• 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.

LFC SOLD to NESV.

Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

The majority on the board would have had no say on whether or not Hicks can reach an agreement with someone else to refinance his debt to RBS, which has nothing to do with them. What they WOULD have been able to say, and (as you indicate) reportedly did say, is that he cannot use the club and its assets as security in any such refinancing agreement.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=41783.msg1190933#msg1190933 date=1286455434]
The majority on the board would have had no say on whether or not Hicks can reach an agreement with someone else to refinance his debt to RBS, which has nothing to do with them. What they WOULD have been able to say, and (as you indicate) reportedly did say, is that he cannot use the club and its assets as security in any such refinancing agreement.
[/quote]

Yeah, so if they replaced the board then they could approve it, and hey presto.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=41783.msg1190874#msg1190874 date=1286450418]
Hicks on the offensive

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Liverpool co-owner Tom Hicks is determined to battle for control at Anfield after refusing to conform to chairman Martin Broughton's authority.

Broughton, who was instated in April to oversee the sale of the club, revealed on Wednesday that Hicks tried to sack managing director Christian Purslow and commercial director Ian Ayre and appoint his own people in an attempt to obstruct a £300million deal with New England Sports Venues (NESV), owners of the Boston Red Sox.

The internal strife at the club continued as Broughton blocked that move, insisting Hicks signed agreements not to oppose the sale when they received an extension to their refinancing deal with the Royal Bank of Scotland earlier this year.

If the NESV deal goes through, Hicks and co-owner George Gillett stand to lose a total of £144million.

Hicks' New York-based spokesman, Mark Semer, said the Americans are disputing Broughton's claim.

Semer told Bloomberg News: "There were no such undertakings given to Broughton, the board has been legally reconstituted, and the new board does not approve of this proposed transaction."

After rejecting the attemped coup, which would have seen Hicks' son Mack and Lori McCuthcheon, of Hicks Holdings replace Purslow and Ayre, Broughton continued with the conference call board meeting even though Hicks had put the phone down.

Broughton maintains he and the other two England-based members of the board have acted appropriately, but will have to wait for that to be confirmed, with the issue set to go to the High Court next week.

PLEASE tell me broughton got his chairmanship assurances in legally binding contracts.
[/quote]
But he's fighting a losing battle, no? Whether Broughton had planned it as such, RBS is now in the know of a ready buyer for Liverpool, that due diligence has been done, and that the Premier League is likely to approve of the deal. If Hicks manages to stall the bid, RBS would be compelled to call in the loan and sell the club to NESV, knowing that 90% of the work has already been done.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=furyoo link=topic=41783.msg1190953#msg1190953 date=1286456108]
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=41783.msg1190874#msg1190874 date=1286450418]
Hicks on the offensive

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Liverpool co-owner Tom Hicks is determined to battle for control at Anfield after refusing to conform to chairman Martin Broughton's authority.

Broughton, who was instated in April to oversee the sale of the club, revealed on Wednesday that Hicks tried to sack managing director Christian Purslow and commercial director Ian Ayre and appoint his own people in an attempt to obstruct a £300million deal with New England Sports Venues (NESV), owners of the Boston Red Sox.

The internal strife at the club continued as Broughton blocked that move, insisting Hicks signed agreements not to oppose the sale when they received an extension to their refinancing deal with the Royal Bank of Scotland earlier this year.

If the NESV deal goes through, Hicks and co-owner George Gillett stand to lose a total of £144million.

Hicks' New York-based spokesman, Mark Semer, said the Americans are disputing Broughton's claim.

Semer told Bloomberg News: "There were no such undertakings given to Broughton, the board has been legally reconstituted, and the new board does not approve of this proposed transaction."

After rejecting the attemped coup, which would have seen Hicks' son Mack and Lori McCuthcheon, of Hicks Holdings replace Purslow and Ayre, Broughton continued with the conference call board meeting even though Hicks had put the phone down.

Broughton maintains he and the other two England-based members of the board have acted appropriately, but will have to wait for that to be confirmed, with the issue set to go to the High Court next week.

PLEASE tell me broughton got his chairmanship assurances in legally binding contracts.
[/quote]
But he's fighting a losing battle, no? Whether Broughton had planned it as such, RBS is now in the know of a ready buyer for Liverpool, that due diligence has been done, and that the Premier League is likely to approve of the deal. If Hicks manages to stall the bid, RBS would be compelled to call in the loan and sell the club to NESV, knowing that 90% of the work has already been done.
[/quote]

even in administration it could be messing as hicks would claim if he were allowed to change the board the refinace would be in place and therefore the club would never have gone into adminstration.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=41783.msg1190958#msg1190958 date=1286456273]
[quote author=furyoo link=topic=41783.msg1190953#msg1190953 date=1286456108]
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=41783.msg1190874#msg1190874 date=1286450418]
Hicks on the offensive

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Liverpool co-owner Tom Hicks is determined to battle for control at Anfield after refusing to conform to chairman Martin Broughton's authority.

Broughton, who was instated in April to oversee the sale of the club, revealed on Wednesday that Hicks tried to sack managing director Christian Purslow and commercial director Ian Ayre and appoint his own people in an attempt to obstruct a £300million deal with New England Sports Venues (NESV), owners of the Boston Red Sox.

The internal strife at the club continued as Broughton blocked that move, insisting Hicks signed agreements not to oppose the sale when they received an extension to their refinancing deal with the Royal Bank of Scotland earlier this year.

If the NESV deal goes through, Hicks and co-owner George Gillett stand to lose a total of £144million.

Hicks' New York-based spokesman, Mark Semer, said the Americans are disputing Broughton's claim.

Semer told Bloomberg News: "There were no such undertakings given to Broughton, the board has been legally reconstituted, and the new board does not approve of this proposed transaction."

After rejecting the attemped coup, which would have seen Hicks' son Mack and Lori McCuthcheon, of Hicks Holdings replace Purslow and Ayre, Broughton continued with the conference call board meeting even though Hicks had put the phone down.

Broughton maintains he and the other two England-based members of the board have acted appropriately, but will have to wait for that to be confirmed, with the issue set to go to the High Court next week.

PLEASE tell me broughton got his chairmanship assurances in legally binding contracts.
[/quote]
But he's fighting a losing battle, no? Whether Broughton had planned it as such, RBS is now in the know of a ready buyer for Liverpool, that due diligence has been done, and that the Premier League is likely to approve of the deal. If Hicks manages to stall the bid, RBS would be compelled to call in the loan and sell the club to NESV, knowing that 90% of the work has already been done.
[/quote]

even in administration it could be messing as hicks would claim if he were allowed to change the board the refinace would be in place and therefore the club would never have gone into adminstration.

[/quote]
I'm not sure I get what you mean. RBS can just bring Liverpool into administration, no questions asked, no? Can he really stall them from doing so by 'what if's'?
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

Furyoo - RBS can't do that until the due date for repayment (15th Oct.) has come and gone. Even then, it would be Hicks and Gillett's holding company Kop Holdings which would be affected, not the club itself.

However, the chances are strongly against that happening. Nobody can give cast iron guarantees about the outcome of any court case but, assuming the accuracy of what Broughton said yesterday about the written agreements governing all this, Hicks would appear to have (in the immortal words of Don King) "two chances, slim and none." It's significant IMO that the upcoming court action was issued not by Hicks but by Broughton himself. There could be no clearer indication of his confidence, and that of his lawyers, about the outcome.

Neil - Hicks would still have to convince the court that what he's proposing is the lesser of two evils, and I wouldn't give much for his chances.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=41783.msg1190964#msg1190964 date=1286456599]
Furyoo - RBS can't do that until the due date for repayment (15th Oct.) has come and gone. Even then, it would be Hicks and Gillett's holding company Kop Holdings which would be affected, not the club itself.
[/quote]
Yes, I understand that it'd be 15th October, which wouldn't be too far away. Pardon me for my lack of knowledge in this area, but the club is an asset under Kop Holdings, no? And should RBS decide, they can force its sale? I'm just trying to figure out if Hicks is fucked no matter what.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

The club is an asset of Kop Holdings, but (and this is very important in all sorts of ways) the club has proven that it is a healthy business in its own right. It's therefore very, very unlikely that RBS would put the club into administration, because that would reduce its value immediately. What would probably happen if RBS decided to move in is that, however reluctantly, RBS would replace Kop Holdings as owner and take the club over for a short period while it completed the sale process. (This BTW is why we would almost certainly not suffer a 9-point deduction.)

It's not possible to say yet that Hicks is f'cked no matter what, as the court case hasn't yet been decided, but the odds are defo against him.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

I might be being a bit stupid here, but I can't see how Broughton can force a sale at all.

He's got written undertakings to say that he can, but if the yanks don't sign then the club doesn't sell. Broughton could separately sue for breach of those undertakings, but that's a different thing altogether.

By the way, I don't know any of that as fact, it just seems logical. Like if I promised to sell my house under certain circumstances and they then happened, it would still be up to me to sign it over. If I didn't then I could be done for breaking the promise, but the house would remain mine. Or something.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

...to which, through its nominee (in this case Broughton), you had given express permission to make the final decision on whether to sell.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=crump link=topic=41783.msg1190976#msg1190976 date=1286457650]
I might be being a bit stupid here, but I can't see how Broughton can force a sale at all.

He's got written undertakings to say that he can, but if the yanks don't sign then the club doesn't sell. Broughton could separately sue for breach of those undertakings, but that's a different thing altogether.

By the way, I don't know any of that as fact, it just seems logical. Like if I promised to sell my house under certain circumstances and they then happened, it would still be up to me to sign it over. If I didn't then I could be done for breaking the promise, but the house would remain mine. Or something.
[/quote]

I'd hope that LFCs lawyers would know the score with all this. There has to be some legal weight behind Broughton and co for them to be making this kind of forceful approach on the cunts.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=Squiggles link=topic=41783.msg1190690#msg1190690 date=1286419066]
[quote author=peekay link=topic=41783.msg1190685#msg1190685 date=1286417227]
Cant Harry Redknapp keep his mouth shut for once. Does he have to provide his opinion on everything and every other fracking player


"In all of this, I have utmost sympathy for the Reds' owners, George Gillett and Tom Hicks.

All they seem to have done is plough a fortune into the place and they stand to lose a fortune when they sell it.

But, for all that, all they get is grief week-in, week-out "
[/quote]

-Boots a ball in 'Arry's direction-


[/quote]

Thats why you're in the reserves.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=crump link=topic=41783.msg1190976#msg1190976 date=1286457650]
I might be being a bit stupid here, but I can't see how Broughton can force a sale at all.

He's got written undertakings to say that he can, but if the yanks don't sign then the club doesn't sell. Broughton could separately sue for breach of those undertakings, but that's a different thing altogether.

By the way, I don't know any of that as fact, it just seems logical. Like if I promised to sell my house under certain circumstances and they then happened, it would still be up to me to sign it over. If I didn't then I could be done for breaking the promise, but the house would remain mine. Or something.
[/quote]

this stuff is always confusing to me - stokeholders v board members

I'm sure everyone here has seen 'spider-man'
there is a scene where normal osborn (the green goblin) is told by his board they are selling the company, osborn is powerless to prevent it even though he OWNS THE COMPANY. HUH?! ???
the same thing is happening here, G&H own 100% of the stock of liverpool and are powerless to prevent the sale.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=ILD link=topic=41783.msg1190984#msg1190984 date=1286458402]
Thats why you're in the reserves.
[/quote]

The facking reserves.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=Sunny link=topic=41783.msg1190982#msg1190982 date=1286458226]
[quote author=crump link=topic=41783.msg1190976#msg1190976 date=1286457650]
I might be being a bit stupid here, but I can't see how Broughton can force a sale at all.

He's got written undertakings to say that he can, but if the yanks don't sign then the club doesn't sell. Broughton could separately sue for breach of those undertakings, but that's a different thing altogether.

By the way, I don't know any of that as fact, it just seems logical. Like if I promised to sell my house under certain circumstances and they then happened, it would still be up to me to sign it over. If I didn't then I could be done for breaking the promise, but the house would remain mine. Or something.
[/quote]

I'd hope that LFCs lawyers would know the score with all this. There has to be some legal weight behind Broughton and co for them to be making this kind of forceful approach on the cunts.
[/quote]

I know, I was just thinking about what would actually be presented to a judge to look at. Nothing is being repossessed or anything at this point. The RBS thing is a totally separate issue. The asset in this case is 100% owned by the yanks, but the chairman is selling it... It just seems well odd.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=41783.msg1190985#msg1190985 date=1286458409]
[quote author=crump link=topic=41783.msg1190976#msg1190976 date=1286457650]
I might be being a bit stupid here, but I can't see how Broughton can force a sale at all.

He's got written undertakings to say that he can, but if the yanks don't sign then the club doesn't sell. Broughton could separately sue for breach of those undertakings, but that's a different thing altogether.

By the way, I don't know any of that as fact, it just seems logical. Like if I promised to sell my house under certain circumstances and they then happened, it would still be up to me to sign it over. If I didn't then I could be done for breaking the promise, but the house would remain mine. Or something.
[/quote]

this stuff is always confusing to me - stokeholders v board members

I'm sure everyone here has seen 'spider-man'
there is a scene where normal osborn (the green goblin) is told by his board they are selling the company, osborn is powerless to prevent it even though he OWNS THE COMPANY. HUH?! ???
the same thing is happening here, G&H own 100% of the stock of liverpool and are powerless to prevent the sale.
[/quote]

Haha. I do remember that bit.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

Well, among other undertakings H and G gave one to agree to a "reasonable sale" and a cornerstone of Broughton's case is that they've already gone back on that. His view (and, I'm sure, that of RBS in the background) is that H and G therefore have no legal leg to stand on now. As already mentioned, it's Broughton who's taken the initiative to bring this before the court, so the legal boys and girls must be pretty darn clear that the majority on the board are on a winner.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

I think there's something in company law about no single shareholder being able to do anyhthing to detriment the health of the overall company. God knows. We could speculate to death here. For me, endgame is nigh in the next 8 days. New owners who we have to give every chance to or the old ones and I'm done with going to the match.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=41783.msg1190989#msg1190989 date=1286458608]
Well, among other undertakings H and G gave one to agree to a "reasonable sale" and a cornerstone of Broughton's case is that they've already gone back on that. His view (and, I'm sure, that of RBS in the background) is that H and G therefore have no legal leg to stand on now. As already mentioned, it's Broughton who's taken the initiative to bring this before the court, so the legal boys and girls must be pretty darn clear that the majority on the board are on a winner.
[/quote]

Defo. And I know I know bugger all compared to them legal boys and girls, but then one thing I do know of every dealing I ever had with those types, is that they've always been very happy to build a nice big fat expensive case.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=crump link=topic=41783.msg1190991#msg1190991 date=1286458839]
[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=41783.msg1190989#msg1190989 date=1286458608]
Well, among other undertakings H and G gave one to agree to a "reasonable sale" and a cornerstone of Broughton's case is that they've already gone back on that. His view (and, I'm sure, that of RBS in the background) is that H and G therefore have no legal leg to stand on now. As already mentioned, it's Broughton who's taken the initiative to bring this before the court, so the legal boys and girls must be pretty darn clear that the majority on the board are on a winner.
[/quote]

Defo. And I know I know bugger all compared to them legal boys and girls, but then one thing I do know of every dealing I ever had with those types, is that they've always been very happy to build a nice big fat expensive case.
[/quote]

They've probably been doing that already and in the background I'd imagine. It's been common knowledge this month was crunch time so people would have been preparing themselves.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

Your last but one post makes a key point too. Neil and one or two others can't seem to get past the idea that ownership = do WTF you like, but it's not that simple. For one thing, if the owners are in debt to others, those others are going to have rights and a say too. For another, company board members have a specific legal duty to the company, not to the owners, and where those things clash no court is going to expect board members to act (unlawfully) in the owners' interests rather than those of the company.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

Safe. I'm reassured enough to not have to read or think about it again til next week.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=Sunny link=topic=41783.msg1190990#msg1190990 date=1286458758]
I think there's something in company law about no single shareholder being able to do anyhthing to detriment the health of the overall company. God knows. We could speculate to death here. For me, endgame is nigh in the next 8 days. New owners who we have to give every chance to or the old ones and I'm done with going to the match.
[/quote]

basically this has got to through or it's the end of the club. if we didn't have a strong board hick would have already have forced through refinance with the club as security. fucking cunt.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=crump link=topic=41783.msg1190976#msg1190976 date=1286457650]
I might be being a bit stupid here, but I can't see how Broughton can force a sale at all.

He's got written undertakings to say that he can, but if the yanks don't sign then the club doesn't sell. Broughton could separately sue for breach of those undertakings, but that's a different thing altogether.

By the way, I don't know any of that as fact, it just seems logical. Like if I promised to sell my house under certain circumstances and they then happened, it would still be up to me to sign it over. If I didn't then I could be done for breaking the promise, but the house would remain mine. Or something.
[/quote]

I think it is as easy as that the club wasnt "owned" by H&G as such, but the bank, as Kop Holding owed the banks a HUGE sum they couldnt repay. SO the bank was kind enough to say that they got pro-longed time to repay the loan on the only condition that the club was put up for sale and Broughton handled the sale. That was the only way the bank new it would get their money. They in a way did not trust the yanks.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

Never mind "in a way", Broughton himself made that point pretty clearly yesterday when he said that he'd been appointed to give the sale process credibility "because Tom and George didn't have credibility".
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=crump link=topic=41783.msg1191000#msg1191000 date=1286459259]
Safe. I'm reassured enough to not have to read or think about it again til next week.
[/quote]

But you will 😉 We all will. One of the most important weeks in Liverpools history. There's a lot of worrying going on about the new potential owners too. The way I look at it is that, subject to the legal wrangling, NESV will be our new owners. I think we, as fans, have a duty to give them a clean slate to work with and not get bogged down in the mire of paranoia and suspicion that exists because of other owners. We should judge them on their actions I agree but the fans need to give them time to affect change before judging them guilty until proven innocent. The looney element need to back off and be careful of not alienating them as they need to do everything to reassure us in turn.

Every Amercian I've spoken to (and I've a good few contacts in the US) have said they have been good for the RedSox and good for baseball overall. I think, if they become our new owners, they deserve a chance and hope that they're clued up enough to realise that, if they treat the cluib and fans well, Liverpool fans will repay that investment tenfold. To do otherwise would be folly - look where the last lot got.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

RAWK kop are posting the email address of hick's lawers. bit of a waste of time that, they should hunt down the email address of the judge 😉
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=TheBunnyman link=topic=41783.msg1191013#msg1191013 date=1286459834]
This thread's getting really dull now.

Anyone know any jokes?
[/quote]

Why did the girl fall off the swing?


She had no arms.
 
Back
Top Bottom