• 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.

Kenny Huang leading serious bid for LFC

Status
Not open for further replies.
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41235.msg1149995#msg1149995 date=1281173896]
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=41235.msg1149984#msg1149984 date=1281173089]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41235.msg1149945#msg1149945 date=1281170728]
So you don't care who is backing him or their previous reputation ?

You care about something which is largely irrelevant, since if the club is not paying the interest on the loans to finance the takeover it'll be paying out dividends to those who put the money up.
[/quote]

obviously I care if the new owner has finances or not but the new owner shouldn't be automatically discounted because he isn't backed by the vast wealth of CIC.


[/quote]

Straw man argument.

If you want to see why Huang is being discounted, read Farkmasters post above.
[/quote]

it's going to be difficult for the board to seperate the people who have the means and desire to genuinely want to take liverpool forwards (for a profit of course) from the people who have just the means to buy the club and little more
 
Next week Broughton and the board wants a clarification on how the interested parties will fund their bids.

It will become pretty clear who Hunags backers are then.
 
[quote author=Hansern link=topic=41235.msg1150030#msg1150030 date=1281178259]
Next week Broughton and the board wants a clarification on how the interested parties will fund their bids.

It will become pretty clear who Hunags backers are then.
[/quote]

Fucking hell another interested party? Are these Hungarian?
 
A number of respected financial sources have indicated that the CIC, the $300bn sovereign wealth fund, had been a part of the consortium, but it is clear that the barrage of publicity associated with the Liverpool story has startled the Chinese authorities and Huang's priority last night was to make it clear that the corporation was not one of the "passive investors" involved.

He appears to have been attempting on Tuesday to dispel suggestions that CIC were backing him, when he sent an email from his mobile telephone indicating to a respected Chinese sports journalist that the sovereign wealth was, indeed, not behind him.

Credibility

That email was evidently intended for his PR representatives, with whom he was formulating the wording, but reached the journalist instead
. In an attempt to put the credibility of the Huang bid back on track, his representatives set up interviews with Ganis yesterday for the Associated Press and the 'Wall Street Journal', though it was not until last night that the notion of CIC's immediate involvement was finally dispelled.


Wow, I can't believe the actually wants us to believe that Huang sent an email to a journo instead of his PR reps.
Gillett is doing all he regarding discrediting Huang and his bid.

This media war is getting dirtier and dirtier.
 
[quote author=Hansern link=topic=41235.msg1150066#msg1150066 date=1281180819]
A number of respected financial sources have indicated that the CIC, the $300bn sovereign wealth fund, had been a part of the consortium, but it is clear that the barrage of publicity associated with the Liverpool story has startled the Chinese authorities and Huang's priority last night was to make it clear that the corporation was not one of the "passive investors" involved.

He appears to have been attempting on Tuesday to dispel suggestions that CIC were backing him, when he sent an email from his mobile telephone indicating to a respected Chinese sports journalist that the sovereign wealth was, indeed, not behind him.

Credibility

That email was evidently intended for his PR representatives, with whom he was formulating the wording, but reached the journalist instead
. In an attempt to put the credibility of the Huang bid back on track, his representatives set up interviews with Ganis yesterday for the Associated Press and the 'Wall Street Journal', though it was not until last night that the notion of CIC's immediate involvement was finally dispelled.


Wow, I can't believe the actually wants us to believe that Huang sent an email to a journo instead of his PR reps.
Gillett is doing all he regarding discrediting Huang and his bid.

This media war is getting dirtier and dirtier.
[/quote]

.......
 
[quote author=Hansern link=topic=41235.msg1150078#msg1150078 date=1281182776]
And by that you mean?
[/quote]

Your comment - what media war ?

Are you saying someone is trying to dirty the Huang bid ?

Do you really believe that ?
 
The reported Al-Kharafi bid isn't getting much mention in the press or on here.

Aren't they supposed to be personally filthy rich?
 
A couple of says old, but it appears to be where Ian Herbert is coming from.

Kenny Huang drafts CIC denial statement as confusion surrounds Liverpool’s Chinese bid
By Nick Harris
5 August 2010
Kenny Huang has prepared a draft statement denying that his bid for Liverpool is backed by the China Investment Corporation, sportingintelligence can now confirm. We reported on the likelihood of this earlier today.
The statement has not been formally released, and Huang’s PR agents at Hill & Knowlton in Hong Kong cannot confirm whether it will be released. But it is in circulation among the Chinese mainland media. It says:
.
STATEMENT FROM KENNETH HUANG REGARDING LIVERPOOL FOOTBALL CLUB
With reference to the recent media reports regarding Mr Huang’s investment interest in Liverpool Football Club, Mr Huang would like to emphasize that he is not able to offer any comment at this stage. Mr Huang would also like to deny that there is any involvement of Mainland China state-owned enterprises in his business dealings. If there is any related development, he will make a further announcement.
.
More details on Huang’s denial yesterday of any formal bid and on his business interests, can be found in here.
Sportingintelligence can also re-iterate that the Liverpool board have not yet had proof of funds from any potential bidders. Sources in China consistently maintain that CIC would be unlikely to invest in Liverpool.
It must be stressed: Kenny Huang may indeed have a backer or backers who will support an attempt by him to lead a Liverpool takeover. But hard evidence of those backers at this stage is impossible to find.
There are already suggestions that CIC and Huang are preparing to formally deny involvement as part of a convoluted strategy at trying to establish some confidentiality to the process. Again, at this stage, that is just hearsay in a confused situation.

LATE ADDITION TO STORY: The Financial Times is reporting that “a spokesperson for China Investment Corp, the country’s main sovereign wealth fund, told the Financial Times on Thursday they had never heard of a plan to buy Liverpool or of Kenneth Huang, the man widely reported to be fronting a Chinese bid to buy the English Premier League club.â€
 
I didn't like the sound of Hwang spouting off in the media when all this shite started last week but did feel some excitement when so many "quality" newspapers reported the CIC backing in such detail.

Based on the FT article, he is a attention seeking, two bit bullshitter.
Hopefully the sale will happen just like Broughton said. The proper and successful bidder will be announced when all signatures have been applied to the dotted lines.
 
You'll never wok alone translated into Mandarin (from the Inde)

Ni Yong Yuan Bu Hui Du Xing

Dong Ni Chuan Guo Feng Bao De Shi Hou,

Gao Ang Qi Ni De Tou,

Bu Yao Hai Pa Hei An.

Zai Na Feng Bao Jin Tou,

Shi Pian Jin Se Tian Kong,

He Bai Lin Na Tian Mei De Ge Sheng.

Chuan Guo Feng, Chuan Guo Yu,

Ni De Meng Xiang Huo Xu Hui Po Mie,

Dan Dai Zhe Ni Xin Zhong De Xi Wang Qian Jin,

Ni Yong Yuan Bu Hui Du Xing,

Ni Yong Yuan Bu Hui Du Xing.
 
[quote author=Frogfish link=topic=41235.msg1150120#msg1150120 date=1281190383]
That is definitely a shortened version Y1.
[/quote]

Froggy, you should know that Chinese is economical with their words. 🙂
 
[quote author=Y1 link=topic=41235.msg1150124#msg1150124 date=1281190873]
[quote author=Frogfish link=topic=41235.msg1150120#msg1150120 date=1281190383]
That is definitely a shortened version Y1.
[/quote]

Froggy, you should know that Chinese is economical with their words. 🙂
[/quote]

Not to the extent of missing out whole lines ! 😀
 
[quote author=Wilko link=topic=41235.msg1150100#msg1150100 date=1281187162]
I didn't like the sound of Hwang spouting off in the media when all this shite started last week but did feel some excitement when so many "quality" newspapers reported the CIC backing in such detail.

[/quote]

More than 50% of what is printed in the "quality" newspapers is unchecked for accuracy.
 
There could be a dark horse here, that hasn't been in the media at all, doing their bit while Huang and Kirdi getting all the media attention.

Hopefully that bid could be the Al-Kharafis or Ambani.
 
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41235.msg1150080#msg1150080 date=1281183148]
[quote author=Hansern link=topic=41235.msg1150078#msg1150078 date=1281182776]
And by that you mean?
[/quote]

Your comment - what media war ?

