Kenny Huang leading serious bid for LFC

[Rosco]

[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=41235.msg1149472#msg1149472 date=1281095256]
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=41235.msg1149435#msg1149435 date=1281093284]
Apparently (I'm waiting to be corrected by Rosco)- Under the agreement with RBS to extend the loan period the Yanks agreed to commit to selling the club, and Broughton was appointed to oversee the process. Some reports have it that the offers for the club will be judged by the 5 person board. Under the rules they agreed to, H&G cannot just accept money from the Rhone group for a share of the club, or accept an offer from Yirdi unless it is approved by the board. Therefore they take whatever deal is put in front of them, or thet default on their agreement with RBS who can affectively take control of the club (I think). If this is something close to the truth, and given the nature of the Huang approach with no profit for the yanks, I'd say it must be, then the Huang bid maximises the benefit for the club to the detriment of owner profit. I'm very happy with that.
[/quote]

I don't disagree that the board has been given the right to pick the bidder. But they still have to act on behalf of the shareholders.

For the sake of the argument, lets say there are two offers on the table, and one gives zero value for the equity, and another that gives a better valuation for the LFC equity. I don't see how the board can decide on the zero value offer because it promises better long term prospects for the club. The board has to act in the interest of its present share-holders not future share-holders.

I, as anyone else on this board, want the new owner to be able to fund stadium and support squad additions. But that owner also needs to match or come very very close to the best valuation of the club's equity. He can't say he will pay less to the owners because he wants to spend more on the asset. That doesn't sound logical.

Waldorf and Statler are not thick, they would have been advised on proper valuation of the club by independent investment broker houses. Every one in our board will be aware of what that value is, and any bid has to come close to that valuation. Especially when there is more than one interested party. "I would prefer not to enrich the out going owners", is an idiotic stand point for that reason....at least i feel it is. If the clubs Debt and Equity is actually valued lower than the actual value owed to the banks, then tough luck. But i doubt thats the case. We are talking about a club that is certainly in the top 15 in world football in terms of Revenue generation, and a fan base that suggests that it has the potential to be top of that chart.

I would be massively surprised if the Americans make a loss out of their Liverpool investments. I have no opinion on whether they deserve a profit or not. I think, they deserve what the club is worth. If it's zero it's zero. Because they own it now. If i owned the club, i would expect my buyer to pay me what its worth. I'm not going to accept significantly less, because the new owner will run the club well.
[/quote]

I would agree entirely.

 

[Rosco]

Kenny Huang has delivered an outline takeover proposal to Liverpool's chairman, Martin Broughton, pledging to erase the club's debt, build a new stadium and to provide significant funding for player transfers.

Marc Ganis, Huang's long-term associate and a sports consultant who lives in Chicago, today confirmed that he made contact with the Liverpool board on Monday on behalf of the Hong Kong-based investment vehicle, QSL Sports.

"We haven't submitted a formal proposal but we submitted the broad parameters of what a proposal would look like to see if it would be welcomed, and it was," said Ganis. Preparing to fund the deal, as revealed by the Guardian yesterday, is the China Investment Corporation, as a "passive investor".

Ganis promised that substantial money would be available to the club. "Liverpool is and always should be one of the highest-spending clubs in all of football," he said. "And our financial models presume Liverpool will be at or near the top in spending on players every year."

Also involved in QSL alongside Huang and Ganis is Guang Yang, a senior investment-fund manager with Franklin Templeton. Huang and Yang would oversee the day-to-day operations at the club. However, Ganis reassured fans that the current executive structure, led by the managing director, Christian Purslow, and the commercial director, Ian Ayre, would remain in place.

"From what we have seen from afar, many of the people currently running Liverpool are doing a good job," said Ganis. "There shouldn't be an expectation there would be a mass upheaval if we submit and are approved."

However, a deal would see the departure of Tom Hicks and George Gillett. The pair are known to believe the club is worth £800m but Huang's consortium will not stretch beyond repayment of the loans they have invested in the club, and would provide no value for their shareholdings.

"What is not one of our goals is the enrichment of the existing owners," Ganis said. "If we submit a proposal and it is accepted, it would be focused on the future and not the past. If anybody wants to [pay for the Hicks/Gillett shares], good luck. We know what we would be prepared to do. If somebody else wants to look at it in a different way, it's their money. That would be their business, not ours."

There will be little Hicks and Gillett can do about that. It is Broughton and his co-directors Ayre and Purslow who hold sway in the takeover battle surrounding the Anfield club. Although Hicks and Gillett remain on the board, under the terms of the latest refinancing agreement on Liverpool's £237m loan with Royal Bank of Scotland, they cannot determine who takes over if Broughton, Ayre and Purslow vote en bloc in favour of any particular bidder.

Since their principal motivation is the future stability of the club, Ganis and Huang thus made great play of the potential for huge revenue growth if the club taps in to the Chinese market, which QSL would be uniquely well-placed to achieve.

The mask is veil is slowly being pulled back on the "Chinese" bid. It is led by two American companies, and fuck all of the money will be from CIC (who will have no actual involvement other than money)

 

[Rosco]

Interestingly, the following is said about Ganis:

Ganis is president and founder of a Chicago-based sports business consulting firm. He's been involved in the development of more than two dozen sports facility projects including the new Yankee Stadium, Heinz Field, Toyota Center, and the Verizon Center. Ganis has lectured at a number of major universities including Harvard, Northwestern, and the University of Chicago

 

[Rosco]

[quote author=Buddha link=topic=41235.msg1149281#msg1149281 date=1281077928]
From Rawk...

In Sohu today : http://sports.sohu.com/20100806/n274020065.shtml

Key points:

- Huang has made a formal bid at £450m.

- The bid made up of two parts: 300m for 100% of the shares; injection of 150m with 100m for the stadium and 50m for transfer.

Sohu said it comes from its own special correspondent in England and internal sources of the Club! Please be careful on anything news piece from China although Sohu is the better one.

***

?
[/quote]

With the cost of the stadium somewhere around the 350m mark we can still expect to be (at least) 250m in debt if the deal goes through as above.

 

[Judge Jules]

Ross, what do you mean in your last but one post by "fuck all of the money will be provided by CIC (who will have no actual involvement other than money)"? The bit in brackets suggests they will in fact be providing it, or some of it.

 

[Rosco]

[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=41235.msg1149690#msg1149690 date=1281113987]
Ross, what do you mean in your last but one post by "fuck all of the money will be provided by CIC (who will have no actual involvement other than money)"? The bit in brackets suggests they will in fact be providing it, or some of it.
[/quote]

I've read elsewhere that 20% of the money that the Franklin Templeton fund is using to buy the club is from CIC.

I'll try to find it.

This bid has been painted in the media to be something it clearly isn't.

 

[Rosco]

I think i read in the Irish Times or Indo earlier, but here's the nub of it

The proposed takeover of Liverpool by a Chinese consortium would not involve direct ownership by the country's government, although they may have a passive role in the organisation, it has been claimed.
More details of the bid fronted by Hong Kong-based businessman Kenny Huang have come to light after it was revealed the Chinese investors are being assisted by Chicago-based company Sportscorp.

The consortium have yet to table a bid, although Liverpool have now requested all parties prove by next week they have the money to back up their interest, but appear to be in pole position to replace American duo Tom Hicks and George Gillett.

If successful Huang and Guang Yang, executive vice-president of Franklin Templeton Investments and chief investment officer of the China Life/Franklin Templeton Fund, would be in charge of a limited liability corporation in control of Liverpool.

Other investors, including China Investment Corp - the country's sovereign wealth fund - would be passive with no more than a 20% share.

The Chinese bid has four major aims: to leave Liverpool debt-free; make significant investment and construct the long-awaited new stadium in Stanley Park; provide a considerable sum for transfers and expand more actively into the Asian market.

However, those behind the plan - the broad details of which have already been submitted to Liverpool chairman Martin Broughton and Barclays Capital, who are running the sale of the club - insist their offer would not be financially beneficial to Hicks and Gillett.

"What is not one of our goals is the enrichment of the existing owners," said head of Sportscorp Marc Ganis, who suggested should the takeover be successful there would not be widespread change behind the scenes at Anfield.

"If we submit a proposal and it is accepted, it would be focused on the future and not the past."



Read more: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/premiership/huang-takeover-aims-mapped-out-14900206.html#ixzz0vqXRsD3W

 

[Squiggles]

[quote author=Cerberus link=topic=41235.msg1149664#msg1149664 date=1281111633]
http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11669_6298131,00.html?

Silvester - Reds sale soon
Secretary believes Liverpool will be sold within four to six weeks

Last updated: 6th August 2010



Liverpool club secretary Ian Silvester believes the sale of the Reds will go through within "the next four to six weeks."

American co-owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett have put the club up for sale, with consortiums from China as well as the Middle East and Canada linked with the Merseysiders.

Club secretary Silvester has believes a sale will go through soon, although not before the new domestic season gets underway.

He told Sky Sports News: "Well from what I understand, and that's all I can say, that the urgency is there due to the pressure from the banks so I would anticipate that something will be happening within the next four to six weeks or so."

[/quote]

Transfer window shuts in three weeks.

Poor Hodgson.

 

[Judge Jules]

Thanks for the info, Ross.

The fact that we'd actually be at arm's length from the Chinese government isn't necessarily a bad thing at all, surely.

 

[doctor_mac]

[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41235.msg1149694#msg1149694 date=1281114267]
I think i read in the Irish Times or Indo earlier, but here's the nub of it

The proposed takeover of Liverpool by a Chinese consortium would not involve direct ownership by the country's government, although they may have a passive role in the organisation, it has been claimed.
More details of the bid fronted by Hong Kong-based businessman Kenny Huang have come to light after it was revealed the Chinese investors are being assisted by Chicago-based company Sportscorp.

The consortium have yet to table a bid, although Liverpool have now requested all parties prove by next week they have the money to back up their interest, but appear to be in pole position to replace American duo Tom Hicks and George Gillett.

If successful Huang and Guang Yang, executive vice-president of Franklin Templeton Investments and chief investment officer of the China Life/Franklin Templeton Fund, would be in charge of a limited liability corporation in control of Liverpool.

Other investors, including China Investment Corp - the country's sovereign wealth fund - would be passive with no more than a 20% share.

The Chinese bid has four major aims: to leave Liverpool debt-free; make significant investment and construct the long-awaited new stadium in Stanley Park; provide a considerable sum for transfers and expand more actively into the Asian market.

However, those behind the plan - the broad details of which have already been submitted to Liverpool chairman Martin Broughton and Barclays Capital, who are running the sale of the club - insist their offer would not be financially beneficial to Hicks and Gillett.

"What is not one of our goals is the enrichment of the existing owners," said head of Sportscorp Marc Ganis, who suggested should the takeover be successful there would not be widespread change behind the scenes at Anfield.

"If we submit a proposal and it is accepted, it would be focused on the future and not the past."



Read more: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/premiership/huang-takeover-aims-mapped-out-14900206.html#ixzz0vqXRsD3W

[/quote]

And the problem with this is? Sounds pretty good to me.

 

[Rosco]

It does sound fine. My problem is the way it has been presented up to now and the ridiculous expectations some fans have gotten because of the misinformation. We're not being bought by the Chinese government with all the related expectations (see Frogfish's posts) , we're being bought by an American Hedge Fund.

It doesn't add up with the other report of the £450m bid though. There's a big hole in there somewhere that will be filled with debt.

 

[Frogfish]

[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=41235.msg1149698#msg1149698 date=1281114522]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41235.msg1149694#msg1149694 date=1281114267]
I think i read in the Irish Times or Indo earlier, but here's the nub of it

The proposed takeover of Liverpool by a Chinese consortium would not involve direct ownership by the country's government, although they may have a passive role in the organisation, it has been claimed.
More details of the bid fronted by Hong Kong-based businessman Kenny Huang have come to light after it was revealed the Chinese investors are being assisted by Chicago-based company Sportscorp.

The consortium have yet to table a bid, although Liverpool have now requested all parties prove by next week they have the money to back up their interest, but appear to be in pole position to replace American duo Tom Hicks and George Gillett.

If successful Huang and Guang Yang, executive vice-president of Franklin Templeton Investments and chief investment officer of the China Life/Franklin Templeton Fund, would be in charge of a limited liability corporation in control of Liverpool.

Other investors, including China Investment Corp - the country's sovereign wealth fund - would be passive with no more than a 20% share.

The Chinese bid has four major aims: to leave Liverpool debt-free; make significant investment and construct the long-awaited new stadium in Stanley Park; provide a considerable sum for transfers and expand more actively into the Asian market.

However, those behind the plan - the broad details of which have already been submitted to Liverpool chairman Martin Broughton and Barclays Capital, who are running the sale of the club - insist their offer would not be financially beneficial to Hicks and Gillett.

"What is not one of our goals is the enrichment of the existing owners," said head of Sportscorp Marc Ganis, who suggested should the takeover be successful there would not be widespread change behind the scenes at Anfield.

"If we submit a proposal and it is accepted, it would be focused on the future and not the past."



Read more: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/premiership/huang-takeover-aims-mapped-out-14900206.html#ixzz0vqXRsD3W

[/quote]

And the problem with this is? Sounds pretty good to me.
[/quote]

and me. Sounds pretty bloody fantastic.

 

[Frogfish]

[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41235.msg1149710#msg1149710 date=1281115294]
It does sound fine. My problem is the way it has been presented up to now and the ridiculous expectations some fans have gotten because of the misinformation. We're not being bought by the Chinese government with all the related expectations (see Frogfish's posts) , we're being bought by an American Hedge Fund.

It doesn't add up with the other report of the £450m bid though. There's a big hole in there somewhere that will be filled with debt.

[/quote]

We were talking about what seemed to be on the table before (as far as we knew it was all CIC) so of course there was excited conjecture, however there were certainly were no definitive statements, rather discussions on how China investment operates and what could be expected.

For someone who comes across as so knowledgeable you can be pretty naive at times. Templeton are into China big time so if you think there is no major Govt involvement then ....... well I really don't know what to say TBH. As I said before I didn't expect it to be CIC outright but via a separate investment vehicle, and that seems to be spot on if this latest news is accurate.

 

[doctor_mac]

I think the most important thing for us is these guys are clearly well placed to exploit the Chinese/Far Eastern markets better than we could possibly imagine.

 

[Rosco]

[quote author=Frogfish link=topic=41235.msg1149719#msg1149719 date=1281116186]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41235.msg1149710#msg1149710 date=1281115294]
It does sound fine. My problem is the way it has been presented up to now and the ridiculous expectations some fans have gotten because of the misinformation. We're not being bought by the Chinese government with all the related expectations (see Frogfish's posts) , we're being bought by an American Hedge Fund.

It doesn't add up with the other report of the £450m bid though. There's a big hole in there somewhere that will be filled with debt.

[/quote]

We were talking about what seemed to be on the table before (as far as we knew it was all CIC) so of course there was excited conjecture, however there were certainly were no definitive statements, rather discussions on how China investment operates and what could be expected.

For someone who comes across as so knowledgeable you can be pretty naive at times. Templeton are into China big time so if you think there is no major Govt involvement then ....... well I really don't know what to say TBH. As I said before I didn't expect it to be CIC outright but via a separate investment vehicle, and that seems to be spot on if this latest news is accurate.


[/quote]

If the Chinese government wanted to buy LFC and run it they would have. They've put their money into a hedge fund that they think will make a return on investment for them. That's all this is.

The Chinese government angle was played up in the media and it got a lot of people onside at the thought of massive wealth being behind things when it simply isn't the case.

 

[Rosco]

[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=41235.msg1149720#msg1149720 date=1281116354]
I think the most important thing for us is these guys are clearly well placed to exploit the Chinese/Far Eastern markets better than we could possibly imagine.
[/quote]

How ?

Everyone in football knows the way to make money is by selling the TV rights. It costs the clubs nothing and makes a fortune. The problem is the Premier League control all the TV deals, meaning we won't gain nearly as much as we might if we were negotiating on our own after building up a big Asian fanbase. Madrid and Barcelona have the advantage of doing their own deals independent of the rest of the league and it's why they have so much more financial muscle.

We can certainly make some gains, but i don't see a pot of gold there unless the big clubs gain the ability to negotiate their own TV deals.


If I wanted to search for possible issues with what has been said by the various parties involved with Huang these would be my questions:

- Leaving Liverpool debt free - When ? After the deal is highly unlikely, The 300m it's more likely at some point down the road when they float or sell the club.

- Keeping us near the top of spending - Only Chelsea and City have spent more in the last 6 years. Will it take much to keep us there ? Probably not.

But in fairness if they get the stadium done I don't really give a fuck about the details above.

 

[Vlads Quiff]

[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41235.msg1149710#msg1149710 date=1281115294]
It does sound fine. My problem is the way it has been presented up to now and the ridiculous expectations some fans have gotten because of the misinformation. We're not being bought by the Chinese government with


all the related expectations (see Frogfish's posts) , we're being bought by an American Hedge Fund.

It doesn't add up with the other report of the £450m bid though. There's a big hole in there somewhere that will be filled with debt.


[/quote]

But the debt is the cost of the club. Its like buying a house with a mortgage. The house still has its equity although the owners have a debt. In this case the club still has a positive equity for what is owed.

Regards

 

[Frogfish]

[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41235.msg1149726#msg1149726 date=1281116977]
[quote author=Frogfish link=topic=41235.msg1149719#msg1149719 date=1281116186]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41235.msg1149710#msg1149710 date=1281115294]
It does sound fine. My problem is the way it has been presented up to now and the ridiculous expectations some fans have gotten because of the misinformation. We're not being bought by the Chinese government with all the related expectations (see Frogfish's posts) , we're being bought by an American Hedge Fund.

It doesn't add up with the other report of the £450m bid though. There's a big hole in there somewhere that will be filled with debt.

[/quote]

We were talking about what seemed to be on the table before (as far as we knew it was all CIC) so of course there was excited conjecture, however there were certainly were no definitive statements, rather discussions on how China investment operates and what could be expected.

For someone who comes across as so knowledgeable you can be pretty naive at times. Templeton are into China big time so if you think there is no major Govt involvement then ....... well I really don't know what to say TBH. As I said before I didn't expect it to be CIC outright but via a separate investment vehicle, and that seems to be spot on if this latest news is accurate.

[/quote]

If the Chinese government wanted to buy LFC and run it they would have. They've put their money into a hedge fund that they think will make a return on investment for them. That's all this is.

The Chinese government angle was played up in the media and it got a lot of people onside at the thought of massive wealth being behind things when it simply isn't the case.

[/quote]

Sorry Rosco .. pretty much what I said before. I'm not saying this is or is not direct China involvement, only that your concept of how the Chinese operate is flawed.

 

[Wilko7]

[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41235.msg1149688#msg1149688 date=1281113955]
[quote author=Buddha link=topic=41235.msg1149281#msg1149281 date=1281077928]
From Rawk...

In Sohu today : http://sports.sohu.com/20100806/n274020065.shtml

Key points:

- Huang has made a formal bid at £450m.

- The bid made up of two parts: 300m for 100% of the shares; injection of 150m with 100m for the stadium and 50m for transfer.

Sohu said it comes from its own special correspondent in England and internal sources of the Club! Please be careful on anything news piece from China although Sohu is the better one.

***

?
[/quote]

With the cost of the stadium somewhere around the 350m mark we can still expect to be (at least) 250m in debt if the deal goes through as above.


[/quote]

Just like 50m for players will kick start the squad, 100m will kick start the construction of the stadium. I'm sure there will be more money made available for players and the stadium as and when it's needed. It's also likely that the new owners will sell the naming rights of the new stadium.

 

[doctor_mac]

[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41235.msg1149730#msg1149730 date=1281117516]
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=41235.msg1149720#msg1149720 date=1281116354]
I think the most important thing for us is these guys are clearly well placed to exploit the Chinese/Far Eastern markets better than we could possibly imagine.
[/quote]

How ?

Everyone in football knows the way to make money is by selling the TV rights. It costs the clubs nothing and makes a fortune. The problem is the Premier League control all the TV deals, meaning we won't gain nearly as much as we might if we were negotiating on our own after building up a big Asian fanbase. Madrid and Barcelona have the advantage of doing their own deals independent of the rest of the league and it's why they have so much more financial muscle.

We can certainly make some gains, but i don't see a pot of gold there unless the big clubs gain the ability to negotiate their own TV deals.


If I wanted to search for possible issues with what has been said by the various parties involved with Huang these would be my questions:

- Leaving Liverpool debt free - When ? After the deal is highly unlikely, The 300m it's more likely at some point down the road when they float or sell the club.

- Keeping us near the top of spending - Only Chelsea and City have spent more in the last 6 years. Will it take much to keep us there ? Probably not.

But in fairness if they get the stadium done I don't really give a fuck about the details above.
[/quote]

How many mugs Rosco? If we became the most supported club in China, the biggest market in the world, it could be very lucrative indeed.

 

[Rosco]

[quote author=Wilko link=topic=41235.msg1149735#msg1149735 date=1281117751]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41235.msg1149688#msg1149688 date=1281113955]
[quote author=Buddha link=topic=41235.msg1149281#msg1149281 date=1281077928]
From Rawk...

In Sohu today : http://sports.sohu.com/20100806/n274020065.shtml

Key points:

- Huang has made a formal bid at £450m.

- The bid made up of two parts: 300m for 100% of the shares; injection of 150m with 100m for the stadium and 50m for transfer.

Sohu said it comes from its own special correspondent in England and internal sources of the Club! Please be careful on anything news piece from China although Sohu is the better one.

***

?
[/quote]

With the cost of the stadium somewhere around the 350m mark we can still expect to be (at least) 250m in debt if the deal goes through as above.


[/quote]

Just like 50m for players will kick start the squad, 100m will kick start the construction of the stadium. I'm sure there will be more money made available for players and the stadium as and when it's needed. It's also likely that the new owners will sell the naming rights of the new stadium.
[/quote]

I think this will be the same as last time. Everything up front is all that will be invested, the rest comes from increases in revenue and debt.

Debt is a necessity for investment companies to make decent returns.

 

[Wilko7]

[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41235.msg1149742#msg1149742 date=1281118362]
[quote author=Wilko link=topic=41235.msg1149735#msg1149735 date=1281117751]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41235.msg1149688#msg1149688 date=1281113955]
[quote author=Buddha link=topic=41235.msg1149281#msg1149281 date=1281077928]
From Rawk...

In Sohu today : http://sports.sohu.com/20100806/n274020065.shtml

Key points:

- Huang has made a formal bid at £450m.

- The bid made up of two parts: 300m for 100% of the shares; injection of 150m with 100m for the stadium and 50m for transfer.

Sohu said it comes from its own special correspondent in England and internal sources of the Club! Please be careful on anything news piece from China although Sohu is the better one.

***

?
[/quote]

With the cost of the stadium somewhere around the 350m mark we can still expect to be (at least) 250m in debt if the deal goes through as above.


[/quote]

Just like 50m for players will kick start the squad, 100m will kick start the construction of the stadium. I'm sure there will be more money made available for players and the stadium as and when it's needed. It's also likely that the new owners will sell the naming rights of the new stadium.
[/quote]

I think this will be the same as last time. Everything up front is all that will be invested, the rest comes from increases in revenue and debt.

Debt is a necessity for investment companies to make decent returns.
[/quote]

Indeed. It seems that these lads will qualify for better, less expensive credit than the American shit.

 

[Rosco]

[quote author=Vlads Quiff link=topic=41235.msg1149733#msg1149733 date=1281117676]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41235.msg1149710#msg1149710 date=1281115294]
It does sound fine. My problem is the way it has been presented up to now and the ridiculous expectations some fans have gotten because of the misinformation. We're not being bought by the Chinese government with


all the related expectations (see Frogfish's posts) , we're being bought by an American Hedge Fund.

It doesn't add up with the other report of the £450m bid though. There's a big hole in there somewhere that will be filled with debt.


[/quote]

But the debt is the cost of the club. Its like buying a house with a mortgage. The house still has its equity although the owners have a debt. In this case the club still has a positive equity for what is owed.

Regards
[/quote]

I think we have crossed wires Vlad.

450m, the way it seems to break down is 300m to the Yanks/debt to fuck off. 100 for the stadium, 50 for a transfer kitty.

That 100m clearly won't be enough to pay for the stadium, so my expectation is that with the RBS debt cleared there is room on the balance sheet for debt for the stadium so they will take on debt and the club will be paying the interest.

I don't actually have a major problem with it so long as the stadium is built.


EDIT - the 300m raises a further question, if the RBS debt is 237m and the Yanks are owed 130m somebody is losing out,

 

[Rosco]

[quote author=Wilko link=topic=41235.msg1149746#msg1149746 date=1281118518]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41235.msg1149742#msg1149742 date=1281118362]
[quote author=Wilko link=topic=41235.msg1149735#msg1149735 date=1281117751]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41235.msg1149688#msg1149688 date=1281113955]
[quote author=Buddha link=topic=41235.msg1149281#msg1149281 date=1281077928]
From Rawk...

In Sohu today : http://sports.sohu.com/20100806/n274020065.shtml

Key points:

- Huang has made a formal bid at £450m.

- The bid made up of two parts: 300m for 100% of the shares; injection of 150m with 100m for the stadium and 50m for transfer.

Sohu said it comes from its own special correspondent in England and internal sources of the Club! Please be careful on anything news piece from China although Sohu is the better one.

***

?
[/quote]

With the cost of the stadium somewhere around the 350m mark we can still expect to be (at least) 250m in debt if the deal goes through as above.


[/quote]

Just like 50m for players will kick start the squad, 100m will kick start the construction of the stadium. I'm sure there will be more money made available for players and the stadium as and when it's needed. It's also likely that the new owners will sell the naming rights of the new stadium.
[/quote]

I think this will be the same as last time. Everything up front is all that will be invested, the rest comes from increases in revenue and debt.

Debt is a necessity for investment companies to make decent returns.
[/quote]

Indeed. It seems that these lads will qualify for better, less expensive credit than the American shit.
[/quote]

Presumably.

I could never figure out quite why the Yanks went with interest only short term debt if they intended to keep the club long term. It made no sense.

 

[keniget]

The whole idea of being "debt free" has become a bit of a burden for would be investors as debt isn't a bad thing as long it's part of a sound financial plan.

Anyways, how important is misleading the fans/media at this point anyways?

The aim of the board members with their reputation at stake is to ensure that everyone thinkings they did a good job after the fact, not necessarily during.

 

[Squiggles]

Chinese ownership of Liverpool would return the club to its former position of primacy in the transfer market, a representative of Kenny Huang's QSL consortium announced today.

Marc Ganis, a Chicago-based sports executive who has struck previous deals for Huang's QSL vehicle and is his long-term associate, acted as spokesman for the Chinese consortium today. He confirmed that an outline takeover proposal had been submitted to Barcap, the investment-banking division of Barclays, and the Liverpool chairman Martin Broughton, who together are overseeing the sale of the club.

If the bid is successful, Ganis assured Liverpool fans that wage and transfer budgets under QSL would allow the five-times European champions to compete on equal terms with Manchester City, Real Madrid and Internazionale.

"Liverpool is and always should be one of the highest-spending clubs in all of football," he said. "And our financial models presume Liverpool will be at or near the top in spending on players every year."

That will be of great comfort to Liverpool fans who have grown frustrated at the payment of up to £43m a year in interest over the three years since Tom Hicks and George Gillett's highly leveraged takeover. In the 12 months to 31 July 2009, those payments meant Liverpool's wage bill was severely restricted – equivalent to only 83.5% of Manchester United's last year and 61.5% of Chelsea's.

The Chinese group have also promised to invest in infrastructure, one of the key demands that must be satisfied for a sale to be approved. Although the board want to complete the deal before the close of the transfer window on 31 August, they are also anxious that the transaction should secure a legacy for the club. The successful bidder must clear the £350m-plus debt and demonstrate they have the means to build a new stadium.

Ganis is therefore aware of the need to appease those directors who are acting not in search of personal profit but as custodians of the club, and his statement today was loaded with messages for the board and shareholders.

About Gillett and Hicks's hopes of raising up to £800m through the sale, Ganis was dismissive. "What is not one of our goals is the enrichment of the existing owners," Ganis said. "If we submit a proposal and it is accepted, it would be focused on the future and not the past. If anybody wants to [pay for Hicks and Gillett's shares], good luck. We know what we would be prepared to do. If somebody else wants to look at it in a different way, it's their money. That would be their business, not ours."

That was a reference to the proposal fronted by Yahya Kirdi, which would offer staggering returns for the shareholders' equity. Unsurprisingly, Kirdi's is the consortium Hicks and Gillett have been enthusiastically promoting. However, at a time when no other bidder has offered anything for the equity, Kirdi's proposal promises such outlandish sums for Hicks and Gillett that sources inside the sale process believe his consortium lacks any credibility.

There is a limit to what Hicks and Gillett can do. The strictures of their most recent refinancing of the £237m loan from Royal Bank of Scotland ensure that any takeover approved by the board must go ahead irrespective of the Americans' votes as shareholder-directors. That means Broughton, Ian Ayre and Christian Purslow hold the destiny of Liverpool in their hands, since they are capable of outvoting the two Americans. Seemingly with that in mind, there was a deliberate sweetener for Ayre and Purslow from Huang.

"From what we have seen from afar, many of the people currently running Liverpool are doing a good job," said Ganis. "There shouldn't be an expectation there would be a mass upheaval if we submit and are approved."

QSL's Chinese bid remains favourite ahead of Kirdi, Kuwait's Kharafi Group and Rhone Capital but it is only first among equals. The absence of any formal approach with sufficient financial muscle to meet the various requirements of the sale means no bidder can be certain of taking control.

 

[Hansern]

After this Ganis interview, there will probably be more PR bollocks from GG and TH. Ganis have been very negative about the way Hicks has run the Rangers, and he has also said a few things about how and what they would do to Liverpool.

I also heard that Huang have gotten the better of GG in some business deals in the past. So, Im guessing our current owners would hate to see Huangs bid go through.

Expect more shit throwing and PR made up BS.

 

[Wilko7]

[quote author=Hansern link=topic=41235.msg1149812#msg1149812 date=1281123762]
After this Ganis interview, there will probably be more PR bollocks from GG and TH. Ganis have been very negative about the way Hicks has run the Rangers, and he has also said a few things about how and what they would do to Liverpool.

I also heard that Huang have gotten the better of GG in some business deals in the past. So, Im guessing our current owners would hate to see Huangs bid go through.

Expect more shit throwing and PR made up BS.
[/quote]

Where did you hear this? In the local post office? Bus stop?

 

[Hansern]

The local chipper

 

[Farkmaster]

[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41235.msg1149747#msg1149747 date=1281118573]
EDIT - the 300m raises a further question, if the RBS debt is 237m and the Yanks are owed 130m somebody is losing out,
[/quote]

Couldn't it just be that of the 300M, the Yanks get paid off, leaving 170. That gets paid to the banks. The remaining money owed the banks is refinanced as a loan and bundled with the new stadium loan?