Bogman

I've no contempt for people taking delight in what is happening. Shows lack or moralness and understanding. Club needs shutting down and re-booting. I'm not as bothered as I thought I was about it all, what I am bothered with, is what happens next. That frightens me................................

Agreed. Rafa goes, that means there's feck all left to fight over, we'd be well and truely fecked. It would signal the death bell for us.

Agreed mate, and I've said for years on other forums, that we've bigger problems that Rafa. It'll take something like this to shake people out of their lethargy, and by then, it'd be too feckin late.

And imagine the message that sends out around the world. Where would that leave Nando, Masch, et al. Who'd want to come and ply their trade here? We're like a man who's been in the Sahara Desert for 5 days without water and the vultures are circling.........................

No idea, just something. Something needs to be done, and now. Not very helpful but too disgusted to think laterally atm.

Heat has to be cranked up on RBS, that goes without saying. Worst thing for us to do is sit back and see what doesn't happen.

Jesus. Deluded c***. Rangers, Stars owner Hicks eager to exit pro sports 11:24 PM CDT on Tuesday, May 25, 2010 By GARY JACOBSON and BRENDAN CASE / The Dallas Morning News Tom Hicks said he stands to lose "a couple hundred million" dollars on the Texas Rangers and Dallas Stars, but he expects to make it up when he sells his stake in a leading English soccer team. He also said he will be glad to exit the professional sports business. "It's never been my primary business," he said in an interview Tuesday with The Dallas Morning News. "And it's a business I no longer want to pay the price to be in." One thing he won't miss is the publicity that comes with owning pro sports teams, he said. "It's a brutal invasion of privacy," he said. Hicks is embroiled in a controversial sale of the Texas Rangers, and the outcome is far from certain. The team filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection Monday, saying it aimed to expedite a sale to an investor group headed by Pittsburgh attorney Chuck Greenberg and Rangers president Nolan Ryan. The team also sought a speedy or "prepackaged" bankruptcy in which the sale could be done in July. That way, new owners could take control before the July 31 player trading deadline, a key on-field consideration as the first-place Rangers prepare to make a run for the playoffs. Unpredictable outcome But the outcome of the bankruptcy case is hard to predict. In a Tuesday court filing, U.S. Trustee William Neary said the case should be treated as a traditional bankruptcy, not a prepackaged one. He said he would hold a meeting June 3 to form a creditors committee. Traditional bankruptcies typically take months to resolve. Meanwhile, some creditors argue that Hicks' proposal doesn't give them enough money. "What they did is going to cause a nuclear war here," said a person close to the creditor group. "Chuck Greenberg and Nolan Ryan will have control of the team by the trade deadline. But it will be the trade deadline of 2020." Last year, Hicks Sports Group, owner of the Rangers and Stars, defaulted on $525 million in loans. The bankruptcy proceedings that began Monday include only the Rangers, not HSG or the Stars. The Rangers transaction could end up giving the lenders up to about $280 million, although estimates vary. Later, they also would stand to get money from a sale of the Stars. In a statement Monday, Major League Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig said he was prepared to submit the Greenberg-Ryan group to other baseball owners for their approval. That's important because three-quarters of the owners must approve a sale, Hicks said. "The creditors seriously misjudge how professional sports work," Hicks said. "It's a club. It's a club that 75 percent of the people have to decide they want to admit somebody into. It can't be forced to be sold to the highest bidder." Creditors' objections At a four-hour hearing Tuesday in Fort Worth before Judge Michael Lynn, creditors objected to the prepackaged plan and suggested they could force two Hicks Sports Group entities into separate involuntary bankruptcies. Lynn said both sides will present arguments on the team's reorganization plan June 15, and he set July 9 as a possible date by which the Rangers could emerge from bankruptcy. The Greenberg-Ryan deal is valued at $575 million, the Rangers said, including the team, assumed liabilities and an accompanying land deal. Under the bankruptcy plan, Hicks would receive some cash from the sale of the team – $5 million for funds he lent the Rangers a year ago. The land deal is valued at about $75 million. That includes $5 million cash, a $53.1 million note, assumption of a $12.8 million obligation related to the Centerfield Office Building and a 1 percent equity stake in the new ownership group. In addition, Hicks would receive game tickets, parking passes, the title of chairman emeritus for three years and "other rights customary to former owners in the sale of professional sports teams," according to court filings. Liverpool FC sale Hicks said Tuesday that his efforts to sell his other teams continue. He said he expects to sell soccer team Liverpool FC in 12 to 18 months. He continued to say that the English Premier League team – one of the world's most valuable sports brands – could fetch "600 to 800" million pounds – or about $860 million to $1.15 billion at current exchange rates. Others place the value at significantly less. Hicks and Colorado businessman George Gillett acquired the team in 2007 in a deal valued at nearly 220 million pounds, which at the time was worth about $430 million because the pound was stronger in relation to the dollar at the time. The effort to sell the Stars is "quietly" progressing, Hicks said. Still, he added, "hockey has some issues," especially outside the Northeast and Canada. He said he could be a small minority partner with a group buying the Stars. The Stars gave Hicks what he has described as his fondest moment as a team owner: the team's Stanley Cup victory in 1999. Under his ownership, the Rangers won two division titles, the last in 1999. But they never won a league championship or World Series, despite high payrolls. "I lost a lot of money," he said. "That was only because I wanted to win." The Fort Worth Star-Telegram contributed to this report. gjacobson@dallasnews.com;

Tony Evans Chief football editor of The Times and ardent red has just done a webchat Comment From Chris99 Lets be honest hicks and gilettte wont sell Liverpool and Galzer won’t sell United unless they get a profit for the clubs! are both fans in for a long wait? Wednesday May 19, 2010 13:37 13:41 Tony Evans: Slightly different scenarios Chris. The Glazers were offered £1.5bn for the club in summer 2008. The thought they could get more. Probably think they still can. They can hold on, despite the huge debt. Hicks and Gillett are clinging on. They will continue to do so for as long as possible because their valuation - £600m - is at odds with RBS's and the new chairman. Something has to give. In the end it may come down to RBS to force a deal through. Effectively repossess the club. With the mountain of debt and no new stadium, I don't see a big-spending saviour on the horizon. These are dangerous time for both clubs, but in the short term Liverpool are more at risk Comment From Luke Stephens Simple question Tony, might not be a simple answer. What's happening with Rafa? Wednesday May 19, 2010 13:42 13:49 Tony Evans: Nothing at the moment, Luke. He's sitting tight and planning for the new season. At a couple of points in the last month I thought it was over. He's been worn down by three years of attrition. One thing is clear: they cannot afford to sack him. The contract he signed last year is cast iron. It was not awarded for football reasons and, as a result, it's as favourable a contract as any manager has ever had. It's symptomatic of how badly Anfield is run. I'm sure there are people at the club who would like rid. But, as of now, he's gone away for a break and that's all. Juventus was never a realistic destination, neither is Inter, and Real isn't on the table this time. Love him or hate him, he's Liverpool manager. And I'll ask you a question, the same one I asked Christian Purslow, the managing director: if he goes, would the next manager be a trade up or trade down? Whats your thoughts on rick parry for the Fa job? He was awful at liverpool, he didnt have a clue what he was doing and is as much at fault as the yanks! Wednesday May 19, 2010 13:49 13:56 Tony Evans: Let's be fair to Parry. He wasn't exactly awful. His conservative temperament just didn't match well with the aggressive approach of Benitez in the transfer market. He wasn't dynamic when the club needed him to be and he clearly made a huge blunder in the sale. However, that's eating away at him, I think, and would inform any role governing the game that was on offer. The difference between him and the Americans is he's a Liverpool fans and I believe he thought he was acting in the best interest of the club. The owners are acting in their own interest. One of the problems in the fanbase is that Parry and David Moores have become a focus for the anger at the way things have turned out. It's misdirected. The real culprits are the owners. Moores was on the point of speaking out in public until a misguided fan badgered him and scared him off. Shame. Because most of Liverpool's support is arguing about Benitez and whether Lucas or Kuyt should be playing while the lifeblood is being sucked out of Anfield. Comment From Chris Do you really think Parry and Moores saw any of this coming when they sold the club? Wednesday May 19, 2010 13:57 13:59 Tony Evans: Chris, if they had, they'd have run a mile. Don't underestimate how bad they feel. Myself too. The newspapers should have been running long pieces about how dangerous these owners could be. There was enough evidence with Corinthians and American sport. But we didn't. All asleep at the wheel Comment From shanks There are rumours of 2 Gulf based investors in L,pool, any info? What about the asking price? Wednesday May 19, 2010 13:59 14:03 Tony Evans: Shanks. Sound name that. There are a few people looking at Liverpool but they can't make the numbers work. We are expecting an operating profit of £35m in the next accounts - when we see them. Even £350m would be ten times that, at the outside range of reasonable investment. £600m? Yeah, right. But people will always be interested and some like to get their names in the paper by linking with a club. There's been Gulf interest, Chinese interest, American interest... we've made a policy decision to stop running these stories until a bid is on the table. It's an easy back page but lazy

Don't forget they'll probably get Cesc as well, and I can't see him going for 30 million either, so that will be best part of 100 million on two players. They ain't Real.

I'm feeling optimistic, I think we ARE f***ed.

I see the Torres thing as a sort of deadline. If the club's still going down the swanny in a months time, and no white knight on horse on the horizon, then.........................

Once again, I'd like everyone to take a few moments out of their busy schedules, and spare a thought for David Moores. I'd like to take this opportunity, and I like to think I speak on behalf of the majority of our fans, if not all, to get this message across to our once proud leader............................... "You motherf***ingc***ofawhore look at the motherf***ingmess you've left us in you piece of f***inggoodfornothingdogs***, just f***offand go live in a cave you spindlessc***ofaw***spanner"

This content is not viewable to guests.,This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.,This content is not viewable to guests.

Or Kidd Creole and his coconuts

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool....00252-26443226/ Anfield’s grim truth is revealed by Liverpool FC’s latest accounts May 14 2010 Liverpool Echo Comments (20)Recommend (6) 123next Anfield 460 A week ago today, Liverpool’s annual accounts were published, giving rise to outrage and concern from deeply worried supporters. Here the ECHO’S Liverpool writer Dominic King delves further into a document that signals the biggest financial crisis in the Reds history - and highlights some stark truths behind the grim figures... LIVERPOOL’S recently published annual financial report is crammed full of many startling revelations and, on page two of the dossier, there is an especially significant sentence. “There are a number of potential risks and uncertainties, which could have a material impact on the Group’s long term performance,” it reads. “The Group derives the bulk of its income from football activities and related merchandising.” In the most simplistic terms, it means Liverpool being successful on the pitch will see the club’s finances in a better light. Yet, worryingly, the campaign which saw the Reds secure some of their best results and performances under Rafa Benitez led to a record deficit. No wonder, then, alarm bells have started ringing loudly among fans. Despite finishing second in the Premier League, reaching the Champions League’s last eight and bringing in a raft of television money, Kop Football (Holdings) Limited still posted a £52.8m loss. Interest payments have soared to more than £40m from £36.5m and, it reveals, creditors are owed a staggering combined total of £472.5m for the year ending July 31, 2009 - up from £421.6m the previous year. Aside from that the report says “the Club invested a further £22.3m in the planning, design and enabling works of its new stadium in 2008/09. The directors are confident that a new stadium will be funded and completed and are fully committed to the project.” That exposure, in particular, has enraged supporters. Stanley Park looks just as it did before Tom Hicks and George Gillett took ownership of the club yet in the last two financial years £45.5m has been spent on the new ground. Many will wonder where that money has gone, given there has been no sign of that “spade in the ground”; that, according to club sources, it has been spent on myriad aspects such as architects, planning and preparatory fees is unlikely to placate critics. When you then factor in the multi-million pound pay-off former chief executive Rick Parry received, along with termination payments to 20 members of the Academy staff, it is clear to see why the perception is that money is being wasted. It’s true that Liverpool’s commercial department is flourishing and expanding at a rate of knots but, for many, that is no solace; this is the biggest summer the club has faced in its history, both on and off the field - and concerns on the Kop run deep. With more and more clubs struggling financially, it has been wondered if administration will be forced upon Liverpool but – according to James Dow of Daresbury-based Corporate Financial Advisors Dow, Schofield and Watts – that is unlikely to be the case. “It’s fair to say if Liverpool had been a ‘normal’ business, it would not have survived as long as it has done,” said Dow, who specialises in football finance. “The only reason I suspect it has, is that