Are you saying someone is trying to dirty the Huang bid ?

Do you really believe that ?
[/quote]

The bid could well be a big bluff, but at the same time it could be exactlty everything that has been reported, the positive that is. All I'm saying is that it's al ot of smoke and mirrors. We don't know the full story and neither do the press that gets fed shite stories that they print. In the end it's up to Broughton and the board, and they have information that no one else has access to.

If Broughton and the board are convinced that Huangs bid is the best one, then it will be done. If it's the same leveraged buy out shite that H&G did, the LFC won't touch with a pogo stick.

The denials from certain spokespersons and so forth means nothing as long as it isn't something official with acutal quotes.

So to sum up, I don't know shite, you don't know and certainly most of the journos know fuck all. The Kirdi bid is all a big hoax, but Huangs bid is pretty undecided yet, as there hasn't been an official statement saying one thing or the other.

The important thing here is that everyone involved has signed NDA, and that shows.
 
[quote author=Hansern link=topic=41235.msg1150210#msg1150210 date=1281206305]
The important thing here is that everyone involved has signed NDA, and that shows.
[/quote]

How has the NDA manifested itself on the Huang proposal?
 
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=41235.msg1150218#msg1150218 date=1281208250]
[quote author=Hansern link=topic=41235.msg1150210#msg1150210 date=1281206305]
The important thing here is that everyone involved has signed NDA, and that shows.
[/quote]

How has the NDA manifested itself on the Huang proposal?
[/quote]

I was actually talking more about the possibility of our next owners not even haveing been mentioned in the press yet. Apart from Kirdi and Huang, it's been very quiet, and Broughton said that this proscess wouldnt be done in the media.

Do we know for a fact which bid we have talked to the Premier League about? Do we actually know that it is the Huang bid? I'm getting more and more a feeling of a dark horse here that we don't know or have heard anything about.


Regarding the Huang bid, there's a lot of negative stories floating about now. Really don't know what to believe.
 
I wonder why Broughton got involved in all this. It just seems like an unnecessary headache for him.
 
[quote author=keniget link=topic=41235.msg1150230#msg1150230 date=1281210432]
I wonder why Broughton got involved in all this. It just seems like an unnecessary headache for him.
[/quote]

Take a wild guess, Keni.
 
[quote author=TheBunnyman link=topic=41235.msg1150240#msg1150240 date=1281213167]
[quote author=keniget link=topic=41235.msg1150230#msg1150230 date=1281210432]
I wonder why Broughton got involved in all this. It just seems like an unnecessary headache for him.
[/quote]

Take a wild guess, Keni.

[/quote]

It was all a front to lure Torres to Chelsea and further damage Liverpool's ownership problems?
 
[quote author=Frogfish link=topic=41235.msg1150155#msg1150155 date=1281197211]
[quote author=Y1 link=topic=41235.msg1150124#msg1150124 date=1281190873]
[quote author=Frogfish link=topic=41235.msg1150120#msg1150120 date=1281190383]
That is definitely a shortened version Y1.
[/quote]

Froggy, you should know that Chinese is economical with their words. 🙂
[/quote]

Not to the extent of missing out whole lines ! 😀
[/quote]

Ah yes, you are right.

Walk on....
 
Liverpool owners want to sell to Yahya Kirdi ahead of Chinese


Liverpool co-owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett want to sell to Syrian businessman Yahya Kirdi.

The Sunday Mirror says the two Americans are ready to join forces once again to back Canada-based Kirdi’s £600million plan to take over at Anfield.

Hicks and Gillett, who fell out spectacularly in the aftermath of the failed attempt to replace Rafa Benitez with Jurgen Klinsmann three years ago, have been forced into a reconciliation by Kenneth Huang’s attempt to sideline them with a takeover plan that would see his Sportscorp China Ltd group purchase the club in a deal that would pay off Liverpool’s £237m debts and force the Americans out with a tiny profit.

Huang's offer has won support from chairman Martin Broughton, managing director Christian Purslow and director Ian Ayre.

The trio are in a position to win a majority vote if Huang’s plan is put before Liverpool’s five-man board after Gillett and Hicks recruited Broughton in March to oversee the sale of the club.

A source close to the Americans said: “Liverpool will not be sold unless the deal is acceptable to the current owners. Their valuation of the club remains unchanged and it is ludicrous to think that any bid will be accepted that doesn’t meet this criteria, regardless of the make-up of the boardroom.â€

Hope that is bullshit
 
We could be the real people's club soon:

[size=14pt]
Taxpayer could take over Liverpool[/size]



* Matt Scott
* The Observer, Sunday 8 August 2010
* Article history

Martin Broughton Liverpool chairman Martin Broughton has had a busy summer. Photograph: John Powell/Liverpool FC via Getty Images

Liverpool are two months from becoming majority-owned by the taxpayer, which, the Observer can reveal, has become the likeliest outcome if a sale has not neared completion in that time.

The Royal Bank of Scotland's main £237m loan to the club expires on 6 October and must either be repaid or rolled over. Additional sums owing to RBS are believed to have increased the club's total debt to the bank to £325m. Liverpool's company secretary, Ian Silvester, said: "From what I understand, and that's all I can say, 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."

One option open to RBS would be to put the club's parent company, Kop Football (Holdings), into administration, but that is not favoured since it would almost inevitably lead to a nine-point deduction under Premier League insolvency rules. Instead, the Observer has learned, unless one of the parties involved in negotiations to take over at Anfield follows through with a formal offer, RBS's corporate-restructuring team would assume control of Liverpool and run the club as a wholly owned subsidiary. That would effectively put the five-times European champions in the hands of the taxpayer who, through the government-owned UK Financial Investments Ltd, holds 84.42% of the issued share capital in RBS.

When the loans last required refinancing in April Martin Broughton was installed by RBS as club chairman. This is said to have been due to the inability of the current shareholders, Tom Hicks and George Gillett, to provide the necessary personal guarantees to the bank. But those close to the situation say RBS's patience has now reached breaking point. In the absence of a takeover or fresh funding from the Americans the bank will be entitled to oust Hicks and Gillett from the board of Kop Football (Holdings), a step the bank is believed to be ready to take in October.

"One or two in the bank are getting twitchy about getting their money back at all," a source said. "And they are incredibly nervous about the current bids. They don't regard anything as particularly serious at the moment."

Those said to be keen on bidding include the Chinese Kenny Huang, the Syrian Yahya Kirdi, the Kuwaiti Kharafi Group, the US private-equity firm Rhône Group and, reportedly, now the Indian conglomerate Sahara.

RBS's prerequisite in the sale process is for repayment in full, though none of the bidders has yet provided proof of funds. This is highly significant since formal due diligence cannot therefore proceed, despite pledges from several consortiums to build a new stadium and invest in the team.

That is when buyers would look for the first time over player contracts, planning applications surrounding the stadium and a host of other legal issues that could potentially throw up obstacles to a takeover. Due diligence can take weeks, so the chance of a takeover before the closure of the transfer window on 31 August is remote. There is also a growing possibility that the 6 October deadline will not be met.

In an effort to bring greater order to the chaos around Anfield, Broughton has issued a request for all parties to demonstrate their funding by the end of the coming week. There were indications yesterday from Huang's camp that he will show he is capable of financing a bid. However, for the first time there was an admission that any cash he has raised will not derive from China's sovereign?wealth fund, the China Investment Corporation. That development raises issues over the credibility of Huang's bid, since those inside the sale process had previously been informed by his camp that CIC was involved.

Broughton will seek this week to apply similar pressure to Kirdi, whose consortium's credibility has been called into question by those involved in the sale process. If neither Huang nor Kirdi can meet Broughton's terms by next weekend, Liverpool will have no further contact with them.

That would leave only two, possibly three, bidders at the table. And without one of Rhône, Kharafi or Sahara proceeding over the next nine weeks to a stage where a takeover is almost a foregone conclusion, the prospect that Liverpool become effectively a state?owned enterprise rises.
 
The owners can't block a sale. They have a vote, but in the end it's up to Broughton as he has the casting vote.

He has already stated this several times, that H&G can not block a sale. This right among others were something they had to do, when they got the 6 months expansion on the loan and debt.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom