• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Barclays Capital etc

Status
Not open for further replies.
[quote author=the count link=topic=39787.msg1087715#msg1087715 date=1271244459]
[quote author=Vlads Quiff link=topic=39787.msg1087692#msg1087692 date=1271241411]

Making money from the club would not be dependent on us winning the Premiership, Champions League or whatever else. Increasing turnover, be it through a bigger stadium, better marketing or whatever is the prize. Winning a trophy would be the bonus that brings in extra profits.
Maybe I have become too cynical of these potential investor's motives but to those who just want rid of Hicks and Gilett, (and I do too) without giving thought to their successors I say again, "be careful what you wish for, it may come true"
[/quote]

I think it would count, success breeds success, if we were not doing well on the pitch I can guarantee we would not be filling a new stadium or selling shirts. In football the adage that you have to speculate to accumulate has never been more true.

regards
[/quote]


[/quote]

I dunno Vlad. I fear that a business man's interpretation of success on the pitch may vary somewhat from ours.

Ticking along, as we have done under Rafa by and large up till this season, consistently qualifying for and having a good run in the Champions league would probably qualify as a business success. This would generate enough revenue to turn a tidy profit and probably increase the overall value of the club.
To increase the chances of actually winning the Premiership, an increase of spending, and thereby a decrease in short term profits, on players/manager would likely be required, without any guaranteed success or return on that investment.

A safer option might be just to have us ticking along as a team with their version of success.

I really hope you are right Vlad. Once bitten, twice shy and all that jazz.
I suppose what we need is a shrewd businessman, who is also a fan, and whose ambitions are not solely to line his own pockets. Surely there have to be a few of those around.
 
Ah I see what you mean, but and to a certain extent I agree, but we have to be seen to be viable to challenge and certainly be a top four side

regards
 
I would be very disapointed if new owners didnt hire a new manager.
Nou Camp is more like 85-90K, all seater following the problems with their ultras firms.

At the end of the day, we need to have success on the pitch. Losing the CL final in Athens on his own was the end for Rafa.
Only a new manager like Mourinho would bring this. Rafa will never win us the title.
Lets wait and see...
 
I haven't really been keeping up to date with all this lark and don't have time to raed the thread. In a few short words please someone, are we selling? Is there actually any point in getting excited?
 
[quote author=LadyRed link=topic=39787.msg1087721#msg1087721 date=1271245235]
I haven't really been keeping up to date with all this lark and don't have time to raed the thread. In a few short words please someone, are we selling? Is there actually any point in getting excited?
[/quote]

It does look like the Yanks are being forced to sell up but the process could take the best part of a year and don't get too excited as God knows who will buy us.
 
[quote author=the count link=topic=39787.msg1087726#msg1087726 date=1271245489]
[quote author=LadyRed link=topic=39787.msg1087721#msg1087721 date=1271245235]
I haven't really been keeping up to date with all this lark and don't have time to raed the thread. In a few short words please someone, are we selling? Is there actually any point in getting excited?
[/quote]

It does look like the Yanks are being forced to sell up but the process could take the best part of a year and don't get too excited as God knows who will buy us.
[/quote]

A year? Surely not.

What about DIC or the London consortium? Are they in the picture?
 
[quote author=LadyRed link=topic=39787.msg1087721#msg1087721 date=1271245235]
I haven't really been keeping up to date with all this lark and don't have time to raed the thread. In a few short words please someone, are we selling? Is there actually any point in getting excited?
[/quote]

okay

* hicks and gillette have decided to sell up

* they have hired barclays capital (not to be confused with barclays bank) to sell the club. barcap are partially owned by arabs (I think) so they have contacts with wealthy clients.

* broughton has been hired as the need chairman. interested investors will deal with him rather than the yanks.

* with broughton at the head the yanks lose their power of veto, for example if gillette wanted a deal but hicks wanted to sell, gillette together with broughton could force the deal through.

* contray to some reports the loan is still with rbs and hasn't been refinaced with barclays capital. the requirement of 100m to refinance the loan is still in place, the only difference is the bank has extended the time period by six months on the condition the owners are serious about selling up.

I think that about covers it
 
[quote author=LadyRed link=topic=39787.msg1087734#msg1087734 date=1271245805]
[quote author=the count link=topic=39787.msg1087726#msg1087726 date=1271245489]
[quote author=LadyRed link=topic=39787.msg1087721#msg1087721 date=1271245235]
I haven't really been keeping up to date with all this lark and don't have time to raed the thread. In a few short words please someone, are we selling? Is there actually any point in getting excited?
[/quote]

It does look like the Yanks are being forced to sell up but the process could take the best part of a year and don't get too excited as God knows who will buy us.
[/quote]

A year? Surely not.

What about DIC or the London consortium? Are they in the picture?
[/quote]

aparently there are three interested parties but the names haven't been leaked out yet.
 
[quote author=LadyRed link=topic=39787.msg1087741#msg1087741 date=1271246125]
Thank Neil. So a sale is on the cards, we just don't know when and who to?
[/quote]

yep, that's pretty much it. I will add its not a foregone conclusion the yanks will sell as they will be looking to make over 400m and only someone with very deep pockets will pay that especially when there is no stadium in tow.
 
whoosh.gif
 
[quote author=SaintGeorge67 link=topic=39787.msg1087744#msg1087744 date=1271246380]
the 3 parties:

David Moores
Steve Morgan
Share Liverpool
[/quote]

That isn't funny.
 
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=39787.msg1087752#msg1087752 date=1271246820]
[quote author=SaintGeorge67 link=topic=39787.msg1087744#msg1087744 date=1271246380]
the 3 parties:

David Moores
Steve Morgan
Share Liverpool
[/quote]

That isn't funny.
[/quote]

in retrospect liverpool would have been better off if steve morgan had bought the club, I doubt he would ave leveraged the fee back on us.
 
[quote author=Vlads Quiff link=topic=39787.msg1087695#msg1087695 date=1271241522]
[quote author=robinhood link=topic=39787.msg1087674#msg1087674 date=1271238736]
I generally think people are barking up the wrong tree when they complain about signings too.

Formation, team selection, style of play, player motivation, ridiculous substitutions - plenty of reason for complaint, but in the transfer market I don't think he's done that badly.
[/quote]

I broadly agree with that Robin, the signings are not his biggest problem, he has brought some dross, but who hasn't. Although I do think he has not known how to handle and where to play some of them.

regards
[/quote]

That's what I'm saying (although it doesn't just apply to recent signings) - it's more how he uses what he buys / what he's got that's the issue, not so much the players themselves (I'm talking about the big money signings).
 
Why didn't the fuck didnt this Staveley woman get us sold to the current man city owners way back??
How in fuck did we turn up our noses at Thaksin shinawatra who had the courtesy to fuck off quickly with no fuss and sell up to the biggest investment fund ever... its fucked it really is...

bankers.... wankers....

Im sick to fucking death of hearing about them lying thieving yank cunts hanging on and on and on.... It seems to me that involving yet another fucking bank is just like having another vulture on the carcass.

6 more months of this shit.... then we get to cross our fingers all over again.
 
[quote author=Molbystwin link=topic=39787.msg1087784#msg1087784 date=1271251349]
Why didn't the fuck didnt this Staveley woman get us sold to the current man city owners way back??
How in fuck did we turn up our noses at Thaksin shinawatra who had the courtesy to fuck off quickly with no fuss and sell up to the biggest investment fund ever... its fucked it really is...

bankers.... wankers....

Im sick to fucking death of hearing about them lying thieving yank cunts hanging on and on and on.... It seems to me that involving yet another fucking bank is just like having another vulture on the carcass.

6 more months of this shit.... then we get to cross our fingers all over again.
[/quote]

That's the spirit!
 
[quote author=Molbystwin link=topic=39787.msg1087784#msg1087784 date=1271251349]
Why didn't the fuck didnt this Staveley woman get us sold to the current man city owners way back??
[/quote]

she had pretty much done just that (brokered the sale of gillettes shares to rich arabs) but hicks (the cunt) vetoed the deal. if such a deal were to happen again hicks would be powerless this time around.
 
[quote author=robinhood link=topic=39787.msg1087700#msg1087700 date=1271242291]
[quote author=Fabio Alrighty-o link=topic=39787.msg1087686#msg1087686 date=1271241046]
I'm a big fan of magic, but we shouldn't have bought him when we had 1 striker good enough to start. Or that perennial left wing issue. SAying that, now he is here I'm delighted
[/quote]

But you can only go for what you can afford and what's available (obviously, sorry).

Again, he's not been anywhere near perfect in the transfer market, but he has brought in some truly excellent players over the course of his time here, including Johnson recently.

It seems to me that rigidly sticking to 4231 when you no longer have the player that made it work is his biggest failing. That and continuing to play Gerrard at second striker when it's clearly not working anymore. Although these two things are ultimately the same issue.

If he was willing to play a setup that suited the central midfielders he has (Gerrard, and Aquilani or Lucas attacking, Mascher holding) and was willing to use Kuyt as striker backup to Torres, his squad on the whole would make a lot more sense and look a lot better.

He just has a track record of signing a decent player and then playing them in a role that clearly doesn't get the best from them. He's clearly more obsessed by what he thinks is possible on paper than what really works on the pitch.

Fair enough to experiment, but you have to be able to go back on it when it doesn't work.

The squad (therefore signings) isn't the main problem.
[/quote]

Spot on, mate.

A different manager could have done much better this season with this squad, even with the injuries.
 
Envy for ownership by an authoritarian with a deplorable human rights record who had to pack his bags quickly because he was sentenced to jail after being overthrown in a military coup. Impressive.

You want a rich sugar daddy owner who will run the club as their toy, damn the expense, except somehow not mind paying a premium for our club, when it's been shown they could buy virtually any other one for half the price, and buy success in a couple years time. How on earth was Staveley unable to set that up? It seems such an easy sales pitch. Please commit to a realistic valuation of the club, which includes a premium for it's potential, AND invest heavily to achieve that, with no expectation of return in the next 10 years. Everyone will be so happy with you they'll even overlook all that state execution sort of thing.
 
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=39787.msg1087961#msg1087961 date=1271274002]
Spidey - Why is Barclays Capital not to be confused with Barclays ?
[/quote]

they are under the 'barclays' umbrella but they specifically deal with investment and equity
 
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=39787.msg1087963#msg1087963 date=1271274355]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=39787.msg1087961#msg1087961 date=1271274002]
Spidey - Why is Barclays Capital not to be confused with Barclays ?
[/quote]

they are under the 'barclays' umbrella but they specifically deal with investment and equity
[/quote]

I don't get where the confusion lies. The impression I got from "not to be confused" was that they were two completely separate entities.
 
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=39787.msg1087966#msg1087966 date=1271274639]
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=39787.msg1087963#msg1087963 date=1271274355]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=39787.msg1087961#msg1087961 date=1271274002]
Spidey - Why is Barclays Capital not to be confused with Barclays ?
[/quote]

they are under the 'barclays' umbrella but they specifically deal with investment and equity
[/quote]

I don't get where the confusion lies. The impression I got from "not to be confused" was that they were two completely separate entities.
[/quote]

they have the barclays name but they are a completely different arm of barclays
http://www.barcap.com/About+Barclays+Capital/Our+Firm
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom