Bogman

Did someone say something?

You missed out, "another".

ttp://www.anfieldroad.com/news/201005063612/lfc-chairman-must-deal-with-damage.html/ By Tom Wilson and Jim Boardman On Saturday a senior Liverpool official made it perfectly clear that there was absolutely nothing to read from the fact that Reds boss Rafa Benítez was yet to meet new chairman Martin Broughton. He claimed it was all part of some plot to paint a false picture of disharmony at Anfield. He got on great with Rafa and Rafa was happy. Even now it’s difficult to work out how he thought anyone would fall for that. Or why he seems to tell different stories to different people. People compare notes, compare what he’s told them, then shake their heads. On Saturday the senior official said that there had been one meeting planned. It would have been ahead of the first-leg of the Europa League semi against Atlético Madrid, but volcanic ash put paid to that idea. When the call came out for the squad to meet up at Runcorn station, the meeting was unsurprisingly called off. Obviously the new chairman is quite different to the last man to have the job all to himself. David Moores used to travel on the team bus with the squad; Martin Broughton doesn’t come across as someone who would feel comfortable slumming it across Europe in first class with the players. According to the senior Liverpool on Saturday, no other meeting had been scheduled so far. The first opportunity following the journey to Madrid would probably have been tied in with the return leg a week later, but with Rafa unavailable until after midnight it was decided, the senior official said, that there was no time for the chairman to meet the manager. Presumably the chairman – who of course has other responsibilities away from Liverpool FC – was unable to pop round to Melwood the following morning. That following morning, the Friday, had been the day before the senior official was explaining why there hadn’t yet been a meeting. And at almost the exact time as the senior Liverpool official was explaining why there hadn’t been a meeting so far, the club’s official site was making it clear that the next opportunity for a meeting was also going to be missed. Liverpool’s last home game of the season was the following day, the Sunday, against the team Martin Broughton has supported all his life, Chelsea. Broughton had presumably set off home early on Friday morning after watching the Atlético game, and he told the official site he wouldn’t be coming back up for that Chelsea match. He wasn’t even going to be in the city for the game, he didn’t want to be seen to celebrate any Chelsea goals. “The only sensible thing is for me to stay at home and watch it on the television,” he said. So he wasn’t exactly making himself available for a meeting with Rafa, which in itself isn’t really a major issue. He’d cleared off before Rafa was available on the Thursday night, he didn’t stick around on Friday to meet then and he didn’t come back up on Saturday in preparation for the Sunday match, so no chance of squeezing a meeting in there. Rafa did want to talk to him, but there clearly hadn’t been time. It was frustrating but understandable. Surely a meeting would be held before the week was out, with no game for Liverpool Rafa would have more room in his own diary to match up with Broughton’s no-doubt hectic schedule. But then came the story on the BBC website, and other BBC outlets, soon to spread like wildfire around the rest of the media. “Liverpool boss Rafael Benitez has cancelled two scheduled face-to-face meetings with the club’s new chairman, Martin Broughton,” wrote David Bond, the BBC’s replacement for Mihir Bose as Sports Editor. Bond had the same title at the Telegraph before joining the BBC, but will be best remembered by Liverpool fans from his time as the paper’s Chief Sports Reporter. From knowing full details of Gillett and Hick’s refinancing deal with RBS before it was announced, to publishing emails DIC and Amanda Staveley had been sent by Hicks, Bond was clearly getting information from people inside and outside the club during that very turbulent period. So who would be talking to him now? Whoever it was wanted to add more weight to the campaign to see Rafa hounded out of the club. “It is understood that he [benítez] pulled out of talks with Broughton last week and another the week before,” wrote Bond. As has just been explained, Rafa did not cancel any meetings with Broughton, and whatever any fan thinks of Benítez, or where his future should be, the fact that someone from Liverpool is trying to smear the manager should set alarm bells ringing loud and clear. This is about far more than Rafael Benítez. This is just the latest in a long line of examples of the press being briefed about Rafa in a way that certainly wasn’t designed to be supportive of the manager. What other lies are being peddled? Even Bond seemed to be unsure of exactly what the story was, writing: “It is not clear why Benitez cancelled the meetings with Broughton, although the last two weeks have been affected by preparations for Liverpool’s Europa League semi-final meetings with Atletico Madrid. The first week in particular was heavily disrupted as Benitez’s team were forced to make the long journey to the Spanish capital by road and rail after flights were grounded by ash from the Icelandic volcano.” Benítez didn’t cancel the meetings, but if he had it was probably slightly more important he got on that train at Runcorn than staying back to meet Broughton. Even Rafa can’t be blamed for the volcanic ash. So why would someone at Anfield feed the BBC this “story”? There aren’t too many candidates for the source of this latest leak. Bond said it came from a Liverpool board member: “There is some surprise inside the Anfield boardroom at the timing of Benitez’s call on Tuesday for an urgent meeting with Broughton to discuss the future.” Bond was one of the first reporters to interview Martin Broughton after his appointment, so perhaps he is a candidate for this story being fed to the press. But Broughton wasn’t at the club when the earliest briefings against Rafa began, to other members of the press. Of course it’s always possible that somebody else told Broughton that Rafa had cancelled the meetings. Someone wary of Rafa actually getting to meet the chairman, and telling the chairman exactly what has been going on. One subtle hint that somebody was talking out of turn came in one of the infamous Henry Winter columns. In November he wrote: “The impressive managing director, Christian Purslow, is not the type for knee-jerk reactions. But it is known around Anfield that Purslow has talked to Benítez about his style of management, notably his cold detachment from the players.” So back in November someone from the club was telling Henry Winter that Benítez had been given a dressing-down by Purslow, that Benítez was being told how to manage his players, essentially being told how to do his job. And it’s as obvious as it looks exactly who it was that impressed this information on Winter. That wasn’t all that Winter learned from his new source: “Liverpool can afford to sack Benítez,” wrote Winter. “Compensation would be less than £5 million under the ‘mitigating the loss’ principle if he found employment.” Which perhaps should now have Winter scratching his head as to why impressive people would be on the phone to him angrily criticising the manager instead of just sacking him. And it’s not as if Winter wasn’t afforded the opportunity to ask that question. No prizes for guessing which senior Liverpool official spent a good part of the bank holiday weekend frantically phoning around trying to get his side, or one of his sides, of the story over. It was almost as if he was frightened that the truth might come out. And Winter had a chance to challenge this particular Liverpool board member on where his stories didn’t really add up. But some reporters would rather just take the information they’re fed and repeat it, hoping there’s plenty more where that came from, than question what they are being told. Having managed to get so many column inches out of the politicking of a certain LFC board member, Winter completely missed the irony of his opening paragraph: “If Rafael Benítez truly respects Liverpool Football Club he’ll leave Anfield today. The players have lost the faith, the boardroom is unimpressed with the politicking and the supporters are suffering, albeit in silence.” When the truth does come out about a certain LFC board member and his efforts to keep the truth from the supporters, perhaps that silence will be broken. And maybe that silence needs to be broken. Maybe the efforts to keep the attention on Benítez to take it away from the failings of the Managing Director and the owners he worked for need to be emphasised a little more. And that might just be a bit messy – but what’s new? That’s how it’s been at Anfield for some time. “If he stays, the inevitable long goodbye becomes indescribably messy, distressing for all concerned and demeaning to a club of Liverpool’s great history. This is not a warning for Benítez, this is a fact,” wrote Winter. The same fact applies, but much more strongly, to the club’s temporary MD. Bill Shankly was the man who made Liverpool great, the man who brought so much of that “great history” to the club. Nobody knows what he would have made of Benitez; chances are he would have seen good and bad in him and he could well have been saying Rafa’s time was up by now. But it doesn’t take a lot of imagination to work out what he would have thought of the club’s owners. And it takes even less imagination to work out what he would have thought of Christian Purslow. And less still what he would have thought of the tactics employed by the club’s current custodian to force Rafa out. Shanks would also have torn a strip off Henry Winter had he ever been unfortunate enough to cross his path. Winter wrote of Rafa: “He’s got a centre-back at left-back and a holding midfielder at right-back.” With the only two left-backs at the club injured, what else was Rafa meant to do? One thing Rafa tried was putting the right-back at left-back, which was why the holding midfielder played at right-back on the Thursday. By the Sunday the right-back was injured too, which is why the centre-back went to left-back, and the holding midfielder stayed at right-back. This isn’t a string of excuses; it’s just some simple facts. Liverpool have to make do and mend. Christian Purlsow’s arrival coincided with spending on transfers that, going off the fees available in public, went from being “net spend” to “net profit”. Liverpool brought more in than went out last year. That’s the calendar year 2009. When Winter used the phrase “How embarrassing,” in his article it surely should have been to describe his own willingness to stick up so transparently for his source in the Liverpool boardroom. And really his article didn’t deserve much more time than that, as went into some kind of rant out of sympathy to his new friend on the board at Anfield. That new friend should have the balls to stand up in public and say what he’s saying privately to the press, if he truly believes it and feels it would stand up to scrutiny. But he knows that, despite claims to the contrary, most Liverpool fans either want Benítez to stay or only want him to leave because they feel he’s been worn down by the unnecessary pressures of the past few years. The vast majority of fans will always consider Benítez a hero, whatever happens. And that is what frightens the board member. He knows that sooner or later the manager will blow him up for what he’s done. He knows that more and more people are starting to see through him. And he knows that if he sacks the manager he’ll never be forgiven. Liverpool’s new chairman was appointed in a non-executive role. The senior Liverpool official constantly points out that the new chairman was appointed in that way, and that he has no control over the actual running of the club, that he’s merely there to sell the club. But the senior Liverpool official fails to mention something very important about the role of a non-executive director. According to the government-commissioned Higgs report, non-executive directors “are responsible for… where necessary removing, senior management.” Surely a senior Liverpool official briefing the press against the club’s manager, over such a sustained period, is grounds for his removal. His decision to bad-mouth the club’s owners, however accurate it might be, is hardly the best way to attract £100m of investment. And that was his major objective when appointed. Perhaps he wanted to delay the partial sale to prolong his own career as Mr Liverpool, to help build up that empire. Is this not also grounds for removal? To discuss transfer targets – even if they are his own, not the manager’s – with the press is also grounds for removal. The list goes on. And that, Martin Broughton, is where you come in. You need to get to the bottom of this mess and you need to get to the bottom of it fast. It’s not just your reputation that depends on it.

no, no and thrice no. squad overhaul? what message would that tell the world, getting rid of two of the best players in their position in the world and replace them with whom? yeah, clear and precise message that spells out.

Finance expert predicts bleak Liverpool future By Harry Harris, Football Correspondent Liverpool's asking price for a takeover may be as much as an inflated £800 million, according to analysis from a leading City expert in football finance. The replacement or refurbishment of Anfield is a key issue in any takeover. And David Bick, Chairman of Square 1 Consulting, argues that Liverpool are in urgent need of a "rescue" package rather than a takeover, as the club need to move from their crumbling Anfield to a new stadium, and are in danger of losing star players such as Fernando Torres and Steven Gerrard. Bick is an advisor to Keith Harris, who has been behind two abortive takeover bids for the stricken club in the recent past, and says City sources have informed him that even the reduced price the two American owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett might accept, £500 million, is far too high, saying: "Rumours abound of a price being asked from £500 million up to an incredible £800 million." While Harris is a leading light in the 'Red Knights' group heavily linked with trying to buy out the Glazers at Manchester United, Bick has focused on their North-West rivals and warns of an impending £10 million fee to be imposed by the Royal Bank of Scotland to extend bank-loan facilities for a further six months. And Bick suggests that, while the club is due to publish and publicise a £35 million profit, there are huge similarities with the recent Manchester United bond issue launched after a similar posting of a putative financial gain. As part of their bond prospectus, United were able to claim a £48.2 million profit, having sold Cristiano Ronaldo for £80 million while Liverpool sold Xabi Alonso for £35 million to Real Madrid last summer - almost the exact amount Bick believes will be trumpeted as this year's profit. In a damning indictment of financial affairs and long-standing neglect at Liverpool, Bick writes in an open letter: "Liverpool has potentially reached its most important historic point. The club has now gone 20 years without winning the English League title. It has never won the Premier League. It was drummed out earlier than expected from this year's Champions League and now, as one of the world's biggest clubs, faces the ignominy and reality of failing to qualify for next season's premier European competition. "To my mind, the people running the club over the last two decades must bear the bulk of the responsibility and the brunt of the criticism. On a recent visit to Anfield to watch my team, West Ham, play like a pub team with a Force 10 hangover, one had only to look at the stadium to see the years of dreadful neglect at first hand. Unbelievably, there are still pillars holding up one roof! "Whether it comes down to incompetence or thoughtless arrogance at Liverpool, we have seen the club left behind by the other great clubs like Arsenal, Manchester United, Manchester City, Chelsea and Spurs. They have rebuilt their stadia to high standards and, largely speaking, to capacities that accommodate their substantial fan bases. Yet all Liverpool fans have heard is talk and a string of broken promises. "The other clubs have built their revenue streams or attracted owners that have given them the wherewithal to compete effectively at the top of the modern game. It seems to me that the Liverpool fans are being treated to a 'product' that is rooted in the 1970s. Sadly, in very recent times, Liverpool has also been owned by people who have said much and delivered little of the stated vision. Replacing them is a very urgent imperative. "Liverpool claimed in a recent statement that it has 'overseen a significant improvement in the financial performance of the club since 2007'. Well, that's difficult to assess. The management has not published accounts for Kop Football (Holdings) Limited - the main trading company - since the filing for the year to 31 July 2008 and, in that year, the business showed net losses of over £42 million and net interest payments on debt of £35 million not covered at all (let alone adequately) by operating profit - pre-player amortisation and trading - of £25 million. "Debt remains stubbornly near a reported £240 million, so what profits are produced do not leave much, if anything, for the manager to work with, even if we believe rumours of a £35 million profit for the year that will end this 31 July. In short, Liverpool's financial structure can't work in my opinion and, since the sale of the club in 2007, it was never going to. "If the manager cannot operate competitively in the transfer market, he has no chance of competing regularly in the top four. We have now seen the first concrete sign of this with the failure to even stay in the top four. Manchester United, a club manfully trying to cope with a similarly onerous financial structure will also, I believe, start to experience similar problems, although their state of decline is nowhere near as advanced as Liverpool's. "It seems axiomatic to me that Liverpool needs new, responsible owners and new top-flight, football-experienced executive management. It will not be beyond the wit of man, the new well regarded chairman included, to find such a new owner. But first of all, Liverpool needs to stop spinning silly numbers. Rumours abound of a price being asked from £500 million up to an incredible £800 million, the lower of which is, in my view, way over the top for a club in its current condition and by any sensible comparison with Arsenal or Manchester United. Bick pinpoints the burning issue of a new stadium, a project that has stalled during over three years of American ownership, and says that this can only make any takeover more complicated. "Financially at least, Liverpool must have a new stadium if it is to have any hope of restoring past glories," he writes. "But the finance for that, and any subsequent financial benefit to owners, must accrue to those who put up the money. In any case, this will not be a conventional acquisition of a football asset - it is more likely now to be a rescue. "The new owners will need to be people of high calibre. They will need to have access to very large sums of money to build the new stadium, revitalise the management and allow for a well thought-through strengthening of the playing squad." On the current and much-debated issue of Rafael Benitez's future as Liverpool manager, Bick expresses the pressing need for stability to be restored or else the club could face a doomsday scenario. "Right now, Liverpool is at risk of losing its manager and some of its best players, demoralised by a recent Europa Cup semi-final defeat and a poor season. While no-one is irreplaceable, such an exodus will leave a new owner with an even more difficult task. Therefore, the new chairman of Liverpool needs to act with some swiftness. "Once decline becomes precipitous, even money may not prevent the decline spiralling into permanency." Bick's open letter, headed 'Rescuing Liverpool', seen by Soccernet, may well cause shock waves among the Premier League community and not just at Anfield. http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=781604&sec=england&cc=5901

EXCLUSIVE: Rafael Benitez Wants To Stay At Liverpool But Seeks Transfer Pledge - Agent Rafael Benitez wants to continue as Liverpool's manager - but only if he is given some guarantees over how much he can spend on new players this summer, his agent confirmed today. Manuel Garcia Quilon, Benitez's agent, confirmed that the Spaniard will sit down with the Reds' new chairman Martin Broughton this week to discuss his future at Anfield. And the promise of financial investment will be pivotal to whether or not he stays. “He [benitez] has a meeting with the chairman this week, and from what I can say Rafael Benitez wants to continue at Liverpool,” Quilon told Goal.com UK. “Benitez needs to know what the plans are for the future. For the investment into players at the club. That is going to be important.” Benitez has been strongly linked with a summer switch to Juventus in recent months, with some outlets even going so far as to claim that last week Quilon had travelled to meet with the Italian club's new chairman, Andrea Agnelli, and agree a four-year deal worth £16 million a year. But the agent denies such reports, and insists that his client's future remains at Anfield. “I have not made any agreement with Juventus," Quilon stated. “He has four years left of his contract [with Liverpool]. If there is going to be any change then that is something you had better ask him directly.” With Liverpool currently put up for sale by their unpopular American owners, it seems the outcome of the meeting between Benitez and Broughton — who has been brought in specifically to find a buyer — will prove very influential in deciding whether the manager stays or goes. "It [the meeting] is to talk about the future," Benitez told reporters this week. "Everyone is asking about my future but the future of the club is more important. Still I do not know what is going on in the club. I don't know if we will have any investors so there are a lot of questions - not just, for me, one question. "For me the club has to answer a lot of questions. "It is very clear: we have to wait and see what is going on. The future is maybe tomorrow or maybe one week; at this moment it is something we don't know." The meeting comes amid uncertainty surrounding the futures of some of Liverpool's most valuable players, including star striker Fernando Torres and captain Steven Gerrard. Torres is wanted by Manchester City, who would be prepared to offer Liverpool up to £70 million for the 26-year-old forward. Should he finally decide to quit Liverpool, Gerrard will attract interest from some of Europe's top clubs including Inter Milan and Real Madrid, whilst Javier Mascherano has long been coveted by Barcelona. Should Liverpool allow any of these players to go, Benitez will seek a guarantee that he can invest all the proceeds on rebuilding his squad http://www.goal.com/en/news/9/england/2010/05/04/1907911/exclusive-rafael-benitez-wants-to-stay-at-liverpool-but

well f*** me sideways with the rough end of a pineapple

1. Ken Dodd. 2. Cilla Black. 3. Bob Carolgees. 4. Michael Shields. 5. Jimmy Corkhill. 6. Derek Hatton. 7. Holly Johnson. 8. Sinbad. 9.Mimi Maguire. 10. Spit the dog. 11. Lucas.

I like Rafa alot, but I'm tired of all this speculation, alot brought on by himself, I might add, but my biggest concern at this moment, after the ownership fiasco, is that I'm worried that Rafa will go, and as is our want, we WILL f*** up his replacement, and it won't be a Van Gaal, or a Maureen, but an O'Neil, and that really really really puts the fear of God up me.