the bank have personal guarantees from Mr Hicks and Mr Gillett. “Usually when you see such figures, you would be expecting the receivers to be called in. The thing that tipped Portsmouth over the edge was the fact that the Inland Revenue demanded the money they were owed and Portsmouth could not pay. “You then look at Leeds, which is a comparable situation. “They tried to sell off their assets to bring their debt down but it did not help. They were what is known as a distressed vendor and that never allows assets to reach their full value. “Would administration ever be something for Liverpool? Probably not. Any business that goes into administration has its reputation tarnished and I don’t think the banks would ever allow that to happen to Liverpool. “But there is no doubt the major shareholders (Hicks and Gillett) will be coming under serious pressure to get themselves sorted out as you can’t keep on running up figures like the ones that have just been published. They are just impractical.” Liverpool’s current debt stands at £237m and unsuccessful attempts have been made by Managing Director Christian Purslow to find an investor to ease the burden – the closest he has come so far was with the New York-based private equity firm, The Rhone Group. James McKenna, spokesman for the Spirit of Shankly fans group which was today meeting Premier League chiefs in London to demand tighter regulations to stop problems like Liverpool’s happening again or elsewhere said: “There has always been a feeling in the past that even when things are bad, we would always get out of it because we are Liverpool,” “We’ve got the history, reputation and you always felt we would win things. “But that isn’t going to be enough now with the pitfalls that lie ahead. “All that history is in jeopardy now because of the debt that has been saddled on the club. I’m very worried about the future. The debt has increased, the levels of interest have increased. “It is hard to see how it is going to get better. Those figures came after a season when we had done really well in the Premier League and been relatively successful in the Champions League, so what does it mean for next year’s figures? “The concern is that we are going to end up in the same situation as Portsmouth or Leeds. The interest payments are quite startling - £110,000 a day is being squandered, which is a massive figure on its own. “But to put it another way, as someone said to me, it is the price of a match ticket (£38) every 30 seconds. It shows the depths to which we have plunged. Some of the revelations in the accounts were really quite staggering.” Until Hicks and Gillett are gone, however, it is doubtful the situation will change; Anfield will continue to be gripped by talk of re-financing deals, investors and levels of debt. But is it really that simple? As Martin Brunskill, spokesman for the Football Supporters Federation, points out, there is no guarantee a sale of the club will lead to nirvana; he also says the fact Liverpool are in such a parlous financial position illustrates that no club is safe in this climate. “Football supporters have woken up to the issues of ownership and debt,” he said. “When the highest profile clubs like Liverpool and Manchester United are involved, it shows that no clubs are averse to such threats. “Before the American owners came in, everybody had a perception that Liverpool was a well run club, with little debt and in a healthy position but it is alarming to see that now the opposite is true. “Owners are coming into football clubs thinking that buying them is a licence to print money but there is no guarantee. It is very worrying for Liverpool fans and for the long-term future of the game.” Peter Furmedge, a qualified accountant who has been closely involved with both Share Liverpool and Spirit of Shankly, added: “Basically the figures we saw were nothing unexpected. “We have been following developments over the last year and while the figures were probably shocking to those who aren’t financially trained, we felt they were inevitable. “The situation that is happening with Liverpool now is exactly what happened when Tom Hicks was involved with Corinthians. It took six years after he had gone for the levels of debt to be unravelled. “The interest Liverpool are paying now is incredible and the £145m that is owed to their Cayman Islands company will end up being doubled to £290m in six years time. “It’s a terrible situation.”

He is literally, balls deep

Yesterday, 09:18 PM 4Q2 Wann Kerr Forumite Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 54 vCash: 500 iTrader: (0) Re: Steven Gerrard doesn't rate Benitez according to Graham Beacroft -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- gerrard - city - £30m £8m per year plus image rights (allegedly)

RAFAEL BENITEZ is set for a further meeting with Liverpool chairman Martin Broughton after a second round of talks failed to resolve the uncertainty surrounding his future. Benitez met with Broughton on Monday to seek reassurances over the direction of the club, which co-owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett are eager to sell. The Anfield manager is keen to be handed significant funds to bolster a squad that could only finish seventh this season, Liverpool's lowest Premier League finish since 1999. However, that is unlikely to happen unless there is a swift sale of the club, and although Broughton was last week confident a change in ownership could be secured in a “matter of months”, that may not be soon enough for the summer transfer window. Broughton described Thursday's initial summit as a “frank exchange of views, constructive and very helpful” before promising neither Fernando Torres nor Steven Gerrard would be sold to service the club's mounting debt. http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/...2534-26426947/

good news indeed

Why Liverpool fans must hold their noses and bite their tongues if they want rid of Hicks and Gillett By David Maddock Published 09:00 11/05/10 (1) Recommend (3) Since Rafael Benitez’s famous outburst – commonly termed ‘Rafa’s Rant’ for ease of reference - Liverpool has been a club inexorably linked with the notion of “facts”. It is ironic then, that no other English football club seems as darkly impenetrable when it comes to discovering the truth over those fundamental issues that affect the heart and soul of the club. In that sense, Liverpool are a very modern club. They are ‘owned’ in the loosest sense by corporate raiders, steeped in the murky spin of leveraged buy-outs, but governed, essentially, by two global banks, with their thoroughly 21st century approach to morals. They are run by financial experts, who can navigate their way around the politics of business and its related balance sheet like Jenson Button does Monza. And they are managed by the most modern of coaches, who is as equally talented in the art of self-preservation as he is in the intricacies of tactics. Perhaps it is no wonder then, that when it really comes to it, with the club apparently in a perpetual state of crisis, we have so much opinion but so few facts about every facet of turbulent life at Anfield. It is an entertaining show, which offers scope for the media to fill the gaps with information and speculation in equal measure, as the major players woo their supporters and fight their enemies with a passion that would be admirable, were it directed towards the day job of making Liverpool Football Club great again. Ultimately though, most of it is a sideshow, particularly the increasingly hysterical politics that surround the tenure of the manager and the senior players he has (or hasn’t, depending on who you believe) fallen out with. Of course, whether Benitez remains in charge at Anfield is important. Whether Fernando Torres and Steven Gerrard stay at Anfield is of huge interest to the fans, and probably to the short-term business aims of the club. But it is still a sideshow, because the fundamental issue facing every person who holds this special, and sometimes special needs, football club to their heart is its financial future. For several years now, a relatively small section of fans has worked that one out. Most don’t really give a monkey’s who owns Liverpool and how much debt they have, so long as they have stars like Torres and Gerrard taking them towards trophies. But some have realised that the way Liverpool is owned stinks. They realise that the manner in which Tom Hicks and George Gillett bought the club is a major barrier – indeed almost impossible obstacle - to long-term health at Anfield, never mind success. I’m going to have to talk money here for a minute, but try to stick with it, even if that prospect makes your eyes glaze over. Because the accounts displayed by Companies House last week relating to Liverpool Football Club and its connected companies make important reading. It was claimed in some circles that that the Americans would not use Liverpool’s money to buy the club, that they would not place one penny of debt upon the club. But the takeover debt has grown from around £80m when they took over three and a half years ago, to a basic level now of £238million. It gets worse. Much worse. The accounts seem to show that the money Hicks and Gillett were forced to put in to reduce debt – or more accurately to stop it escalating even further – came actually in the form of a loan from their offshore company in the Cayman Islands… a tax haven, of course. And, as with all loans or mortgages, Liverpool are paying the interest on that too. Currently, the debt to Kop Cayman stands at £145million and counting, because it had almost doubled in 12 months. Which means, if looked at coldly, debts on the club in the form of net borrowings (and there is a distinction here between gross and net) now effectively stand at more than £350million. Liverpool are paying the interest on that total amount. In fact, interest payment for the years 2007-2009 now stand at £78million. No doubt that figure will be much higher at the end of the current financial year, which runs until June. The accounts show that Liverpool have – in theory – a negative net worth of £128million, and are only operating as a going concern because of the support of the banks. What does that mean to you, as a fan? It means that your football club isn’t really owned by the Americans at all. It is actually owned by a bank – the RBS. The Yanks have the title deeds, and when the club is sold, if there is any money left after settling the debts, they will get a nice big cheque, because that is the nature of a leveraged buy-out, but in a moral sense, the bank is the owner. It means that last year, before any money could go on signing players or increasing wages to top players, more than £40million was spent on interest payments. It means that between £3million-£4.3million was spent on paying off a chief executive. It means another £3million was spent on getting rid of staff the manager didn’t want. It means that Liverpool can’t build a stadium because they have too much debt piled on the club to raise any more funds to start the dig (even though upwards of £43million seems to have been spent on stadium development costs in the past two years). It means that Liverpool are crippled under the current ownership. If you didn’t quite realise that before, then you know now. Incontrovertibly. I’ll run those figures by you one more time - £95million losses in two years, £78million interest payments in two years, and a negative net worth of £128million (which presumably means they’d have to pay me to take it off their hands!). Hicks and Gillett won’t put any more money in. So debts will continue to rise until they go. If they are here for another five years under those conditions, debts could conceivably be around the £700million mark, if not considerably beyond. The irony of it all, is that it remains a good business. The financial team of Ian Ayre and Philip Nash and more latterly Christian Purslow have quietly repositioned Liverpool as equal to Manchester United in terms of sponsorship levels and global brand, and they are now in the top four or five clubs in the world, in the sense of commercial potential, if not performance. But no amount of record-breaking sponsorship deals can make up for interest payments that will go beyond £50million a year, and debts that will inevitably go beyond the £500million mark, given there is not sufficient stadium revenue to make up the deficit. If all that is alarmist, then of course there is a solution. The answer is to get new owners. Even the Americans have conceded that must happen, and the question now simply is, how much profit do they want before they go? If they don’t want any at all, then a deal could probably be done next week. But this is the real world, the ruthless modern world, and that will not happen. No amount of protests and ridicule will turn them away from the pursuit of profit. In their world, remember, greed is good. It’s like that programme with the wide-boy from Stoke and the chunky blond bird that students watch, where people buy a house cheaply at auction, tart it up a bit with a pair of dodgy curtains and cash in and make a tidy profit when the market allows. Only on a bigger scale. Liverpool are Homes Under the Hammer. With very dodgy curtains. There was a time when Liverpool could have handled interest payments and debts, and still made enough profits to buy players and pay top wages and compete at the top, just as Manchester United are doing despite their staggering level of debt. But the accounts show that is not the case any more. So what can fans do, and what can the club itself do, those competent people like Ayre and Nash who will be left when the Yanks and the bankers clear off? The only solution is to make Liverpool as attractive as possible to prospective new owners, and ensure at the same time they are fit and proper people to own the club. This is the hard part, because what I am about to say will come as anathema to the fans who quite rightly feel betrayed by Liverpool Football Club, feel betrayed by the people they entrusted to run their club – and it is THEIR club in the end. The effect of all the financial dealings of recent months is that Hicks and Gillett have effectively handed over running of the club to the RBS, or strictly more accurately to the RBS and Barclays Capital. It is a complicated deal, but essentially, the Americans discovered that no-one wanted to buy the club from them and now realise they must shut up and go away and let Broughton and Barclays get on with selling a world-class brand… and wait for the cheque they want at the end of it. If you don’t want them to profit, then the only solution is to agitate and destabilise to ensure a buyer can’t be found, and eventually the banks will pull the plug, the Yanks will go bankrupt and there will be a fire sale. But that could take years and years, and there could be little left of Liverpool as we know it at the end. So even though it stinks, the only realistic option is to find a buyer willing to pay a decent sum for Liverpool. And that means doing everything possible to present an image of a club WORTH buying. That sticks in the throat, because it means the Americans will trip off after four years or so with a big fat cheque, after bringing Anfield to its knees. But that is the way it is, it is the way it has always been – the speculators make the money off the rest of us. The fact is, not one true fan wants Liverpool Football Club to go under, to go out of business, to cease to exist. So clenching the teeth and presenting a united front to find new owners who can take the club forward is the only way. It is the only way for the financial men, who must set aside the daily politics of their spin to present only an image of a stable institution that actually has impressive figures in terms of global brand. It is the only way for the supporters of the manager who seem to think that destroying the image and reputation of the club is the best way to ensure he stays. The hysterical in-fighting of recent weeks has served only to suggest Liverpool is a basket case that shouldn’t be touched with a bargepole, and even those with a pathological need for power and control must realise it has to stop. It is the only way for the fans who have been strong enough to fight the Americans from the start, and expose their greed. It is the only way because they love the club and at heart want it to thrive, no matter what has happened. When it is done, the fans of the club – all of them, not just small, isolated, easily manipulated groups - must stand up and ensure that this situation never happens again. They must ensure that owners, directors, executives, managers and staff are all working for the long-term success of the club, and not the short term gain of themselves. It is a utopian vision, but somehow, they have to ensure those people know who really owns this club. http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/opinion/columnists/david-maddock/David-Maddock-column-Liverpool-fans-must-bite-their-tongues-if-they-want-rid-of-Tom-Hicks-and-George-Gillett-from-crisis-torn-Anfield-article422817.html

Nicked from RAWK- Re: H&G: We have now decided together to look to sell the Club « Reply #2238 on: Today at 09:07:20 AM »Quote Throwing this in there, just store it away and who knows, I posted it yesterday on reina thread: 'LFC sale could go through before the World Cup. Syrian businessman Yahia Kirdi is a front for Prince Faisal of Saudi Arabia ($19 Billion personal fortune) source: friend of friend with Middle East connections.'

Premier League - Tycoon awaiting Reds delegation A spokesman for Chinese businessman Zhu Jun has given an enigmatic response when asked about reports about the internet tycoon's involvement in talks over the purchase of Liverpool. Zhu, who owns Chinese Super League club Shanghai Shenhua, has held preliminary talks about buying the 18-times champions in Hong Kong and Shanghai, according to a report in the Independent. "I cannot tell you any information at this moment," his assistant Zhou Liang told Reuters. "(The report) was information from the English side. Information moves very fast but there are some entities that need vehicles to travel. It is a long way between England and China. It takes time to travel. "These entities need to go either by air or by sea. They are on their way. As soon as they arrive in China, we will let you know." Liverpool's American owners George Gillett and Tom Hicks have brought in a new chairman, Martin Broughton, to oversee the sale of the club they have owned since February 2007. If he did buy the club, Zhu would become the first Liverpool owner to have played against the team, having appeared for five minutes under a pseudonym when Shanghai played them in pre-season tournament in the Netherlands in 2007. The 44-year-old made his fortune from The9, a Nasdaq-quoted internet company that prospered on the back of holding the China licence for the hugely popular World of Warcraft fantasy game. He bought Shanghai United in 2006 before taking over as the majority shareholder in their more successful city rivals Shenhua a year later and controversially uniting them in one club. Zhu is the second Chinese to be linked with Liverpool after Kenny Huang, a Guandong-born American citizen who has interests in Chinese baseball and basketball. Huang issued a statement last month denying comments attributed to him in the British media about the future of Liverpool manager Rafa Benitez but declining comment on his interest in purchasing the five-times European champions. Huang, who was also involved in a bid to purchase a minority share in Cleveland Cavaliers basketball team, runs his Chinese sporting interests through a private company, QSL Sports Limited. Last week, Huang took 100 per cent control of QSL after the departure of his partner Adrian Cheng, a Hong Kong retail tycoon thought to be the money behind the venture. Hong Kong billionaire Carson Yeung became the first Chinese owner of a Premier League club when he bought Birmingham City through his Grandtop International Holdings investment vehicle last year." Source : http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/110520...elegation.html

You're persistant mate. I've voted over "here", but won't over in TLW. And, he should be given one more season. Bigger problems we have than him, tbh.