• 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.

Liverpool not for sale

Forums Unread posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
juniormember

juniormember

Well-Known
Member
Premier League: Liverpool deny reports that club is up for sale

Last Updated: July 27, 2013 7:06am

JOHN-W-HENRY_2781143.jpg

Liverpool owner John W Henry
​
Liverpool have denied suggestions owners Fenway Sports Group are considering putting the club up for sale.
Fenway, headed by Liverpool owner John W Henry, completed the purchase of the club from fellow Americans George Gillett and Tom Hicks in October 2010.
Despite heavy interest in the club, Brendan Rodgers' side have failed to secure a place in the Champions League and finished seventh in the Premier League last season.
But both the club and Fenway Sports Group have been quick to quash a report in The Lying Rag that the club is unofficially up for sale for around £350m.
"Fenway Sports Group has made its position clear, Liverpool Football Club is not for sale. There is no truth in this story," said a club spokesman.
A spokesperson for Fenway Sports Group said: "Like so many rumours in the past about a sale of LIverpool Football Club, there is absolutely no truth in this.
"We have had no meetings with anyone about a sale, we don't know who the source of the rumour is.
"
 
But both the club and Fenway Sports Group have been quick to quash a report in The SCUM that the club is unofficially up for sale for around £350m

Mmm are any Arab billionaires out there ??
 
The supposed buyer is Suadi Aramco. I think the club talked to them recently about sponsorship and this story has been twisted from that. (The Daily Mail carried the same report and has now removed it.)
 
Ranked in Forbes's 2012 ranking of the world's biggest oil and natural gas companies as no. 1. "Saudi Aramco is by far the biggest energy company in the world, generating more than $1 billion a day in revenues." :jawdrop:
 
I'll either stop supporting Liverpool or stop watching football altogether if that happens.
 
Binny said:
Ranked in Forbes's 2012 ranking of the world's biggest oil and natural gas companies as no. 1. "Saudi Aramco is by far the biggest energy company in the world, generating more than $1 billion a day in revenues." :jawdrop:
Click to expand...


Its state owned company but has been valued in the trillions (of dollars). The question is why would a state owned company like Saudi Aramco want to own a football club? Most of its clientèle I would imagine would be sovereign states and large energy companies of the likes of Shell, Exxon and BP.
 
Binny said:
Ranked in Forbes's 2012 ranking of the world's biggest oil and natural gas companies as no. 1. "Saudi Aramco is by far the biggest energy company in the world, generating more than $1 billion a day in revenues." :jawdrop:
Click to expand...
We could buy 20 Suarez every day
 
urn-3:HUAM:INV113760P_dynmc


20 Suarez, please.

We've only got Gerrards.

What are Gerrards?

Captain Full Strength!

I just want cigarettes, not terrible jokes!

Blast it, I guess you don't want a pack of Nevilles, then!
 
gkmacca said:
The supposed buyer is Suadi Aramco. I think the club talked to them recently about sponsorship and this story has been twisted from that. (The Daily Mail carried the same report and has now removed it.)
Click to expand...

I wonder if its relating to the stadium. They are involved in the construction of the King Abdullah Sports City (includes the King Abdullah Football Stadium with a capacity of 60k), which is due for completion this year.
18583

18582


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwCKV8WBi30
 
redhorizon2 said:
Its state owned company but has been valued in the trillions (of dollars). The question is why would a state owned company like Saudi Aramco want to own a football club? Most of its clientèle I would imagine would be sovereign states and large energy companies of the likes of Shell, Exxon and BP.
Click to expand...

I like the Saudis and Qataris. Basically they throw a crap load of money at you and never get too bothered about how the business is run.
 
God, I hate this talk. It's so ugly and depressing.

We can fill giant stadiums around the world - is it really beyond us to start a really serious drive for some kind of fan ownership? Is it really just a hopeless pipedream?

Relying on fucking scumbag Saudis... I don't like it one bit.
 
peterhague said:
God, I hate this talk. It's so ugly and depressing.

We can fill giant stadiums around the world - is it really beyond us to start a really serious drive for some kind of fan ownership? Is it really just a hopeless pipedream?

Relying on fucking scumbag Saudis... I don't like it one bit.
Click to expand...

So you'd like us to be fan owned?!

Isn't that the opposite of everything you normally espouse?

It's practically asking for fucking socialism!
 
cloggypop said:
Commie.
Click to expand...


I love it. He doesn't believe in state planning, high taxes, big government therefore he loves Saudi oil companies.

It's unprejudiced and open-minded thinking like that that makes you an intellectual heavyweight on here, Cloggy lad.
 
peterhague said:
God, I hate this talk. It's so ugly and depressing.

We can fill giant stadiums around the world - is it really beyond us to start a really serious drive for some kind of fan ownership? Is it really just a hopeless pipedream?

Relying on fucking scumbag Saudis... I don't like it one bit.
Click to expand...


Silly, stupid and very naive question, but how does fan ownership work? I mean in terms of liabilities and raising funds.
 
redhorizon2 said:
Silly, stupid and very naive question, but how does fan ownership work? I mean in terms of liabilities and raising funds.
Click to expand...



God, I don't know, it's very complicated, and there are loads of different models.

I suppose initially you'd raise money in return for shares and votes, up to a maximum for a single person. You might be able to try to raise further funds for transfers or large capital items (if conventional sources weren't forthcoming) via something similar to preference shares, guaranteeing a small dividend and additional ownership but no vote.
 
peterhague said:
God, I don't know, it's very complicated, and there are loads of different models.

I suppose initially you'd raise money in return for shares and votes, up to a maximum for a single person. You might be able to try to raise further funds for transfers or large capital items (if conventional sources weren't forthcoming) via something similar to preference shares, guaranteeing a small dividend and additional ownership but no vote.
Click to expand...

sounds like something stalin would say
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom