• 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)

Not as if it's the most significant failure of their regime, but my god the PR we are seeing now from Broughton & NESV outmanoeuvres everything we've seen out of Hicks' whole time in charge, which was often completely laughable.

Articles talking about what geniuses the group was with the Red Sox.

Articles about how their take overs are fundamentally different.

Broughton coming out swinging.

Articles playing up the threat of failure.

Articles playing down any other interest.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

"Sorry, you are banned from using this forum!
you've been warned plenty of times now just fuck off
Your ban is not set to expire."

Hahah. I think it was my pointing out that Bamba turned out not to know anything whatsoever, outside of what the PR representing Huang's non-existent "consortium" had given him.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=41783.msg1192206#msg1192206 date=1286669502]
"Sorry, you are banned from using this forum!
you've been warned plenty of times now just fuck off
Your ban is not set to expire."

Hahah. I think it was my pointing out that Bamba turned out not to know anything whatsoever, outside of what the PR representing Huang's non-existent "consortium" had given him.


[/quote]

You'll be banned from 6CM for knowing nothing about Bud Fox and Blue Star!
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

"Blue Horseshoe LOVES Anacott steel (and NESV too!)"
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

i just want to say having read a few more articles, I am extremely impressed with Broughton. He's brought things to a head, managed a very political situation really well, and hasn't ducked the tough decisions. I was expecting someone to go the easy route. But no, he's put his reputation on the line. I'm impressed - it feels like he's been looking out for us.

PS is the Alonso thread the record thread still? How big?
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

I know Pesam says it won't happen, but everyone else is taking the idea seriously. Now NESV say they won't go through with the sale if we are docked the points!



Sale of the Anfield club could be affected by administration


By Dan Roan
BBC sports news correspondent

Liverpool's proposed takeover by New England Sports Ventures (NESV) could be jeopardised if the club is docked nine points, BBC Sport understands.

An NESV source said the penalty, which is likely if the club's parent company goes into administration, would be "a deal breaker".

Liverpool chairman Martin Broughton told BBC Sport that the threat of NESV walking away "is not my understanding".

But he has admitted that administration would be "catastrophic" for the club.

NESV's proposed £300m takeover is set to be opposed in the High Court next week by Liverpool owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett.

Their parent company Kop Holdings owe £280m to Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) and must pay by 15 October.

If the American duo are successful in blocking the proposed sale, or if it is delayed beyond next Friday, RBS may place Kop Holdings into administration to release the money owed to them.

Because the club is the only asset of Kop Holdings, the Premier League would then be likely to deduct nine points, leaving Liverpool on -3 points and bottom of the table after a dismal start to the season.

It now appears this could dissuade NESV from concluding any sale but if for some reason a deal with the American group is scuppered, BBC Sport sources have learned that the Asian consortium that has also tabled a bid for the Merseysiders could then be in a position to proceed.

Broughton said on Friday he fears the club is at risk of entering administration, leaving it devalued and "wide open to predators".

"Setting aside the nine-point deduction, it would have an impact on Liverpool's value and be wide open to predators, whereas we have what we believe is the right new owners to take the club forward," he told ESPN.

"This is all part of why it is important that we made the decision on Tuesday to accept one or the other of two very acceptable bids.

"Heading into administration was a very likely outcome if we didn't. Even now with the court case looming, administration cannot be ruled out."

Reds co-owners Hicks and Gillett oppose the sale as they value Liverpool at double NESV's bid, but they have been outvoted by the rest of the board.

BBC Sport understands that RBS is pushing to have the owners' opposition to the sale heard in the High Court on Tuesday, in order to leave as much time as possible before the deadline.

Whenever Hicks and Gillett's case is eventually heard, thousands of Liverpool fans are expected to make the journey to London to voice their protest over the duo's ownership of the club.

Should the pair be unsuccessful in court and NESV go ahead with their bid to buy Liverpool - a proposal which has been approved by the Premier League - Reds boss Roy Hodgson could expect to face discussions on his future.

Broughton has said that is a situation Hodgson was aware of when he arrived at Anfield and that a break clause in his contract addresses the possibility that new owners may want to bring in their own man.

"Provisions were made in Roy's contract to relate specifically to any change in ownership," Broughton stated.

The Reds chairman said he expected Hodgson to continue as manager, but added: "He came to the club knowing full well the circumstances and the risks attached to it."

Broughton said he believed that in NESV, who own the Boston Red Sox baseball team, he had found the right buyers to take the club forward.

And he also admitted to having searched the world looking for potential suitors such as those at Premier League rivals Chelsea, owned by Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich.

"We hoped for someone who wanted a 'trophy asset', but having scoured the world without finding one, the conclusion is that there are no more Romans out there," he said.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

That's their best argument though, they are all making the case in public in advance of the trial.

NESV say they won't buy the club if it is docked points.
The board says it will be docked points should the club go into administration.
Broughton says that no other purchasers are available, and certainly none willing to pay Hicks' valuation.

If that is all accepted as true, then it's reasonable to say that this was the best option for the club, which the board have an obligation to follow.

The only thing that disturbs me is the effort going into this whole PR push, as if everyone isn't quite as certain as they seem, though that's probably paranoia talking. It also seems irrelevant to the case in many respects. The primary question is whether the board was legally reconstituted or not. If the case is being made that the new board wouldn't be carrying out it's fiduciary duty, is that a tacit acceptance of weakness on the initial point regarding the illegality of the board's reconstitution?
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

No Press is Bad Press

I think this rings true.

2 thumbs up to Broughton, he's done admirably.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=41783.msg1192240#msg1192240 date=1286695371]
That's their best argument though, they are all making the case in public in advance of the trial.

NESV say they won't buy the club if it is docked points.
The board says it will be docked points should the club go into administration.
Broughton says that no other purchasers are available, and certainly none willing to pay Hicks' valuation.

If that is all accepted as true, then it's reasonable to say that this was the best option for the club, which the board have an obligation to follow.

The only thing that disturbs me is the effort going into this whole PR push, as if everyone isn't quite as certain as they seem, though that's probably paranoia talking. It also seems irrelevant to the case in many respects. The primary question is whether the board was legally reconstituted or not. If the case is being made that the new board wouldn't be carrying out it's fiduciary duty, is that a tacit acceptance of weakness on the initial point regarding the illegality of the board's reconstitution?
[/quote]

Yep. It's funny how all the PR is now saying that the 9 points is a distinct possibility when it was stated by the PL a few weeks ago we wont be & there's precedents set.

It's obvious that a judge will hear this coverage & regardless how they're not meant to use any prior knowledge in court everyone does, & will, it's human nature.

This is clearly a strategy.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

I think so too.

The risk of administration plays into Broughton's hands especialy now that NESV have chimed in.

If there were a real risk of a 9 point deduction AND that there was no way NESV would have gone ahead with the deal in that case, there's no way Hick's actions in frustrating the sale by means of the new appointments of directors (when he's already failed to refinance and failed to come up with viable buyers due to his ridiculous valuation) would be deemed to be in the best intrests of the club as whole.

The issue is whether Broughton acted 'reasonably' and whether he deliberately tried to defraud the shareholders by selling at a gross undervalue, and with those risks as mentioned..he probably acted very reasonably.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=41783.msg1192240#msg1192240 date=1286695371]
That's their best argument though, they are all making the case in public in advance of the trial.

NESV say they won't buy the club if it is docked points.
The board says it will be docked points should the club go into administration.
Broughton says that no other purchasers are available, and certainly none willing to pay Hicks' valuation.

If that is all accepted as true, then it's reasonable to say that this was the best option for the club, which the board have an obligation to follow.

The only thing that disturbs me is the effort going into this whole PR push, as if everyone isn't quite as certain as they seem, though that's probably paranoia talking. It also seems irrelevant to the case in many respects. The primary question is whether the board was legally reconstituted or not. If the case is being made that the new board wouldn't be carrying out it's fiduciary duty, is that a tacit acceptance of weakness on the initial point regarding the illegality of the board's reconstitution?
[/quote]

I think you're right about that.

I was a bit concerned with the validity of the appointments.

Still am actually.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

Reading the latest articles, I'm not to sure this case will go to court now. Wouldn't surprise me the least if it was resolved on monday.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

From the Sunday Times;

Hicks calls on US hedge fund in fight to keep Liverpool

Tom Hicks, co-owner of Liverpool football club, has joined forces with Mill Financial, a secretive American hedge fund, in a last-ditch attempt to prevent the club being sold against his wishes...

...Hicks, meanwhile, is scrambling to find backers to bail him out. It is thought the Texan businessman has pinned his hopes on support from Mill Financial and its contacts in the hedge-fund world.

Mill Financial has, in effect, taken control of 50% of Liverpool’s shares since Hicks’s partner, George Gillett, defaulted on the loan it gave him to finance his half of the club’s £218m buyout in 2007.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

This is where it gets a litle iffy.

The idea of 'in effect' is dangerous; if Gillette had defaulted, then Mill Financial should have taken steps to assume ownership of the shares.

This wasnt done obviously because Gillette's lawyer was at the meeting.

I think Broughton was perfectly within his rights to deal with Gillette.

Bit murky though.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

Does anybody ever momentarily misread New England Sports Vultures?
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=41783.msg1192240#msg1192240 date=1286695371]
That's their best argument though, they are all making the case in public in advance of the trial.

NESV say they won't buy the club if it is docked points.
The board says it will be docked points should the club go into administration.
Broughton says that no other purchasers are available, and certainly none willing to pay Hicks' valuation.

If that is all accepted as true, then it's reasonable to say that this was the best option for the club, which the board have an obligation to follow.

The only thing that disturbs me is the effort going into this whole PR push, as if everyone isn't quite as certain as they seem, though that's probably paranoia talking. It also seems irrelevant to the case in many respects. The primary question is whether the board was legally reconstituted or not. If the case is being made that the new board wouldn't be carrying out it's fiduciary duty, is that a tacit acceptance of weakness on the initial point regarding the illegality of the board's reconstitution?
[/quote]


no, i don't think so. the board has two arguments to win:

1. they are legally constituted, due to Hicks's sacking of CP & IA being illegal
2. being legally constituted, they performed their fiduciary duty to the shareholders in accepting the bid (ie it wasn't a gross undervaluation).
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=41783.msg1192206#msg1192206 date=1286669502]
"Sorry, you are banned from using this forum!
you've been warned plenty of times now just fuck off



[/quote]

that reads like you were banned by bren 😉
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=41783.msg1192255#msg1192255 date=1286699690]
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=41783.msg1192240#msg1192240 date=1286695371]
That's their best argument though, they are all making the case in public in advance of the trial.

NESV say they won't buy the club if it is docked points.
The board says it will be docked points should the club go into administration.
Broughton says that no other purchasers are available, and certainly none willing to pay Hicks' valuation.

If that is all accepted as true, then it's reasonable to say that this was the best option for the club, which the board have an obligation to follow.

The only thing that disturbs me is the effort going into this whole PR push, as if everyone isn't quite as certain as they seem, though that's probably paranoia talking. It also seems irrelevant to the case in many respects. The primary question is whether the board was legally reconstituted or not. If the case is being made that the new board wouldn't be carrying out it's fiduciary duty, is that a tacit acceptance of weakness on the initial point regarding the illegality of the board's reconstitution?
[/quote]

I think you're right about that.

I was a bit concerned with the validity of the appointments.

Still am actually.
[/quote]

Well, you're the lawyer, Avvy, but how likely is it that Broughton and his lawyers would have taken the initative and launched this court action if they were in any real doubt on this point? Surely they must believe there's a cast iron case, based on H and G's written undertakings to RBS, against Hicks' attempt to reconstitute the board separately from Broughton.

Like Peter above, once the legality of the make-up of the board has been dealt with I doubt very much that Broughton's case concerns what the new board would or wouldn't have done. The merits of each course of action won't be affected by the question of who would undertake it.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

Now the secretive world of hedge funds emerges. Next. Will the Mafia, Da Vinci codes characters come out of the shadows?
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=41783.msg1192240#msg1192240 date=1286695371]
That's their best argument though, they are all making the case in public in advance of the trial.

NESV say they won't buy the club if it is docked points.
The board says it will be docked points should the club go into administration.
Broughton says that no other purchasers are available, and certainly none willing to pay Hicks' valuation.

If that is all accepted as true, then it's reasonable to say that this was the best option for the club, which the board have an obligation to follow.

The only thing that disturbs me is the effort going into this whole PR push, as if everyone isn't quite as certain as they seem, though that's probably paranoia talking. It also seems irrelevant to the case in many respects. The primary question is whether the board was legally reconstituted or not. If the case is being made that the new board wouldn't be carrying out it's fiduciary duty, is that a tacit acceptance of weakness on the initial point regarding the illegality of the board's reconstitution?
[/quote]

I don't think it is paranoia Farky, Broughton has suggested as much, it may be a deal that's been in the pipeline for sometime, but after years of turning potential buyers away, you have to wonder.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

PURSLOW CONFIDENT OF TAKEOVER

Liverpool chief executive Christian Purslow is confident the proposed £300million sale of the club to New England Sports Ventures will go through.

Purslow maintained the Reds board had "done their homework" on the American investment group, which owns the Boston Red Sox baseball team, and said that the club's £237m debt would be wiped out if the takeover, which is subject to a High Court challenge from current owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett, goes through next week.

He also insisted manager Roy Hodgson's job was safe and that the Liverpool fans would be given a voice should the new owners be able to complete their takeover.

Hicks and Gillett borrowed money from the Royal Bank of Scotland to complete their purchase of Liverpool in 2007, a debt which Purslow insists would be wiped out by an NESV buy-out.

Purslow told BBC Radio Five Live's Sportsweek programme: "My total priority has been to try to remove the debt which has been put on this club and which has been a cloud since February 2007.

"It is wrong that we should have so much of the money that comes through the turnstiles or through our commercial activity go to pay interest on loans.

"A bidder who has been willing with cash to rid of us of all this long-term debt is by far the largest and most important priority in evaluating bids.

"We have done our homework and NESV are buying this business with cash and clearing our debt which transforms our financial position overnight."

Hicks and Gillett have launched a legal challenge to the takeover, describing it as invalid and insisting that the offer by NESV under-valued the club. The High Court case is set to begin on Tuesday.

If the court rules in favour of Hicks and Gillett, RBS could call in their debt as early as Friday, when repayment is due in full, and force Kop Holdings into administration.

That would almost certainly result in a nine-point penalty being imposed on the club by the Premier League, which would leave them bottom of the table on minus three points.

However, Purslow said: "I'm not even contemplating administration."

Purslow added that the prospect of administration had not been discussed with NESV, who own American baseball team the Boston Red Sox, and all efforts were focused on tying up the deal.

Speaking on BBC Radio 5 Live's Sportsweek programme Purslow also gave an insight into why NESV had chosen Liverpool, saying:

"Last Monday we had two very good offers to buy our business that would clear all our debts and I am completely focused on making sure that the sale completes.

"They (NESV) see a number of parallels with the Red Sox when they purchased them and Liverpool today and the word that jumps off the page every time we sit with them is 'winning.'

"They see winning on the field is linked to how you perform commercially off the field. They go hand in hand. It's extremely enjoyable to make sports clubs more successful. Whether you're a poor or a rich sports fan, winning is great fun and I sense both of those things when we meet with these people.

"They approached us. They met our chairman. He was immediately struck with their seriousness and the entire senior management team of NESV came to Liverpool.

"They spent a large amount of time in the club doing their work and those are important signs of people's seriousness in the transaction business."

Purslow said he was convinced NESV, fronted by businessman John W Henry, would supply cash for team building and unlike Hicks and Gillett would maintain a high-profile presence at Anfield.

Purslow said: "You don't spend £300m on buying a sports team for it to be a mediocre team.

"If they buy Liverpool I would expect them to be very visible around the business. They are serious people, they're deadly serious about wanting to succeed. I can't imagine they'd be hands-off for one minute."

Purslow also insisted that if the deal went through the Liverpool fans, who have protested vociferously against the current owners, would be given a say in how the club was run.

He said: "Our fans have felt totally disenfranchised by the experience of the last three years. One thing I really liked about NESV is they are really serious about the importance of engaging with their fans.

"I've asked them to consider a scheme at our club that will give our fans a real sense of ownership, a real sense of inclusion, the kind of voice they deserve and NESV have told us they'll look at this very seriously if they complete.

"It's not been easy with the current owners - tensions have been high and so that side of things has been difficult but now that we have potential new ownership I don't want to miss the opportunity to make sure that our fans never again feel so disenfranchised.

"The most important principle is that fans need to feel that they have a means to express their views and to be listened to and the sense of ownership obviously is the most extreme example of that."

Purslow also urged Hicks and Gillett to call off their High Court action and to walk away from Anfield for the good of the club.

He said: "Right now they do have an opportunity with one simple short correspondence today to allow a sale to complete and that would clear the club of all the acquisition debt and give us a massive lift before the Everton game (next Sunday). A fresh start and real hope for our fans and players that we can get back to the top.

"That's in their gift and would enable them to leave with some dignity and some peace rather than precipitating a messy dispute. I hope they'll think about that."

When asked about Hodgson's contract, which had been reported to include an exit clause, Purslow said: "There is nothing in Roy's contract which is not totally standard under the LMA (League Managers' Association) guidelines."

Pressed if Hodgson would be part of the set-up if the takeover is completed Puslow replied: "Absolutely."

Purslow, however, was unclear whether it would mean a new stadium for the club.

"We've shown NESV all the plans around the stadium that we have planning permisson for in Stanley Park," said Purslow.

"They know we believe this is the way forward and have been very impressed by that. It's been a key ingredient in attracting them to Liverpool.

"A bit too much has been made that when they bought the Red Sox they refurbished the existing stadium. In fact the same ownership group in two previous teams built new stadia in Baltimore and San Diego.

"It's simple, given that a new owner will be paying for a new stadium it is entirely reasonable and their prerogative that when they get here they want to pull up the carpets, fine-tune the detail that we are proposing and make their final decision. They want to increase the capacity of Liverpool Football Club."
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

I was just about to post that. Slightly worrying that he's still trying to persuade Hicks to back off to avoid 'a messy dispute'. I thought the idea was that this would drag on no longer than a week anyway? Or could Hicks take it to a higher court if he lost the case?
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=Buddha link=topic=41783.msg1192341#msg1192341 date=1286716694]
eh?
[/quote]

I guess it's sarcasm as purslow was slated by many fans as a snake like two faced cunt & it runs out he does actually seem to want the best for us.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=TheBunnyman link=topic=41783.msg1192325#msg1192325 date=1286713555]
I was just about to post that. Slightly worrying that he's still trying to persuade Hicks to back off to avoid 'a messy dispute'. I thought the idea was that this would drag on no longer than a week anyway? Or could Hicks take it to a higher court if he lost the case?
[/quote]

I'm afraid Hicks has form for dragging these things out. He fought the loss of the Texas Rangers for months through the US courts, which was a nuisance despite it being clear to nearly everyone that he was going to lose in the end. There's no harm in Purslow seeing if by some chance he can persuade Hicks not to throw good money after bad if (as is still likely) he loses next week.

If and when Hicks does lose, I believe he'd have to ask for leave to appeal. As I understand it, leave is generally granted but the judge can say no if he or she thinks there's no arguable case to put before the Court of Appeal. If the judge says no next week, Hicks might still be able to ask the Court of Appeal itself for leave instead, but they will certainly not want their time wasted. Other things to bear in mind are (a) that all this will be very expensive for anyone going through it and (b) that Hicks has only until next Friday to pay RBS back, court action or no court action, so the matter could well be taken out of his hands by the bank at that stage if it isn't resolved by then.
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

I'm guessing the 'other' Asian bidder is just a ploy to apply urgency and pressure on the yanks to give up.

anyone know who the asians are ? or are they non-existent ?
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

[quote author=My_Blood_Bleeds_Red link=topic=41783.msg1192350#msg1192350 date=1286719079]
I'm guessing the 'other' Asian bidder is just a ploy to apply urgency and pressure on the yanks to give up.

anyone know who the asians are ? or are they non-existent ?
[/quote]

well there are more than 3 billions Asians....
 
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)

I think it was narrowed down to Singapore, although it still might turn out be invented. Who knows?
 
Back
Top Bottom