So boiled down, and in lay-mans' terms, are H&G cunts?
Times Exclusive: 'Indian Billionarie looks to buyout Americans'
- Thread starter Ryan
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=38850.msg1052411#msg1052411 date=1265754015]
So boiled down, and in lay-mans' terms, are H&G cunts?
[/quote]
I don't think the answer is clear yet - despite the media speculation and the propoganda by SoS.
I believe the answer will be clear once they make the sale of (purportedly) 25%. If they sell 25% for 100m, pay down the debt as Purslow has stated and then fail to take immediate steps to begin work on the stadium then I think the answer is yes.
If they do that doesn't mean the answer is "no" - it just means their goals are aligned with ours at that point.
So boiled down, and in lay-mans' terms, are H&G cunts?
[/quote]
I don't think the answer is clear yet - despite the media speculation and the propoganda by SoS.
I believe the answer will be clear once they make the sale of (purportedly) 25%. If they sell 25% for 100m, pay down the debt as Purslow has stated and then fail to take immediate steps to begin work on the stadium then I think the answer is yes.
If they do that doesn't mean the answer is "no" - it just means their goals are aligned with ours at that point.
[quote author=Wilko7 link=topic=38850.msg1052234#msg1052234 date=1265741122]
[quote author=Sunny link=topic=38850.msg1052219#msg1052219 date=1265737937]
God forbid it could be any worse Vlad. According to things I've heard the debt on the club is £237m. I've also heard the debt on Hicks and Gillett for their 'own' money to their parent company - Kop Cayman - is in the region of £240m. The latter debt is a personal debt for Tom and George fortunately but it means the total debt on club and owners is not far short of half a billion quid. If that's the price that's need to see these two pricks debt free then what is the price they're putting on the club for them to walk away with a profit. It cannot be realistic. This makes me worry we'll have to put up with Tweedledumb and Tweedledope for a lot longer.
[/quote]
I doubt anyone would throw money at these tossers and allow them to retain a 51% control of the club and no one is going to pay half a billion to buy them out considering the fact that, without additional investment, Laurel and Hardy are up the creek in July.
[/quote]
That's my biggest fear as well.
Any potential invesor wouldnt be able to justify an expensive takeover now when it'd be a lot cheaper in 5 months.
Unfortunately what those 5 months could mean to the club is potentially very ominous.
[quote author=Sunny link=topic=38850.msg1052219#msg1052219 date=1265737937]
God forbid it could be any worse Vlad. According to things I've heard the debt on the club is £237m. I've also heard the debt on Hicks and Gillett for their 'own' money to their parent company - Kop Cayman - is in the region of £240m. The latter debt is a personal debt for Tom and George fortunately but it means the total debt on club and owners is not far short of half a billion quid. If that's the price that's need to see these two pricks debt free then what is the price they're putting on the club for them to walk away with a profit. It cannot be realistic. This makes me worry we'll have to put up with Tweedledumb and Tweedledope for a lot longer.
[/quote]
I doubt anyone would throw money at these tossers and allow them to retain a 51% control of the club and no one is going to pay half a billion to buy them out considering the fact that, without additional investment, Laurel and Hardy are up the creek in July.
[/quote]
That's my biggest fear as well.
Any potential invesor wouldnt be able to justify an expensive takeover now when it'd be a lot cheaper in 5 months.
Unfortunately what those 5 months could mean to the club is potentially very ominous.
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=38850.msg1052462#msg1052462 date=1265762433]
[quote author=Wilko7 link=topic=38850.msg1052234#msg1052234 date=1265741122]
[quote author=Sunny link=topic=38850.msg1052219#msg1052219 date=1265737937]
God forbid it could be any worse Vlad. According to things I've heard the debt on the club is £237m. I've also heard the debt on Hicks and Gillett for their 'own' money to their parent company - Kop Cayman - is in the region of £240m. The latter debt is a personal debt for Tom and George fortunately but it means the total debt on club and owners is not far short of half a billion quid. If that's the price that's need to see these two pricks debt free then what is the price they're putting on the club for them to walk away with a profit. It cannot be realistic. This makes me worry we'll have to put up with Tweedledumb and Tweedledope for a lot longer.
[/quote]
I doubt anyone would throw money at these tossers and allow them to retain a 51% control of the club and no one is going to pay half a billion to buy them out considering the fact that, without additional investment, Laurel and Hardy are up the creek in July.
[/quote]
That's my biggest fear as well.
Any potential invesor wouldnt be able to justify an expensive takeover now when it'd be a lot cheaper in 5 months.
Unfortunately what those 5 months could mean to the club is potentially very ominous.
[/quote]
Beyond me why this would be the case. No one is going to get the club cheap no matter the circumstances.
Let's take the most extreme and, by extension, the most unlikely scenario; H&G default and can't pay the loan nor service the debt. The result would be administration as the bank sought to recoup it's loan. What's the best way to recoup it's loan?? - by selling the asset of the club.
Contrary to popular opinion no bank ever wants to have to go after directors - certainly not on this scale. By the time they were able to work through the tangled network of ownership and entities H&G would have died of old age. The way to get full payment is to sell the club for the outstanding value of the loan. This would almost certainly be done in conjunction with H&G since they'll discuss with the bank at what point they'll accept the sale as "commercially sound". That point will be the negotiation point and the bank will want H&G to say at point x we will pay the remainder at 40c in the dollar. The bank will then negotiate a higher repayment if they can get closer to the full principal outstanding - say 60c in the dollar. I have no idea of what the internal policy of RBS would be but a lot of banks operate on the 2/3 principle so anything north of 67c in the dollar would suit them.
From a potential buyers situation the purchase amount hasn't really changed or, if so, only marginally. What has changed is the value of the brand has been impaired due to it being dragged through the mud in an administration process. That kind of odour sticks in the mind of investors for years and makes it far less valuable to the purchaser.
Any investor genuinely interested in getting the club and, importantly, the club name, will be wanting to do it outside of any bank intervention so they'll deal with H&G over the bank if at all possible.
[quote author=Wilko7 link=topic=38850.msg1052234#msg1052234 date=1265741122]
[quote author=Sunny link=topic=38850.msg1052219#msg1052219 date=1265737937]
God forbid it could be any worse Vlad. According to things I've heard the debt on the club is £237m. I've also heard the debt on Hicks and Gillett for their 'own' money to their parent company - Kop Cayman - is in the region of £240m. The latter debt is a personal debt for Tom and George fortunately but it means the total debt on club and owners is not far short of half a billion quid. If that's the price that's need to see these two pricks debt free then what is the price they're putting on the club for them to walk away with a profit. It cannot be realistic. This makes me worry we'll have to put up with Tweedledumb and Tweedledope for a lot longer.
[/quote]
I doubt anyone would throw money at these tossers and allow them to retain a 51% control of the club and no one is going to pay half a billion to buy them out considering the fact that, without additional investment, Laurel and Hardy are up the creek in July.
[/quote]
That's my biggest fear as well.
Any potential invesor wouldnt be able to justify an expensive takeover now when it'd be a lot cheaper in 5 months.
Unfortunately what those 5 months could mean to the club is potentially very ominous.
[/quote]
Beyond me why this would be the case. No one is going to get the club cheap no matter the circumstances.
Let's take the most extreme and, by extension, the most unlikely scenario; H&G default and can't pay the loan nor service the debt. The result would be administration as the bank sought to recoup it's loan. What's the best way to recoup it's loan?? - by selling the asset of the club.
Contrary to popular opinion no bank ever wants to have to go after directors - certainly not on this scale. By the time they were able to work through the tangled network of ownership and entities H&G would have died of old age. The way to get full payment is to sell the club for the outstanding value of the loan. This would almost certainly be done in conjunction with H&G since they'll discuss with the bank at what point they'll accept the sale as "commercially sound". That point will be the negotiation point and the bank will want H&G to say at point x we will pay the remainder at 40c in the dollar. The bank will then negotiate a higher repayment if they can get closer to the full principal outstanding - say 60c in the dollar. I have no idea of what the internal policy of RBS would be but a lot of banks operate on the 2/3 principle so anything north of 67c in the dollar would suit them.
From a potential buyers situation the purchase amount hasn't really changed or, if so, only marginally. What has changed is the value of the brand has been impaired due to it being dragged through the mud in an administration process. That kind of odour sticks in the mind of investors for years and makes it far less valuable to the purchaser.
Any investor genuinely interested in getting the club and, importantly, the club name, will be wanting to do it outside of any bank intervention so they'll deal with H&G over the bank if at all possible.
[quote author=Y1 link=topic=38850.msg1051666#msg1051666 date=1265699113]
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=38850.msg1051656#msg1051656 date=1265697645]
Tony Fernandes?
The prat already failed with a bid to buy West Ham.
Which is funny since he's a big time Manc and his bloody airline has tie-ins with them
[/quote]
Yep, since the papers are speculating, sooner or later Tony's name will surface as a potential buyer.
When he was bidding for west Ham, he changed his colours to being a WH fan!
He never pays for anything. He simply wants publicity.
[/quote]
The fucker can go lick slur Alex ass and I don't care a fuck, but stay fucking far away from lfc.
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=38850.msg1051656#msg1051656 date=1265697645]
Tony Fernandes?
The prat already failed with a bid to buy West Ham.
Which is funny since he's a big time Manc and his bloody airline has tie-ins with them
[/quote]
Yep, since the papers are speculating, sooner or later Tony's name will surface as a potential buyer.
When he was bidding for west Ham, he changed his colours to being a WH fan!
He never pays for anything. He simply wants publicity.
[/quote]
The fucker can go lick slur Alex ass and I don't care a fuck, but stay fucking far away from lfc.
[quote author=Wizardry link=topic=38850.msg1052406#msg1052406 date=1265753298
As for the interest rate which I think is necessary to avoid taxation in two forms, if the loan was made externally then we'd be paying interest anyway. As it is the interest stays within the investing group and doesn't leave the circle. I don't know what they do with the interest afterwards but we'd be paying that either way so I have no real complaints.
[/quote]
Couldn't they have just paid the funds in directly (ie. not via the holding company), so avoiding loan repayments? We wouldn't be paying any interest then?
As for the interest rate which I think is necessary to avoid taxation in two forms, if the loan was made externally then we'd be paying interest anyway. As it is the interest stays within the investing group and doesn't leave the circle. I don't know what they do with the interest afterwards but we'd be paying that either way so I have no real complaints.
[/quote]
Couldn't they have just paid the funds in directly (ie. not via the holding company), so avoiding loan repayments? We wouldn't be paying any interest then?
Other reports now suggesting the interest here is far less serious... it seems like we are looking anywhere we can for potential suitors, and a result with any one of them can generate a news story, but is unlikely to go anywhere.
[quote author=Sunny link=topic=38850.msg1052352#msg1052352 date=1265750682]
What I've heard is that the money (£180m) purported to be their own was actually leveraged from Kop Cayman, a parent company at an interest rate of 10%. Now I'm not sure how reliable the info is nor am I sure what the make up of this company is i.e. if it's just Gillet and Hicks who own it or it's a consortium of investors. Having such an interest rate appended to it would make me think the latter. If it's true - then the worrying thing is the value these two cunts are putting on our club to enable them to even break even - which would scare off potential investors. Note though I believe the debts on Tom and George and not the club.
I think our future actually could lie in us not getting any investment by July, the two tools being unable to get any finance anywhere else, and RBS forcing a sale. I would imagine that would fuck up our summer spending again. I'm no financial expert though.
Vlad's better at this stuff than me. Vlad !
[/quote]
Sunny, I am no expert but the Kop cayman loan even if it is leveraged at 10% is not on the club. Basically its what the yanks want to get but it isn't guarenteed and its unlikely they will see it while RBS are still in the picture.
What I've heard is that the money (£180m) purported to be their own was actually leveraged from Kop Cayman, a parent company at an interest rate of 10%. Now I'm not sure how reliable the info is nor am I sure what the make up of this company is i.e. if it's just Gillet and Hicks who own it or it's a consortium of investors. Having such an interest rate appended to it would make me think the latter. If it's true - then the worrying thing is the value these two cunts are putting on our club to enable them to even break even - which would scare off potential investors. Note though I believe the debts on Tom and George and not the club.
I think our future actually could lie in us not getting any investment by July, the two tools being unable to get any finance anywhere else, and RBS forcing a sale. I would imagine that would fuck up our summer spending again. I'm no financial expert though.
Vlad's better at this stuff than me. Vlad !
[/quote]
Sunny, I am no expert but the Kop cayman loan even if it is leveraged at 10% is not on the club. Basically its what the yanks want to get but it isn't guarenteed and its unlikely they will see it while RBS are still in the picture.
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=38850.msg1052361#msg1052361 date=1265751242]
I would imagine there might be some slight misunderstandings in there Sunny. Leveraged probably isn't strictly accurate in that sense.
Kop Football (Cayman) is the holding company which owns Kop Football, which owns LFC. I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if the money going from the holding company to the Kop Football company was in the form of debt, rather than equity. It probably gives them a claim on assets should things go tits up, but I'd imagine RBS would have priority over them.
It's impossible to tell whether the money Kop Football (Cayman) raised was in the form of debt or equity, but my gut feeling would be nobody would lend to the holding company when the only thing it owns is another company in significant debt. I would presume the money that was lent to Kop Football is the 130m that Purslow referred to as the owners putting their own money in recently. The last set of accounts showed we received around £50m from Kop Football (Cayman) too, add them together and you get the 180m you mention above.
Having an interest rate on the loan from one company to another is just a slightly more discreet way for them to take money out of the club for themselves. Cheeky Bastards.
[/quote]
^^^ this
I would imagine there might be some slight misunderstandings in there Sunny. Leveraged probably isn't strictly accurate in that sense.
Kop Football (Cayman) is the holding company which owns Kop Football, which owns LFC. I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if the money going from the holding company to the Kop Football company was in the form of debt, rather than equity. It probably gives them a claim on assets should things go tits up, but I'd imagine RBS would have priority over them.
It's impossible to tell whether the money Kop Football (Cayman) raised was in the form of debt or equity, but my gut feeling would be nobody would lend to the holding company when the only thing it owns is another company in significant debt. I would presume the money that was lent to Kop Football is the 130m that Purslow referred to as the owners putting their own money in recently. The last set of accounts showed we received around £50m from Kop Football (Cayman) too, add them together and you get the 180m you mention above.
Having an interest rate on the loan from one company to another is just a slightly more discreet way for them to take money out of the club for themselves. Cheeky Bastards.
[/quote]
^^^ this
[quote author=Sunny link=topic=38850.msg1052397#msg1052397 date=1265752343]
So, Ross, do you essentially think it's Tom and George taking 10% a year back out the club ?
[/quote]
IMO it is what they want however the club has to be able to afford it. If RBS decide they want 100M in the summer, trust me, we can't afford it. In otherwords RBS have first call on the money and they are calling for it before these cunts leech as much of it as they can.
So, Ross, do you essentially think it's Tom and George taking 10% a year back out the club ?
[/quote]
IMO it is what they want however the club has to be able to afford it. If RBS decide they want 100M in the summer, trust me, we can't afford it. In otherwords RBS have first call on the money and they are calling for it before these cunts leech as much of it as they can.
- Status
