The Liverpool Thread

[jdckelly]

notw is saying that nesv would pull out of the sale should the club go into admin........

 

Guardian said the same thing, though without any real evidence.

you mean the "source" doesn't count as evidence 

[Guest ObiChrisKenobi]

notw is saying that nesv would pull out of the sale should the club go into admin........

 

Guardian said the same thing, though without any real evidence.

you mean the "source" doesn't count as evidence 

 

Mr. Source must be the most well paid person in the world, he knows everything. Pretty sure he's Wikipedia.

[midds]

Liverpool being out of the Champions League spotlight for any length of time is bound to have an impact on the following they have. They're still a massive club obviously but if City get their feet under the table then Liverpool will suffer.

[OzzieMandias]

Liverpool have loads of fans abroad. One of my best friends in Morocco is a Liverpool fan, and has been since he was a kid and saw them winning the European Cup on TV. There are people like him all over the fucking world, and only a handful of other clubs have that kind of global popularity. Liverpool getting relegated would unarguably reduce the popularity of the Premier League.

 

Not that I think it's a reason it shouldn't happen, like.

 

Possibly top 5 in terms of global support? Man Utd, Chelsea, Real and Barca perhaps more popular. That's just an educated guess though, it's hard to measure like.

 

Yeah, that's probably right, though I'm not sure about Chelsea, who are a fairly recent arrival and haven't yet won the CL. The big Italian teams are pretty popular too; I've seen a lot of Juve shirts on my travels (though maybe I just notice them because they're black and white). In Morocco, which is the only country I know well where people don't care that much about their national league (only Raja Casablanca have a big local support), most people seem to be Real or Barca fans.

[jdckelly]

meanwhile 57% of liverpool fans surveyed have no faith in hodgson

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Liverpool-fans-have-written-off-their-season-and-have-little-or-no-faith-in-Roy-Hodgson-according-to-a-supporters-survey-article598113.html

[Guest neesy111]

Benitez's waste of money during his period on average players starting to hit pool hard.  Without their 2 star players they are a very very average side, which is being found out now.

[Guest ObiChrisKenobi]

I see some of them are hanging on to the hope of Rafa's Return if they get new owners. 

[Mr. Snrub]

Bunch of self obsessed, up their own arse pricks who think Liverpool FC is the holy grail of football. 

 

Never fuck up about Hillsbrough but are happy to sweep Heysel under the rug.  Also rob their own fans for CL Final tickets.  Scummy bunch of cunts who deserve fuck all.

 

Long may their misery continue

[Guest neesy111]

I see some of them are hanging on to the hope of Rafa's Return if they get new owners. 

 

And people think we are deluded and stupid.

[Guest neesy111]

Bunch of self obsessed, up their own arse pricks who think Liverpool FC is the holy grail of football. 

 

Never fuck up about Hillsbrough but are happy to sweep Heysel under the rug.  Also rob their own fans for CL Final tickets.  Scummy bunch of cunts who deserve fuck all.

 

Long may their misery continue

 

My thoughts as well.

[Guest ObiChrisKenobi]

I feel a bit twisted, like Gollum, obsessing over their demise. It can't be healthy. On one hand I know I shouldn't really care, but the other hand I'd Love it, just love it, (keegan), if they got what the rest of the football world think they deserved.

[Guest neesy111]

I feel a bit twisted, like Gollum, obsessing over their demise. It can't be healthy. On one hand I know I shouldn't really care, but the other hand I'd Love it, just love it, (keegan), if they got what the rest of the football world think they deserved.

 

Quite a large section of fans in general were lauding our demise, so imo it's good to feel their demise in a way/

[madras]

to be fair the vast majority of other fans love it when a "big club" gets its comeuppance.

[Guest neesy111]

to be fair the vast majority of other fans love it when a "big club" gets its comeuppance.

 

That is true.  Maybe shows how many fans still think we a big/large club perhaps ?

[Guest ObiChrisKenobi]

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=831053&sec=england&cc=5739

 

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."

[Neil]

Benitez's waste of money during his period on average players starting to hit pool hard.  Without their 2 star players they are a very very average side, which is being found out now.

 

The Gerrard/Torres rescue act doesn't hold much strength at the moment. They're a better side with them in, obviously, but it's now more a case of making them 'less worse' as opposed to hauling them out of shit like they were doing a couple of years ago. Gerrard's on the way down and Torres doesn't look interested.

[jdckelly]

according to the people its the other 19 clubs who are insisting that the points deduction be put in place so theres no preferential treatment

[Guest neesy111]

according to the people its the other 19 clubs who are insisting that the points deduction be put in place so theres no preferential treatment

 

Good nice to see the other clubs will not allow for the rules to be bent over for teams.

[madras]

according to the people its the other 19 clubs who are insisting that the points deduction be put in place so theres no preferential treatment

 

Good nice to see the other clubs will not allow for the rules to be bent over for teams.

are they though ? there'll be lots of smallprint as regarding the club as the company,holding companies etc.........why do you think these holding companies are set up, including the holding company that technically owns us ?

[jdckelly]

according to the people its the other 19 clubs who are insisting that the points deduction be put in place so theres no preferential treatment

 

Good nice to see the other clubs will not allow for the rules to be bent over for teams.

are they though ? there'll be lots of smallprint as regarding the club as the company,holding companies etc.........why do you think these holding companies are set up, including the holding company that technically owns us ?

i think ashleys one was set up to buy the shares iirc

[Guest neesy111]

according to the people its the other 19 clubs who are insisting that the points deduction be put in place so theres no preferential treatment

 

Good nice to see the other clubs will not allow for the rules to be bent over for teams.

are they though ? there'll be lots of smallprint as regarding the club as the company,holding companies etc.........why do you think these holding companies are set up, including the holding company that technically owns us ?

 

Taxing Purposes, Also Limited Liability on the Owners (i.e. if liverpool default on the debts then Gillet and Hicks other companies don't go tits up) etc.  It's in the Premier League rules, as in the Football League rules that if the holding company goes into admin then the club is in admin.  The clubs will enforce this (14 out of 20 votes needed to pass these rules, or create new rules).

[Cronky]

according to the people its the other 19 clubs who are insisting that the points deduction be put in place so theres no preferential treatment

 

Good nice to see the other clubs will not allow for the rules to be bent over for teams.

are they though ? there'll be lots of smallprint as regarding the club as the company,holding companies etc.........why do you think these holding companies are set up, including the holding company that technically owns us ?

 

Taxing Purposes, Also Limited Liability on the Owners (i.e. if liverpool default on the debts then Gillet and Hicks other companies don't go tits up) etc.  It's in the Premier League rules, as in the Football League rules that if the holding company goes into admin then the club is in admin.  The clubs will enforce this (14 out of 20 votes needed to pass these rules, or create new rules).

 

As with West Ham, I don't think the parent company or club going into admin automatically means a penalty. Providing the debts can be cleared in full by the process of administration (as would be the case with Liverpool), then you're okay. The problem with Leeds and Portsmouth was that the debt was greater than the value of the club.

 

It'll be interesting to see how the Court case goes. I would have thought that the Board were under an obligation to find the maximum price for the club. The fact that the price they've got matches the debt looks a bit dodgy. It's like they've created the deal that is most in the interests of the club and the buyer, rather than the owners.

 

If the wording of the agreement between the Board and the owners says something ambiguous like a 'reasonable' price, then it'll all come down to the views of an individual judge, and where his / her sympathies lie.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

according to the people its the other 19 clubs who are insisting that the points deduction be put in place so theres no preferential treatment

 

Good nice to see the other clubs will not allow for the rules to be bent over for teams.

are they though ? there'll be lots of smallprint as regarding the club as the company,holding companies etc.........why do you think these holding companies are set up, including the holding company that technically owns us ?

 

Taxing Purposes, Also Limited Liability on the Owners (i.e. if liverpool default on the debts then Gillet and Hicks other companies don't go tits up) etc.  It's in the Premier League rules, as in the Football League rules that if the holding company goes into admin then the club is in admin.  The clubs will enforce this (14 out of 20 votes needed to pass these rules, or create new rules).

 

As with West Ham, I don't think the parent company or club going into admin automatically means a penalty. Providing the debts can be cleared in full by the process of administration (as would be the case with Liverpool), then you're okay. The problem with Leeds and Portsmouth was that the debt was greater than the value of the club.

 

It'll be interesting to see how the Court case goes. I would have thought that the Board were under an obligation to find the maximum price for the club. The fact that the price they've got matches the debt looks a bit dodgy. It's like they've created the deal that is most in the interests of the club and the buyer, rather than the owners.

 

If the wording of the agreement between the Board and the owners says something ambiguous like a 'reasonable' price, then it'll all come down to the views of an individual judge, and where his / her sympathies lie.

 

Wasn't the West Ham case more to do with the holding company holding lots of companies?

 

In Liverpool's case Kop Holdings only holds Liverpool Football Club, so the PL rules would dictate that if Kop Holdings go into Administration so do LFC (for points purposes)

[Cronky]

according to the people its the other 19 clubs who are insisting that the points deduction be put in place so theres no preferential treatment

 

Good nice to see the other clubs will not allow for the rules to be bent over for teams.

are they though ? there'll be lots of smallprint as regarding the club as the company,holding companies etc.........why do you think these holding companies are set up, including the holding company that technically owns us ?

 

Taxing Purposes, Also Limited Liability on the Owners (i.e. if liverpool default on the debts then Gillet and Hicks other companies don't go tits up) etc.  It's in the Premier League rules, as in the Football League rules that if the holding company goes into admin then the club is in admin.  The clubs will enforce this (14 out of 20 votes needed to pass these rules, or create new rules).

 

As with West Ham, I don't think the parent company or club going into admin automatically means a penalty. Providing the debts can be cleared in full by the process of administration (as would be the case with Liverpool), then you're okay. The problem with Leeds and Portsmouth was that the debt was greater than the value of the club.

 

It'll be interesting to see how the Court case goes. I would have thought that the Board were under an obligation to find the maximum price for the club. The fact that the price they've got matches the debt looks a bit dodgy. It's like they've created the deal that is most in the interests of the club and the buyer, rather than the owners.

 

If the wording of the agreement between the Board and the owners says something ambiguous like a 'reasonable' price, then it'll all come down to the views of an individual judge, and where his / her sympathies lie.

 

Wasn't the West Ham case more to do with the holding company holding lots of companies?

 

In Liverpool's case Kop Holdings only holds Liverpool Football Club, so the PL rules would dictate that if Kop Holdings go into Administration so do LFC (for points purposes)

 

There have been confusing messages about this, but I read on the BBC website that if the club remains solvent, then they won't pay a penalty. Given that the club would actually be profitable when the debt is cleared, and the new owners would clear the debt, there doesn't seem any doubt about that.

 

The situation that they're trying to deter is clubs going bust and creditors having to settle for a fraction of what they're owed. The re-constituted club then takes over, having gained an unfair advantage previously over its rivals by over-spending.

 

What H and G will try to do is show that the club is being under-sold, which in reality is probably the case. I doubt whether they'll get a sympathetic hearing though. In America, the club is a franchise, which the owner can transfer to any other city if it suits him. In this country, the club has a much closer tie to a particular city, like some community institution that the owner only holds in trust. If that's how the court sees it, then they'll find against the Americans.

 

I suspect this culture clash is what lay behind that foul-mouthed email that Hicks jnr sent to that fan. He couldn't handle this bloke trying to tell him what he ought to do with his club.

[Guest north shields lad]

Ha ha, I thought it might not be simple.

 

Does a buyer exist who is going to take on the club's debt AND build a stadium? I doubt it.

 

I know it's been debated before, but it is complete, utter, total madness that both Liverpool and Everton need new stadiums but will not ground share. There may be protests, but people will soon get used to the idea.

 

I assume that the block until now is that Liverpool have felt that they are the bigger club and that the deal would therefore benefit Everton more than them. It looks like it's time to re-consider that particular idea.

 

Wouldnt that be like us sharing with sunderland?