LFC SOLD to NESV.
- Thread starter Terrier
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)
[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=41783.msg1192639#msg1192639 date=1286805445]
The original question was a daft one anyway, because it's based on neil's obsession with RBS refinancing when that was never remotely likely in the first place.
[/quote]
How unlikely was it, do you think?
As "remotely unlikely" as, say, Carlos Tevez joing Liverpool from Man Utd?
ie at the "never going to fucking happen for a million and one reasons, as everybody knows" end of the "unlikely" scale?
[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=41783.msg1192639#msg1192639 date=1286805445]
The original question was a daft one anyway, because it's based on neil's obsession with RBS refinancing when that was never remotely likely in the first place.
[/quote]
How unlikely was it, do you think?
As "remotely unlikely" as, say, Carlos Tevez joing Liverpool from Man Utd?
ie at the "never going to fucking happen for a million and one reasons, as everybody knows" end of the "unlikely" scale?
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)
[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=41783.msg1192639#msg1192639 date=1286805445]
The original question was a daft one anyway, because it's based on neil's obsession with RBS refinancing when that was never remotely likely in the first place.
[/quote]
okay, so when hicks attempted to secure refinance (with blackstone) using anfield as security he was only messing around...?
[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=41783.msg1192639#msg1192639 date=1286805445]
The original question was a daft one anyway, because it's based on neil's obsession with RBS refinancing when that was never remotely likely in the first place.
[/quote]
okay, so when hicks attempted to secure refinance (with blackstone) using anfield as security he was only messing around...?
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=41783.msg1192622#msg1192622 date=1286804284]
[quote author=Hansern link=topic=41783.msg1192618#msg1192618 date=1286803679]
Starts 10.30 tomorrow
Bloomberg learns Kop Football, Liverpool parent, is already in default. RBS could have put the club into administration any day not Oct 15.
[/quote]
This is excellent news.
THIS was the news I was hoping for.
I'm feeling more optimistic now.
[/quote]
Ah a lawyer's prayer answered!
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=41783.msg1192622#msg1192622 date=1286804284]
[quote author=Hansern link=topic=41783.msg1192618#msg1192618 date=1286803679]
Starts 10.30 tomorrow
Bloomberg learns Kop Football, Liverpool parent, is already in default. RBS could have put the club into administration any day not Oct 15.
[/quote]
This is excellent news.
THIS was the news I was hoping for.
I'm feeling more optimistic now.
[/quote]
Ah a lawyer's prayer answered!
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)
[quote author=Sunny link=topic=41783.msg1192641#msg1192641 date=1286805529]
But they're only questions - there's no need for anyone to get all arsey about them is there?
[/quote]
exactly, sunny.
[quote author=Sunny link=topic=41783.msg1192641#msg1192641 date=1286805529]
But they're only questions - there's no need for anyone to get all arsey about them is there?
[/quote]
exactly, sunny.
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=41783.msg1192643#msg1192643 date=1286805590]
[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=41783.msg1192639#msg1192639 date=1286805445]
The original question was a daft one anyway, because it's based on neil's obsession with RBS refinancing when that was never remotely likely in the first place.
[/quote]
okay, so when hicks attempted to secure refinance (with blackstone) using anfield as security he was only messing around...?
[/quote]
No, he was serious, but the odds were always against him because (a) the board had already kicked him into touch over the security idea and (b) even people like Blackstone want to see their money back sometime, and Hicks was clearly not going to be good for it any time soon.
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=41783.msg1192643#msg1192643 date=1286805590]
[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=41783.msg1192639#msg1192639 date=1286805445]
The original question was a daft one anyway, because it's based on neil's obsession with RBS refinancing when that was never remotely likely in the first place.
[/quote]
okay, so when hicks attempted to secure refinance (with blackstone) using anfield as security he was only messing around...?
[/quote]
No, he was serious, but the odds were always against him because (a) the board had already kicked him into touch over the security idea and (b) even people like Blackstone want to see their money back sometime, and Hicks was clearly not going to be good for it any time soon.
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)
No. There's a legal process to go through before we're "technically" in administration and no-one's gone through it. Additionally RBS have good reason to keep it that way, so the price of the club doesn't go down.
No. There's a legal process to go through before we're "technically" in administration and no-one's gone through it. Additionally RBS have good reason to keep it that way, so the price of the club doesn't go down.
