claims that the sub-committee became so ingrained that the directors started to refer to it as the "home team" in emails between themselves. One of which was accidentally sent to the owners at start of last week. Hicks claims that he only breached sales agreement by trying to oust two board members because the sub committee was a breach of the sales agreement in itself.
×
×
  • Create New...