Rafa committed to Reds Reds boss planning for long-term Rafa committed to Reds Benitez: Annoyed with rumours Liverpool boss Rafa Benitez insists he is committed to the club and is frustrated at rumours over his future. Benitez's position at Anfield has been the subject of intense speculation in recent weeks with Italian giants Juventus strongly linked with a move for his services. The Spaniard, who is preparing for Thursday's Europa clash with Atletico Madrid, is annoyed with the constant speculation over his Liverpool future and claims the signing of Charlton youngster Jonjo Shelvey proves his long-term planning for the club. "I don't like [the rumours]," said Benitez. "I would like to see news in the press about trophies, or goals or fantastic performances about players but you cannot control everything. "My future is Atletico Madrid. We have to concentrate on this game and try to win because it is the best for the club." Signings Benitez is happy with the signing of Shelvey and admits he has other young British talent lined up to bring in at Anfield. "But we have been working for years; I was trying to sign Gareth Barry before and Glen Johnson was the same idea - we were trying to bring in British players with passion," added Benitez. "Players who could feel what Liverpool means for them. Shelvey is one of these and we have two or three names ready so we will try to do the best for the club. "We have this long-term plan in place and we will try to follow the plan." http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11661_6121363,00.html There you have it folks, Rafa's future is Atletico Madrid.

With Phat Sam as his understudy.

Exactly what I did. Had to read it twice before it read right.

Well, at least a clean one

Sodding chinese whispers http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/clarification-statement-from-kenneth-huang-regarding-liverpool-football-club-92100174.html Clarification Statement From Kenneth Huang Regarding Liverpool Football Club BEIJING, April 26 /PRNewswire-Asia/ -- With reference to the article published on the Sunday Mirror dated April 24, 2010 quoting Mr. Kenneth Huang regarding his investment interest in Liverpool Football Club ("Liverpool FC"), Mr. Huang would like to clarify that he did not speak with the newspaper nor the reporter and did not make the statements attributed to him. Mr. Huang would not make any comment in relation to the Liverpool FC. SOURCE QSL Sports Limited

bwahahahahahaha http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2559/rumours/2010/04/25/1894178/arsenal-plan-raid-for-liverpool-goalkeeper-pepe-reina-report Arsenal are reportedly aiming to take advantage of Liverpool's financial woes over the summer by luring their Spanish goalkeeper Pepe Reina to the Emirates. According to a report in the Sunday Express, the much-lauded shot-stopper is viewed as an ideal replacement for Manual Almunia and Lukasz Fabianski, after both have failed to impress this season. Reina has established himself as one of the top keepers in the Premier League since joining Liverpool in 2005, and Reds' chief Rafael Benitez would be fuming if he was forced to offload one of his major assets. The 27-year-old 'keeper recently penned a long-term deal at Anfield, but the prospect of missing out on Champions League football next season will truly test his commitment. Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger has been linked with a number of glovemen this summer and Bayer Leverkusen's Rene Adler and Lyon’s Hugo Lloris may prove likelier options.

Today, 01:25 PM #472 PrimeTime TIA Youth Team Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Lincolnshire / Liverpool (weekends), London (week) Posts: 225 Re: Liverpool Football Club officially FOR SALE - Broughton appointed -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm in between meetings so I can't elaborate too much right now but I'm to one bidder is 9/10ths of the way through due diligence and is close to a full bid, which WILL go publc... It's one of our friends from the UAE! Sorry, I don't know who yet.

showmethemoney TIA Legend Join Date: May 2007 Location: South West London Posts: 6,058 Re: Liverpool Football Club officially FOR SALE - Broughton appointed -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm meeting someone from Merrill this afternoon & apparently she says there is 'significant movement' with regards to the sale of the club.

Haven't got an opinion either way to be honest, but I get the impression Maureen would jump at the chance of managing us. Think of his ego, raising our liver bird once more out of the fire, would sit well in him, whereas I don't think he'd get the same vibe from the scum. As I've read somewhere before, it wouldn't be under the current regime mind. But then, would I want Rafa to go? That's another discussion for another day, we need to be sold now, another stagnant season like this one, and we'll be in free-fall. God forbid.

Exacta-mondo. Sky media driven drivel. If he were to leave, it would be back to Spain, but that won't happen yet. If we stagnate next season, no signings, no change of ownership, no nothing, then I reckon he'll do one, and I wouldn't blame him, but not this up coming season, no.

Boom (and indeed a) tish.

http://www.sonypictures.com/movies/openseason/site/deeplinks_js/deeplink_image.jpg

Tom Hicks worried lenders won't give approval to sale of Rangers 09:18 PM CDT on Wednesday, April 21, 2010 By EVAN GRANT / The Dallas Morning News egrant@dallasnews.com BOSTON – A showdown looms between Major League Baseball and the lenders holding $525 million in IOUs from Hicks Sports Group. Control of the Rangers is at stake. During an on-field visit at Fenway Park, Rangers outgoing owner Tom Hicks expressed doubt that the sale of the club to the Chuck Greenberg-Nolan Ryan-led Ryan Baseball Express would meet approval from the 40 lenders holding the notes on the defaulted loans. Hicks said he was "concerned" about closing the deal and if lenders would approve the Greenberg-Ryan bid as currently structured. "I think the lenders feel that [the Greenberg-Ryan] group may not be the highest option," Hicks said. "It's something that has to be worked out between MLB, the lenders and the Greenberg group. When we agreed to this sale in January, we said it was a complicated deal, and it's only getting more complicated. At the end of the day, the lenders have the final say." Neither Greenberg nor Ryan commented on Wednesday's developments. MLB has publicly endorsed the Greenberg-Ryan deal – though it would still have to meet approval of two-thirds of the owners once the financial portion of it is closed. MLB released a statement on the matter: "As part of the Texas Rangers sale process, Tom Hicks selected the Chuck Greenberg/Nolan Ryan group as the chosen bidder on December 15, 2009 and entered into an exclusive agreement with that group. Major League Baseball is currently in control of the sale process and will use all efforts to achieve a closing with the chosen bidder. Any deviation from or interference with the agreed upon sale process by Mr. Hicks or any other party, or any actions in violation of MLB rules or directives will be dealt with appropriately by the Commissioner." Commissioner Bud Selig had asked the lenders to decide one way or another on the deal by April 9, but that deadline has come and gone. Selig indicated to The Dallas Morning News in March that he has the ability to take control of the franchise in an effort to expedite its sale. Since the deadline has passed, a stare-down between MLB and the creditors has ensued. The Rangers were recently valued at $451 million by Forbes magazine, which annually tries to estimate club valuations. Reports on the Ryan Baseball Express sale price have varied from $530 million to $570 million. But the implication is that a higher deal was bypassed for the Greenberg-Ryan deal. Houston businessman Jim Crane reportedly offered somewhere in the vicinity of $575 million before Hicks chose Ryan-Greenberg. Various reports have indicated that a gap of approximately $30 million exists in the amount of money lenders would receive out of the current deal. What's difficult to grasp is how much the lenders are actually due. While the defaulted loan is for $525 million, that covers both the Rangers and the NHL's Dallas Stars, one of the other two sports franchises Hicks has put up for sale. The combo loan to the umbrella holding company of the two franchises is one aspect that makes the deal so complicated. Hicks said however the deal is resolved, Ryan would remain in place. He said even if the team is forced into bankruptcy, a scenario which is emerging as a legitimate but distant option, club operations would not be impacted. The Rangers, however, have been operating under very strict budget guidelines since MLB loaned the team money last season. Hicks, however, dismissed the idea that funds he would receive from the sale of the club – for parcels of land – were a complication. He said bankers recognized that transaction was separate from the actual price of the club. http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...e.39a3941.html

Um.................................

http://twitter.com/JamesHorncastle