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)
[quote author=Brendan link=topic=41783.msg1192628#msg1192628 date=1286804468]
[quote author=Sunny link=topic=41783.msg1192627#msg1192627 date=1286804427]
[quote author=Brendan link=topic=41783.msg1192625#msg1192625 date=1286804357]
Been in default since lunchtime
[/quote]
Any source ?
[/quote]
The usual City wankers
[/quote]
Oh. 🙁
That makes it a little less good then..
I'd suspected that Hicks was already in default even before the whole NESV story came out..; which was why Broughton had been given the green light by RBS to sell the club to NESV.
Any attempt by Hicks to then reconstitute the board could then be easily rebuffed (which is what happened).
If he's only NOW in default then I suspect there's an issue of whether Broughton had the legal rights to prevent the reconstitution of the board in the first place...and if so, we then have to go back to the undertakings and powers accorded to Broughton and all that jazz again.
It's still good for us though, as Hicks would probably still have to show the existence of possible buyers/refinancing before the said default.
[quote author=Brendan link=topic=41783.msg1192628#msg1192628 date=1286804468]
[quote author=Sunny link=topic=41783.msg1192627#msg1192627 date=1286804427]
[quote author=Brendan link=topic=41783.msg1192625#msg1192625 date=1286804357]
Been in default since lunchtime
[/quote]
Any source ?
[/quote]
The usual City wankers
[/quote]
Oh. 🙁
That makes it a little less good then..
I'd suspected that Hicks was already in default even before the whole NESV story came out..; which was why Broughton had been given the green light by RBS to sell the club to NESV.
Any attempt by Hicks to then reconstitute the board could then be easily rebuffed (which is what happened).
If he's only NOW in default then I suspect there's an issue of whether Broughton had the legal rights to prevent the reconstitution of the board in the first place...and if so, we then have to go back to the undertakings and powers accorded to Broughton and all that jazz again.
It's still good for us though, as Hicks would probably still have to show the existence of possible buyers/refinancing before the said default.
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)
[quote author=Y1 link=topic=41783.msg1192650#msg1192650 date=1286805887]
So we are technically in administration! Broughton is the administrator appointed by the bank!
[/quote]
seems that way to me.
this is excellent news because before I thought hicks case would be the board didn't act in the interest of the shareholders and with the shareholders set to lose 140m they had a point, but with hicks defaulting on the loan then the board has to look after the interest of the creditor (RBS) so the case is much stronger. I think I'll go as far as to say it's in hicks' interests to settle out of court.
[quote author=Y1 link=topic=41783.msg1192650#msg1192650 date=1286805887]
So we are technically in administration! Broughton is the administrator appointed by the bank!
[/quote]
seems that way to me.
this is excellent news because before I thought hicks case would be the board didn't act in the interest of the shareholders and with the shareholders set to lose 140m they had a point, but with hicks defaulting on the loan then the board has to look after the interest of the creditor (RBS) so the case is much stronger. I think I'll go as far as to say it's in hicks' interests to settle out of court.
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)
[quote author=Rafa4PM link=topic=41783.msg1192636#msg1192636 date=1286805096]
[quote author=Insignificance link=topic=41783.msg1192635#msg1192635 date=1286804971]
[quote author=Rafa4PM link=topic=41783.msg1192632#msg1192632 date=1286804830]
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=41783.msg1192626#msg1192626 date=1286804410]
[quote author=Hansern link=topic=41783.msg1192618#msg1192618 date=1286803679]
Starts 10.30 tomorrow
Bloomberg learns Kop Football, Liverpool parent, is already in default. RBS could have put the club into administration any day not Oct 15.
[/quote]
so there is no chance of hicks pushing through refinance even if they managed to win and change the board?
[/quote]
Can anyone answer this question please ^^^ ?
[/quote]
The case is in such a sensitive manner that there is a court hearing about it tomorrow, and you want an answer from any Champagne Charlie on a Footie Forum? Well the answeer is NO. NO Noone can answer you, please.
[/quote]
No need to be a twat Insig.
Cheers sunny.
[/quote]
Sorry... N 🙂
[quote author=Rafa4PM link=topic=41783.msg1192636#msg1192636 date=1286805096]
[quote author=Insignificance link=topic=41783.msg1192635#msg1192635 date=1286804971]
[quote author=Rafa4PM link=topic=41783.msg1192632#msg1192632 date=1286804830]
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=41783.msg1192626#msg1192626 date=1286804410]
[quote author=Hansern link=topic=41783.msg1192618#msg1192618 date=1286803679]
Starts 10.30 tomorrow
Bloomberg learns Kop Football, Liverpool parent, is already in default. RBS could have put the club into administration any day not Oct 15.
[/quote]
so there is no chance of hicks pushing through refinance even if they managed to win and change the board?
[/quote]
Can anyone answer this question please ^^^ ?
[/quote]
The case is in such a sensitive manner that there is a court hearing about it tomorrow, and you want an answer from any Champagne Charlie on a Footie Forum? Well the answeer is NO. NO Noone can answer you, please.
[/quote]
No need to be a twat Insig.
Cheers sunny.
[/quote]
Sorry... N 🙂
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=41783.msg1192654#msg1192654 date=1286806201]
[quote author=Y1 link=topic=41783.msg1192650#msg1192650 date=1286805887]
So we are technically in administration! Broughton is the administrator appointed by the bank!
[/quote]
seems that way to me.
this is excellent news because before I thought hicks case would be the board didn't act in the interest of the shareholders and with the shareholders set to lose 140m they had a point, but with hicks defaulting on the loan then the board has to look after the interest of the creditor (RBS) so the case is much stronger. I think I'll go as far as to say it's in hicks' interests to settle out of court.
[/quote]
We were actually in administration when Broughton was appointed except that the FA did not smell it, nor were others aware of it, otherwise everyone would have been screaming till they are blue in their face. Broughton was exercising the power of an administrator on behalf the secured creditor when he sold LFC to NESV.
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=41783.msg1192654#msg1192654 date=1286806201]
[quote author=Y1 link=topic=41783.msg1192650#msg1192650 date=1286805887]
So we are technically in administration! Broughton is the administrator appointed by the bank!
[/quote]
seems that way to me.
this is excellent news because before I thought hicks case would be the board didn't act in the interest of the shareholders and with the shareholders set to lose 140m they had a point, but with hicks defaulting on the loan then the board has to look after the interest of the creditor (RBS) so the case is much stronger. I think I'll go as far as to say it's in hicks' interests to settle out of court.
[/quote]
We were actually in administration when Broughton was appointed except that the FA did not smell it, nor were others aware of it, otherwise everyone would have been screaming till they are blue in their face. Broughton was exercising the power of an administrator on behalf the secured creditor when he sold LFC to NESV.
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)
No, we weren't. You can't just "be" in administration. A specific court application has to be filed asking for that to be done.
No, we weren't. You can't just "be" in administration. A specific court application has to be filed asking for that to be done.
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)
[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=41783.msg1192659#msg1192659 date=1286806701]
No, we weren't. You can't just "be" in administration. A specific court application has to be filed asking for that to be done.
[/quote]
They wouldn't do that otherwise the 9 points would have already been deducted. RBS had G&H signed away their shareholders rights (hopefully it is true) in favour of RBS during the selling period. So it was a stealth appointment of an administrator without going to the court! Very cunning move I would say!
[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=41783.msg1192659#msg1192659 date=1286806701]
No, we weren't. You can't just "be" in administration. A specific court application has to be filed asking for that to be done.
[/quote]
They wouldn't do that otherwise the 9 points would have already been deducted. RBS had G&H signed away their shareholders rights (hopefully it is true) in favour of RBS during the selling period. So it was a stealth appointment of an administrator without going to the court! Very cunning move I would say!
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)
I think you're both right.
What Mike means is that the powers Broughton are wielding are very similar to those of a receiver and manager; but you're right in that he legally isn't since no application has been made and this is just somethig insisted on by RBS as a pre-condition for the extension of the loans.
I think you're both right.
What Mike means is that the powers Broughton are wielding are very similar to those of a receiver and manager; but you're right in that he legally isn't since no application has been made and this is just somethig insisted on by RBS as a pre-condition for the extension of the loans.
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=41783.msg1192666#msg1192666 date=1286807226]
ROss : fucked if I know.
We're just guessing without any hard facts.
[/quote]
I would have thought any application that´s getting a hearing so quickly would only be an interim one. Like an injunction to prevent RBS taking possession of the club prior to having a full hearing at a later stage.
Has there been any indication that´s what this is
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=41783.msg1192666#msg1192666 date=1286807226]
ROss : fucked if I know.
We're just guessing without any hard facts.
[/quote]
I would have thought any application that´s getting a hearing so quickly would only be an interim one. Like an injunction to prevent RBS taking possession of the club prior to having a full hearing at a later stage.
Has there been any indication that´s what this is
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41783.msg1192668#msg1192668 date=1286807944]
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=41783.msg1192666#msg1192666 date=1286807226]
ROss : fucked if I know.
We're just guessing without any hard facts.
[/quote]
I would have thought any application that´s getting a hearing so quickly would only be an interim one. Like an injunction to prevent RBS taking possession of the club prior to having a full hearing at a later stage.
Has there been any indication that´s what this is
[/quote]
If I read the news/rumours correctly the latest surprise is RBS taking a court action to suggest that G&H are in default of the loan....
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41783.msg1192668#msg1192668 date=1286807944]
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=41783.msg1192666#msg1192666 date=1286807226]
ROss : fucked if I know.
We're just guessing without any hard facts.
[/quote]
I would have thought any application that´s getting a hearing so quickly would only be an interim one. Like an injunction to prevent RBS taking possession of the club prior to having a full hearing at a later stage.
Has there been any indication that´s what this is
[/quote]
If I read the news/rumours correctly the latest surprise is RBS taking a court action to suggest that G&H are in default of the loan....
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41783.msg1192668#msg1192668 date=1286807944]
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=41783.msg1192666#msg1192666 date=1286807226]
ROss : fucked if I know.
We're just guessing without any hard facts.
[/quote]
I would have thought any application that´s getting a hearing so quickly would only be an interim one. Like an injunction to prevent RBS taking possession of the club prior to having a full hearing at a later stage.
Has there been any indication that´s what this is
[/quote]
But RBS are taking the action arnt they?
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41783.msg1192668#msg1192668 date=1286807944]
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=41783.msg1192666#msg1192666 date=1286807226]
ROss : fucked if I know.
We're just guessing without any hard facts.
[/quote]
I would have thought any application that´s getting a hearing so quickly would only be an interim one. Like an injunction to prevent RBS taking possession of the club prior to having a full hearing at a later stage.
Has there been any indication that´s what this is
[/quote]
But RBS are taking the action arnt they?
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41783.msg1192668#msg1192668 date=1286807944]
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=41783.msg1192666#msg1192666 date=1286807226]
ROss : fucked if I know.
We're just guessing without any hard facts.
[/quote]
I would have thought any application that´s getting a hearing so quickly would only be an interim one. Like an injunction to prevent RBS taking possession of the club prior to having a full hearing at a later stage.
Has there been any indication that´s what this is
[/quote]
Pretty sure this is the interim one, as Sunny says.
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41783.msg1192668#msg1192668 date=1286807944]
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=41783.msg1192666#msg1192666 date=1286807226]
ROss : fucked if I know.
We're just guessing without any hard facts.
[/quote]
I would have thought any application that´s getting a hearing so quickly would only be an interim one. Like an injunction to prevent RBS taking possession of the club prior to having a full hearing at a later stage.
Has there been any indication that´s what this is
[/quote]
Pretty sure this is the interim one, as Sunny says.
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)
RBS case against Hicks & Gillett over Liverpool is separate from LFC case, evidence of concerted effort to oust Americans
11 October 2010
A High Court hearing scheduled for tomorrow that could shape the future ownership of Liverpool pits RBS bank against Tom Hicks “and othersâ€, and is NOT Liverpool’s legal action Hicks and George Gillett, which could yet happen separately, sportingintelligence has learned.
The case of ‘Royal Bank of Scotland v Hicks & others’ has been listed among a group of cases to be heard tomorrow by Mr Justice Floyd, sometime after 10.30am. In this case, RBS as the bank that loaned Hicks and Gillett money (via their Liverpool holding company), will be seeking judgement that undertakings given by Hicks and Gillett to RBS under the terms of their loan extension earlier this year are legally binding.
There were multiple undertakings and sportingintelligence is not party to all the details, but this website has been told that the key decision for the judge is: Were Hicks and Gillett in breach of undertakings given to RBS by trying remove Christian Purslow and Ian Ayre from Liverpool’s board last week?
RBS will argue Hicks and Gillett were in breach. If the judge agrees, then effectively Hicks and Gillett can do nothing more (pending appeal) to prevent the sale of Liverpool, as agreed by Liverpool’s board last week, to New England Sports Ventures. An RBS statement on this is expected soon, and will be linked here when it drops.
Liverpool, ie: Liverpool FC and / or its “independent†board members Broughton, Purslow and Ayre, will still, separately, pursue a “declaratory†judgement against Hicks and Gillett, effectively seeking the same end goal as RBS, namely the legal right to sell to NESV.
But the significance of RBS and Liverpool / Broughton seeking separate judgements shouldn’t be underestimated: it means, and emphasises, that Liverpool / Broughton on the one hand, and RBS, independently, on the other hand, are now working to force through the NESV deal – and force Hicks and Gillett out.
Sportingintelligence further understands – as reflected to some extent in this article yesterday – that RBS has little appetite for putting in train any course of events that would plunge Liverpool into administration.
While there is a 15 October deadline for repayment of loans owed by Hicks & Gillett to the bank, it is entirely within RBS’s powers to be flexible with that deadline. RBS ultimately wants the outcome that is in the best interests for the stability of Liverpool, because ultimately the stability of Liverpool enhances the chances of RBS getting back all the money it leant. For now, administration remains more of a theoretical possibility than a probability.
As ever in this saga, the situation remains fluid.
RBS case against Hicks & Gillett over Liverpool is separate from LFC case, evidence of concerted effort to oust Americans
11 October 2010
A High Court hearing scheduled for tomorrow that could shape the future ownership of Liverpool pits RBS bank against Tom Hicks “and othersâ€, and is NOT Liverpool’s legal action Hicks and George Gillett, which could yet happen separately, sportingintelligence has learned.
The case of ‘Royal Bank of Scotland v Hicks & others’ has been listed among a group of cases to be heard tomorrow by Mr Justice Floyd, sometime after 10.30am. In this case, RBS as the bank that loaned Hicks and Gillett money (via their Liverpool holding company), will be seeking judgement that undertakings given by Hicks and Gillett to RBS under the terms of their loan extension earlier this year are legally binding.
There were multiple undertakings and sportingintelligence is not party to all the details, but this website has been told that the key decision for the judge is: Were Hicks and Gillett in breach of undertakings given to RBS by trying remove Christian Purslow and Ian Ayre from Liverpool’s board last week?
RBS will argue Hicks and Gillett were in breach. If the judge agrees, then effectively Hicks and Gillett can do nothing more (pending appeal) to prevent the sale of Liverpool, as agreed by Liverpool’s board last week, to New England Sports Ventures. An RBS statement on this is expected soon, and will be linked here when it drops.
Liverpool, ie: Liverpool FC and / or its “independent†board members Broughton, Purslow and Ayre, will still, separately, pursue a “declaratory†judgement against Hicks and Gillett, effectively seeking the same end goal as RBS, namely the legal right to sell to NESV.
But the significance of RBS and Liverpool / Broughton seeking separate judgements shouldn’t be underestimated: it means, and emphasises, that Liverpool / Broughton on the one hand, and RBS, independently, on the other hand, are now working to force through the NESV deal – and force Hicks and Gillett out.
Sportingintelligence further understands – as reflected to some extent in this article yesterday – that RBS has little appetite for putting in train any course of events that would plunge Liverpool into administration.
While there is a 15 October deadline for repayment of loans owed by Hicks & Gillett to the bank, it is entirely within RBS’s powers to be flexible with that deadline. RBS ultimately wants the outcome that is in the best interests for the stability of Liverpool, because ultimately the stability of Liverpool enhances the chances of RBS getting back all the money it leant. For now, administration remains more of a theoretical possibility than a probability.
As ever in this saga, the situation remains fluid.
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)
Pretty much every time we think we've got a handle, there's another twist (Mill Financial, or RBS has us in Default, or now RBS are taking court action, not LFC...). It'd be very entertaining if it was someone else's club!
Pretty much every time we think we've got a handle, there's another twist (Mill Financial, or RBS has us in Default, or now RBS are taking court action, not LFC...). It'd be very entertaining if it was someone else's club!
Re: LFC Sold to NESV (New England Sports Ventures)
RBS apparently took out an interim injunction last Friday
RBS apparently took out an interim injunction last Friday
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked