Jump to content
IGNORED

Hicks Looking To Keep Control Of The Shites

Guest Reg Reagan

By Guest Reg Reagan
in General Football and Sport Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Bailey Grand Master

Bailey

Posted
Posted

they havent put "loads of money" into Liverpool at all.

 

The season they took over they borrowed money to buy the club and then borrowed a further £60m for cash flow. Both these loans were secured against the club, and it's the second loan that provided the transfer money the season we signed Torres, Babel, and Mascherano. Every season since then we've made a net profit on transfers. They haven't put a single cent of their own money into the club for players. The only money they are personally liable for is the £140 of equity RBS insisted they provide as part of a previous refinace deal. This money is also borrowed, albeit against personal guarantees. This was then loaned to Kop Holdings through a second holding company, Kop Caymen. The club, whilst they own it, carry the burden of repaying this loan also.

 

But they will stand to lose out regardless... While they might not have to repay as much as I thought they might it will still effect them and their current business ventures plus any future investments. Im not sure any bank will be willing to give them a loan after all this. As far as I am concerned they still stand to lose a lot, even if it is not directly lost with regards to the club. However my point still remains that they financed deals for the likes of Torres & Mascherano and kept Gerrard. They didnt have to and they took the gamble that getting these world class players in would provide benefits on the pitch, which it didnt. The owners deserve some stick, but the managers and players deserve a lot more.

 

The reason for that is they value it at $750m (£470m) and the bids being talked about are less than £300m. The way they see it is they are being done out of £150m+

 

I understand this but the fact is that the company are going to go under and most businessmen would be looking to cut their losses and move on whereas these guys seem to be more inclined to let it go into administration and potentially lose more.

 

I dont like this to happen to any club and its a shame it is overshadowing what could be a vital win for either side in the derby on Sunday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 183
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

johny Newbie

johny

Posted
Posted

"They" didn't finance the deals for Torres, Mascherano, and Gerrard though. We, the fans, did.

 

The money was secured against the club, they had absolutely no personal liability for that cash whatsoever.

 

 

Without those loans there would have been an extra £40 million a year to intest in players and wages, instead we have had to deal at a profit in the transfer market since July 2008 to stay solvent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MikeO Grand Master

MikeO

Posted
Posted

Hicks and Gillett say they've received an injunction from a Texas court preventing the sale of Liverpool, and they're trying to get $1.6billion in damages!

The judge's details (facebook & phone number) are all over the Liverpool corner of the 'net.

 

Really don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Reg Reagan

Guest Reg Reagan

Posted
Posted

A lot of you do not understand why they have taken out the injunction.

 

First off, don't listen to those RS fans like johnny since they know everything about nothing.

 

Idiotic RS fans and the media are claiming Hicks & Gillett are just trying to be hold onto the shites now they have lost the court case, but if you look at it from their point of view, then they have a case.

 

They are trying to recoup the money they put into the club and the RBS being devient as they are are just trying to get their money back and will not let H&G do anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
johny Newbie

johny

Posted
Posted

Reg, they defaulted on their loans in April, they've have no rights to anything for six months now. RBS hold all the cards.

They have NO case, which has now been argued and proven twice in court.

 

and MikeO...in answer to your question...Badly, demonstrably so. :P <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Reg Reagan

Guest Reg Reagan

Posted
Posted

Mill Financial are an arm of the Springfield Financial Companies. That has been confirmed. In recent weeks, there have been reports that they lent George Gillett £75m to meet his further loan commitments at Liverpool, and that he defaulted on that loan, so they have in effect repossessed his shares. That has not been confirmed by Mill, who so far do not return calls. Gillett has not returned a call for some weeks now.

 

If those reports are true, that means if Liverpool is sold to NESV for the agreed £300m, to repay all Liverpool's debts owed to the banks (except for £30m to finance stadium development), it is Mill Financial which will lose that £75m, along with Hicks losing his around £70m.

 

That means a US hedge fund, based, like Hicks, in southern USA - Springfield, Virginia - have a £75m loss to protect. That helps to explain why they should now be apparently working desperately with Hicks to avoid a sale to NESV. If they lend Hicks the £200m to repay RBS, the scenario being discussed at the moment by the participants, and Hicks does so, he could stay in control of Liverpool, because RBS is repaid and their hold over the board via the undertakings falls away. Hicks would owe Mill £200m, at whatever rate of interest he has had to agree to. The "payment in kind" loans from the US hedge funds at Manchester United currently charge 16.25% interest, a year, so that would be £32.5m a year interest, and there would likely be very large costs to add to it - financial institutions like to charge for the right to lend their money.

 

There seems little doubt that Hicks would make Liverpool itself, out of its income - fans' money, TV, commercial revenues - pay that interest and harges and service the debt, as he and Gillett did with the RBS loans. That is a major financial reason why Liverpool fans will be desperate the Mill/Hicks eleventh hour bid does not succeed.

 

NESV, have committed, to clearing the £300m of debt, and not loading the club with any more debt, or making the club in any way pay any of the costs associated with buying it.

NESV are saying very firmly they will sue because they have a binding agreement with the board to buy the club - as Henry has reiterated on Twitter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...