LFC SOLD to NESV.

[localny]

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

JESUS, this is like an episode of Dallas. Gillett doesn't own half our club anymore, some hedge-fund does?

[size=11pt]George Gillett’s role now unclear in LFC after default on £75m loan
[/size]

THE role of George Gillett in Liverpool Football Club remains unclear as he is in default on a £75m loan he took out to invest in the club.

The loan from Mill Financial, an arm of US hedge fund Springfield Financial Company, should have been paid by the co-owner of the football club.

But it has not been and Mill Financial could take control of his shareholding.

At this stage the company does not appear to be exerting that much influence at Anfield, and has not returned calls from the ECHO, so its intentions are unclear.

Technically, Liverpool view the current legal dispute as a straight fight with Tom Hicks, not Gillett, owing to that £75m loan default.

But despite this debt not being paid, and unconfirmed reports that a US hedge fund took control of his share at Anfield, Gillett carried enough sway to join his co-owner in their attempt to vote Christian Purslow and Ian Ayre off the board during Tuesday’s extraordinary meeting.

For the time being George Gillett remains on the board of Kop Holdings along with co-owner Hicks, chairman Martin Broughton, managing director Purslow, and commercial director Ayre.

When buying Liverpool FC, the Americans set up a complex series of holding companies with an overriding parent company registered in Delaware.

Gillett’s £75m loan from Mill Financial is secured against his 50% share in the Delaware based parent company.

But the £237m RBS debt is secured against Kop Holdings, which sits much further down the line in the hierarchy of holding companies and just one level above Liverpool Football Club company, which ultimately controls the assets of the Reds – the playing squad, stadium, and commercial rights.

As the RBS debt is secured against the company in direct control of LFC it is in the strongest position to be repaid.

The £75m loan from Mill Financial provided the cash that Gillett used to invest in the club and had amounted to his Reds equity.

Read More http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2010/10/08/george-gillet-s-role-now-unclear-in-lfc-after-default-on-75m-loan-100252-27427765/2/#ixzz11pcYZmQc

 

[Squiggles]

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

This thread is more of a mind-fuck than Jason trying to explain the film, Inception.

 

[Fabio]

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

I like turtles

 

[FoxForceFive]

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

[quote author=Fabio link=topic=41783.msg1191970#msg1191970 date=1286618752]
I like turtles
[/quote]

Whilst they move more elegantly, tortoises have more intrinsic value, especially if one has a door that keeps closing or needs to reach something on a high shelf.

 

[Fabio]

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

[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=41783.msg1191973#msg1191973 date=1286619095]
[quote author=Fabio link=topic=41783.msg1191970#msg1191970 date=1286618752]
I like turtles
[/quote]

Whilst they move more elegantly, tortoises have more intrinsic value, especially if one has a door that keeps closing or needs to reach something on a high shelf.
[/quote]

Touche sir......

Well played

 

[SummerOnions]

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

[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=41783.msg1191973#msg1191973 date=1286619095]
[quote author=Fabio link=topic=41783.msg1191970#msg1191970 date=1286618752]
I like turtles
[/quote]

Whilst they move more elegantly, tortoises have more intrinsic value, especially if one has a door that keeps closing or needs to reach something on a high shelf.
[/quote]

And turtles lose the race. Aesop said so.

 

[Fabio]

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

[quote author=SummerOnions link=topic=41783.msg1191985#msg1191985 date=1286620016]
[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=41783.msg1191973#msg1191973 date=1286619095]
[quote author=Fabio link=topic=41783.msg1191970#msg1191970 date=1286618752]
I like turtles
[/quote]

Whilst they move more elegantly, tortoises have more intrinsic value, especially if one has a door that keeps closing or needs to reach something on a high shelf.
[/quote]

And turtles lose the race. Aesop said so.
[/quote]

Aesops wife was a whore.

Turtles FTW

 

[Terrier]

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

It wouldn't surprise me if G-H ended up going bankrupt from this deal.

What a disaster of an investment it's been for them.



Note to self: never buy a football club

 

[spider-Neil]

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

http://www.espn.co.uk/football/sport/story/49686.html?CMP=OTC-RSS

Liverpool chairman Martin Broughton has confirmed to ESPNsoccernet that the future of manager Roy Hodgson following a takeover is catered for in the provisions of his contract.

Prospective owners New England Sports Ventures (NESV), led by John W Henry, plans to sit down with Hodgson once the deal is complete to discuss his vision for Liverpool's future.

The men who own the Boston Red Sox have no immediate plans to install their own manager but Broughton was brutally honest about the situation Hodgson now faces, and how Hodgson entered into his Liverpool contract with his eyes wide open.

In an exclusive interview with ESPNsoccernet, Broughton revealed: "Roy knew when he signed up from Fulham that we were in the process of finding new owners, it was not a surprise to him. He was fully reconciled with the possibility there would be an ownership chance and the risk involved with that.

"But Roy is self confident and was, when he signed up, confident he was capable of doing the job at Liverpool. With that in mind provisions were made in Roy's contract to relate specifically to any change in ownership."

The 'break clause' in Hodgson's contract was revealed by ESPNsoccernet this week, although even then there were no hints that a change in manager was being planned immediately.

"I suggested that the clause relates to Hodgson being paid a full year's salary within 28 days should the new owners want to bring in their own manager," Broughton commented: "I don't have Roy's contract in front of me, so I can't comment on that, but it is something like that in his contract.

"But he came to the club knowing full well the circumstances and the risks attached to it."

Hodgson will have to prove himself to the new owners. Broughton added: "I would full expect Roy to continue as manager and there has been no indication to me to suggest otherwise. However, as we all know, at the end of the day, everything depends on results."

 

[peterhague]

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

sounds quite ominous for roy, does that.

 

[Fabio]

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

I think he gets the derby. That's it.

 

[Terrier]

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

[quote author=Fabio link=topic=41783.msg1192003#msg1192003 date=1286621605]
I think he gets the derby. That's it.
[/quote]


He'll get till Xmas.

I'll be shocked if any less.

 

[Rafiagra]

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

Yeah, it basically sounds like Broughton saying Roy has done himself no favours so far.

I saw one report that mentioned NESV wanted Klinsmann to come in.

 

[Buddha]

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

[quote author=peterhague link=topic=41783.msg1192002#msg1192002 date=1286621534]
sounds quite ominous for roy, does that.
[/quote]

Good. A new start all round would do us good. Give the new manager 3/4 of a season to bed and get ready for next year.

 

[TheBunnyman]

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

We need to get the choice of new manager right though, and that may take time. It would be better for everyone if Roy could turn our results round and get us higher up the table. The last thing we need is to be rushed into appointing a new manager because the club is mired in the relegation zone.

 

[Rafiagra]

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

The problem with this takeover is that we need Man City-esque investment in the team if we are to get back up challenging, and nothing so far indicates this will be possible.

Yes, we will have no debt and so hopefully there will be the cash from loan repayments. However, we arent getting the CL revenue.

We need another £20m striker and about the same on an attacking wide player. Add to that 2 fullbacks and a new CB. And to top all of that we need a new manager who can bring these players in and get them performing.

 

[Wilko7]

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

No, we don't need Man City like spending.

 

[Judge Jules]

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

It occurs to me that we've heard nothing about yesterday's application by Hicks for an injunction to uphold his and Gillett's earlier attempt to replace Purslow and Ayre on the board. I'm open to correction on this, but I'd have thought that has to mean the application failed. Otherwise next week's court action would have collapsed, because the court would already have decided yesterday that two members of the board who agreed to sell the club to NESV couldn't validly do so. Avvy, any views?

 

[ctlovesred]

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

Not exactly sure how an injunction works in the UK, but over here they are sought in anticipation of more extensive court action in order to preserve the status quo. In this case, Hicks is looking to stop any change to the status quo of ownership before the judge has a chance to rule on the merits of the case this week. Not getting granted might suggest that the judge isn't inclined to Hicks' point of view, but it might also mean that the risk of significant changes to the status quo before Tues or whatever day the case comes up is small enough not to merit the injunction.

Of course, this would be based on US law. Could be different over yonder.

By the way, how's it going JJ?

 

[peterhague]

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

[quote author=Rafiagra link=topic=41783.msg1192035#msg1192035 date=1286626467]
The problem with this takeover is that we need Man City-esque investment in the team if we are to get back up challenging, and nothing so far indicates this will be possible.

Yes, we will have no debt and so hopefully there will be the cash from loan repayments. However, we arent getting the CL revenue.

We need another £20m striker and about the same on an attacking wide player. Add to that 2 fullbacks and a new CB. And to top all of that we need a new manager who can bring these players in and get them performing.


[/quote]


i don't think we need massive investment, i'd have thought about £50m would go a long way, certainly to getting us back in the CL. if we assume we can bring in £20m from babel and aquilani then it's not inconceivable that the other £30m can be found from the club and the owners, plus whatever we get from a couple of other sales.

 

[Judge Jules]

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

Hey ct, I'm well, my friend, hope the same goes for you and yours.

As far as I know, injunctions work pretty similarly on both sides of the pond. In this instance, though, if the matter's been correctly reported Hicks wasn't just seeking an injunction to prevent the sale going through till the substantive hearing next week, but was seeking to overturn the validity of the whole process by having the make-up of the board which agreed the sale declared unlawful. Had he been successful in that, surely next week's hearing would have fallen through altogether as there would then be, in effect, no sale in law for the court to rule upon.

 

[peterhague]

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

from the telegraph:

According to the shareholders' agreement dating back to their £218.9 million takeover in February 2007, Hicks and Gillett agreed that debt repayment would not to any significant extent depend on the club's revenues. "We have bought the club with no debt on the club," Gillett said at the time.

That the legacy of their acquisition debt to the Royal Bank of Scotland now stands at £200 million, costing some £40 million in interest repayments every year, is likely to be used by Slaughter and May, the lawyers engaged by the club's chairman, to call into question the pair's credibility when the High Court hears the case next week.


Related Articles
Why would anyone want to buy Liverpool?
Dear Mr Hicks
Premier League approve Liverpool takeover
Liverpool takeover: key men
Broughton: points loss would be 'catastrophic'
Rush: No excuses for Reds players Though legal experts believe the outcome depends on the strength of the written undertakings Broughton insists Hicks and Gillett have signed, giving him the right to sell the club, the Americans' case will centre on whether the price the chairman has agreed with New England Sports Ventures is a reasonable one.

NESV will pay £300 million to replace Hicks and Gillett, who estimate the club is worth about £600 million.

They will appeal to the court that Broughton, along with managing director Christian Purslow and commercial director Ian Ayre, has a fiduciary duty to the shareholders to secure the best possible price for the club, but they will need to prove both that their valuation is realistic and that another buyer can be found. In such circumstances, their credibility is key.

Hicks's only other hope of retaining control of the club lies in either gazumping NESV's bid or in finding the funds to pay off the £282 million owed to RBS before the bank calls in its debt on Friday.

Should neither circumstance materialise, Liverpool's prospective owners will take control – either after a court case or after the club has been placed into administration – and seek talks with both the city council and fans' groups over plans to redevelop Anfield or build the long-awaited new stadium on Stanley Park as a matter of urgency.

Increasing Liverpool's capacity is key to NESV's business plan but the group, led by John W Henry, is determined to keep an open mind as to whether that is at an extended Anfield or at the new stadium which the club's present owners promised to build when they arrived on Merseyside.

NESV successfully redeveloped Fenway Park, the home of the Boston Red Sox, but is likely to meet opposition from the city council should they attempt to do the same at Anfield.

Though the group intend to repay a £9.6 million loan from the city council for the new stadium and have not signed a binding agreement to build the club's new home, they insist they remain open to both options.

 

[Avmenon]

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

[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=41783.msg1192037#msg1192037 date=1286626884]
It occurs to me that we've heard nothing about yesterday's application by Hicks for an injunction to uphold his and Gillett's earlier attempt to replace Purslow and Ayre on the board. I'm open to correction on this, but I'd have thought that has to mean the application failed. Otherwise next week's court action would have collapsed, because the court would already have decided yesterday that two members of the board who agreed to sell the club to NESV couldn't validly do so. Avvy, any views?
[/quote]

Has it been heard yet?

I'd have thought the result would have been big news either way.

If it were an interim injunction being souhgt, the failure or success of it probably wouldnt have an impact on the substative hearing wich should be held some time after the interim hearing.

(The interim injunction is only allowed where the timing of the application is crucial ie where failure to get the interim order would make the substantive hearing academic, as an example)

The most likely result I see from the interim injunction is that Boughton will win it, ie the court will agree that the preliminary point abut the validity of Hick's appointments can only be determined at the substantive hearing once the powers conferred by RBS' debenture/charge are known.

 

[Hansern]

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

The Echo says the court case will start on tuesday.

 

[Jürgen4PM]

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

NESV deal is in 'best interests' of Hicks and Gillett
By Harry Harris, Football Correspondent

Liverpool's ace card against Tom Hicks and George Gillett in the looming court case is that the £300 million takeover by New England Sports Ventures is actually in the best interests of the outgoing owners - because it wipes out a massive £110 million worth of personal guarantees to the Royal Bank of Scotland.

Hicks and Gillett stand to lose a total of £254 million if the move by the owners of the Boston Red Sox collapses and they cannot find a replacement new owner by Friday.

ESPNsoccernet can exclusively reveal the cornerstone of Liverpool's case at the High Court next week is that the takeover is in everyone's best interests. The hearing is not likely until Tuesday at the earliest.

An inside source said: "It's in Hicks and Gillett's best interests, the board will argue, because it caps their losses at £144 million. Part of the deal with NESV is that the Royal Bank of Scotland wipe out the £110 million of personal guarantees."

An out of court settlement with Hicks and Gillett cannot be ruled out as the board is so confident that they will win the case.

Liverpool chairman Martin Broughton cannot comment on the specifics of the case, but he has told ESPNsoccernet that he believes he can win the case and the takeover can go through.

Behind the scenes 'negotiations' are clearly going on between the warring factions aimed at avoiding a messy public court hearing that would tear the club apart. Equally, the court hearing, which comes just days before Friday's deadline with the Royal Bank of Scotland, is unlikely to be the end of the legal wranglings, as whoever losses the initial hearing is sure to seek an appeal.

On the issue of an appeal, Liverpool's lawyers will argue that if Hicks and Gillett lose and the takeover can go through, and they call for an appeal, it would seriously jeopardise the takeover, and potentially throw the club into administration, thereby putting the club's survival at risk.

If the legal actions drag to a second hearing, it is inevitable that RBS will have to take some decision on Friday, most likely to suspend the outcome of whether to put the club into administration pending the final court room verdict. The logical solution is for both sets of lawyers to find some sort of middle ground, even if it is a settlement on the steps of the High Court. There is no direct contact anymore between the factions, with Hicks and Gillett one one side and the three English members of the board led by Broughton on the other.

Broughton told ESPNsoccernet exclusively: "All of these issues I cannot possibly comment on, as this is going to court, one would assume. We have no date for the hearing yet, but we are told it is a 'short order' and so it would be any day hopefully early next week. The lawyers have told me I am not unable to talk about the case directly."

However, without going into any legal detail, Broughton said: "Yes, I am confident we shall win. However we all know when you have two sets of lawyers they are both telling you that they are 100% confident that they will win."

There is one central key issue of the entire legal procedure, and Broughton made that abundantly clear: "We are going to the courts seeking clarification that we are able to proceed with the sale of Liverpool FC."

Although Hicks publicly declared that he had given no undertaking directly to Broughton about the constitution of the board and the sale process being determined by the board (rather than the shareholders when he did his deal with RBS to extend the facility for six months), Broughton confirmed that such an undertaking was given to RBS.

Broughton said: "The obligation was given to RBS as part of the loan extension agreement. If an undertaking was given to the major creditor, than an undertaking was given."

In another twist, leaked minutes from a Liverpool board meeting allegedly contain Hicks making personal and abusive comments about Liverpool fans, which will increase the hatred already felt by the supporters against the current owners.

 

[RolandG]

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

I think that the extensive lengths that Broughton marketed the club in his efforts to find a buyer will be a big factor in the case.

The written undertakings by G&H to RBS and Broughton will determine the outcome of the case as it would point to the Board acting within its mandate.

I'm unusually confident that the sale will go through after a ruling in favour of the Board.

 

[FoxForceFive]

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

"leaked minutes from a Liverpool board meeting allegedly contain Hicks making personal and abusive comments about Liverpool fans"

Anyone read these?

I'm surprised SoS havent sent them out.

 

[spider-Neil]

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

[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=41783.msg1192139#msg1192139 date=1286649970]
"leaked minutes from a Liverpool board meeting allegedly contain Hicks making personal and abusive comments about Liverpool fans"

Anyone read these?

I'm surprised SoS havent sent them out.
[/quote]

we hate him and he hates us, so it's not really news.

 

[Oncy]

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

[quote author=Fabio link=topic=41783.msg1191977#msg1191977 date=1286619307]
[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=41783.msg1191973#msg1191973 date=1286619095]
[quote author=Fabio link=topic=41783.msg1191970#msg1191970 date=1286618752]
I like turtles
[/quote]

Whilst they move more elegantly, tortoises have more intrinsic value, especially if one has a door that keeps closing or needs to reach something on a high shelf.
[/quote]

Touche sir......

Well played
[/quote]Touche Turtle.

 

[Jack D Rips]

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

FINAL INSULT FROM HICKS
Protesting Kop branded 'a noise we have been dealing with'

By Chris Bascombe
Follow me on Twitter


TOM HICKS has delivered the final insult to The Kop by arrogantly dismissing them as 'noise we are dealing with'.

The amazing jibe was made by Liverpool owner Hicks on his last visit to England.


Hicks put the condescending 'noise' claim in writing as part of an outlined refinancing package. However, he still claimed to be 'sensitive' to the fans' desire to see him go.


Hicks met with fellow Anfield directors in a board meeting on September 15, although there is no suggestion he presented the explosive document to them.

In an astonishing insight into the Texan's erratic behaviour, he brazenly shrugged off the supporters' hatred under a section entitled 'noise we are dealing with'.


Hicks also backtracked from earlier claims he valued Liverpool as highly as £800million.


He said the only reason he had pitched the club between £600m and £800m was because too many people were talking about selling just for the £282m owed to RBS.


In fact, Hicks predicted the Reds would fetch somewhere between the RBS debt level and £600m.


Liverpool have now agreed a £300m sale to New England Sports Ventures.


The rest of the board - two of which Hicks tried to sack this week - are stunned by the American's bizarre antics.


The revulsion with which he is held by supporters has already reached fever pitch.


Alan Kayll, from the Kop Faithful group, said: "Hicks Jr was forced to resign for insulting one fan. Hicks Snr has now gone further by insulting all Liverpool fans.


"This underlines the utter contempt and disregard he has for how supporters feel."


Hicks goes to the High Court this week in an attempt to block the takeover by Boston Red Sox owner John W Henry.