The Liverpool Thread

[OzzieMandias]

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?

 

It might be if Sunderland were based, not 12 miles away, but on the other side of Leazes Park.

[Guest ObiChrisKenobi]

Liverpool and Everton are basically Newcastle West and Newcastle East End before they merged together to form Newcastle United. I'm sure I've read that Liverpool were a break away team from an original Everton team.

[Heron]

Please, please, PLEASE don't do what Villa did when these get relegated though. Let another club be the stupid fucks.

[jdckelly]

Liverpool and Everton are basically Newcastle West and Newcastle East End before they merged together to form Newcastle United. I'm sure I've read that Liverpool were a break away team from an original Everton team.

think so, everton originally owned anfield but left to build their own stadium and the new liverpool club got anfield

[Rob W]

I can think of 14 clubs that would LOVE Liverpool  (or anyone else but themselves) to be 9 points worse off RIGHT NOW

 

and can you see Liverpool's old mates at ManU, Everton, etc voting against a penalty - juts makes the top 4 safer

[wacko]

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.

 

The following is a distant third behind the money and the players. Just getting to the CL group stage is worth a very pretty penny. Being a CL regular is essential for holding on to the very best players.

 

Even if we did scrape into the CL, we can kiss goodbye the massive receipts from having been regulars in the late stages. On a man-to-man basis, Liverpool punched well above its weight in Europe under Benitez, and that was entirely down to him. Those days are over for now, whether we qualify for the CL or not.

 

It's not too hard to imagine a few of our better players buggering off without regular CL footie.

 

In terms of spending power, we're probably at about Spurs' level, behind Man Utd, Arsenal, Chelsea and Man City, so without a new stadium, we're going to find it very hard to become a CL regular again, depending on what the UEFA rules do to Chelsea and Man City.

 

I'd say, if all goes as well as possible (new stadium, top manager, no fuckholes in the boardroom etc.), we're 5-10 years off being where we were 2-3 seasons ago under Rafa. Alonso leaving was the beginning of the end for that side, because he was the heart of it, and the best player in it.

[Mick]

 

The following is a distant third behind the money and the players. Just getting to the CL group stage is worth a very pretty penny. Being a CL regular is essential for holding on to the very best players.

 

Even if we did scrape into the CL, we can kiss goodbye the massive receipts from having been regulars in the late stages. On a man-to-man basis, Liverpool punched well above its weight in Europe under Benitez, and that was entirely down to him. Those days are over for now, whether we qualify for the CL or not.

 

It's not too hard to imagine a few of our better players buggering off without regular CL footie.

 

In terms of spending power, we're probably at about Spurs' level, behind Man Utd, Arsenal, Chelsea and Man City, so without a new stadium, we're going to find it very hard to become a CL regular again, depending on what the UEFA rules do to Chelsea and Man City.

 

I'd say, if all goes as well as possible (new stadium, top manager, no fuckholes in the boardroom etc.), we're 5-10 years off being where we were 2-3 seasons ago under Rafa. Alonso leaving was the beginning of the end for that side, because he was the heart of it, and the best player in it.

 

Liverpool looks as if they are trying to emulate Newcastle and while I don't think you'll get relegated yet, things are not looking too good.  The thought of Liverpool going down would have been unthinkable a couple of years ago but like we found out, anything can happen when you're a club in turmoil.  You look as if you’ll do well to finish mid table this season and if you are docked 9 points then you’re really in the shit and anything could happen.

 

Welcome to our world.

 

I don’t take any pleasure seeing Liverpool struggle because I’ve always got on well with Liverpool fans.  After saying that, I think you're now one of the also-rans and you'll be lucky to get a cup run to make your season interesting because the league is way beyond you, European qualification by and means probably is.

 

 

 

[Neil]

8th I reckon.

[madras]

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.

could have happened a few years ago had we strengthened on reaching the champs league instead of bringing in bowyer on afree.

[BlueStar]

Could someone explain how come Southampton were docked 9 points when their holding company went into administration, but the view is that if Liverpools's holding company went into administration, but the club itself didn't, then they wouldn't lose 9 points?  West Ham seemed to avoid it as well.

 

There's also talk about there only being a risk of a points deduction if the holding company is deemed by the Premier League as being solely concerned with the ownership of Liverpool and football-related matters, but they'll be safe if the club's just a solvent part of an overall portfolio - I know West Ham's Icelandic bank owners had their fingers in a large amount of other pies, but what else exactly does Kop Football (Holdings) Ltd do?

[Guest neesy111]

Could someone explain how come Southampton were docked 9 points when their holding company went into administration, but the view is that if Liverpools's holding company went into administration, but the club itself didn't, then they wouldn't lose 9 points?  West Ham seemed to avoid it as well.

 

There's also talk about there only being a risk of a points deduction if the holding company is deemed by the Premier League as being solely concerned with the ownership of Liverpool and football-related matters, but they'll be safe if the club's just a solvent part of an overall portfolio - I know West Ham's Icelandic bank owners had their fingers in a large amount of other pies, but what else exactly does Kop Football (Holdings) Ltd do?

 

Different Leagues, Different Rules.

 

The other premiership clubs will make sure Liverpool are punished IMO, it's in all of their best interests tbh.

[clintdempsey]

Could someone explain how come Southampton were docked 9 points when their holding company went into administration, but the view is that if Liverpools's holding company went into administration, but the club itself didn't, then they wouldn't lose 9 points?  West Ham seemed to avoid it as well.

 

There's also talk about there only being a risk of a points deduction if the holding company is deemed by the Premier League as being solely concerned with the ownership of Liverpool and football-related matters, but they'll be safe if the club's just a solvent part of an overall portfolio - I know West Ham's Icelandic bank owners had their fingers in a large amount of other pies, but what else exactly does Kop Football (Holdings) Ltd do?

I think the reasoning behind docking points of Southampton and in this case Liverpool would be that the holding companies only hold the club itself. The ruling is that if the holding company goes into administration because of football matters the club itself should be docked 9 pts. In West Ham's case it was different as the demise of the holding company was down to other companies under the same holding company struggling and therefore no points were docked.

 

In Liverpool's case it would be hard to argue that the holding company has had problems not relating to football since all it owns is Liverpool FC.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

High Court hearing 10.30am on Tuesday, be amazed if anything other than the sale being allowed is the outcome.

[BlueStar]

High Court hearing 10.30am on Tuesday, be amazed if anything other than the sale being allowed is the outcome.

 

Liverpool will probably be awarded 9 extra points, can't have one of the big four in the relegation zone.

[quayside]

High Court hearing 10.30am on Tuesday, be amazed if anything other than the sale being allowed is the outcome.

 

Whoever loses will, no doubt, put in an appeal against the decision.

[Guest elbee909]

High Court hearing 10.30am on Tuesday, be amazed if anything other than the sale being allowed is the outcome.

 

Liverpool will probably be awarded 9 extra points, can't have one of the big four in the relegation zone.

 

The big four that Liverpool belonged to was a few years ago.

[jdckelly]

High Court hearing 10.30am on Tuesday, be amazed if anything other than the sale being allowed is the outcome.

hard to call without the full facts, hicks aim may be to just drag it out so the club goes into admin as a final farewell present to as he dubbed it "that noise over there" (aka the liverpool fans)

[Dokko]

I just can't see how someone you hire (and then sack) have the right to sell your business.

 

They were there to find a buyer, for a price H&G deemed acceptable, they've not met those requirements therefore really failed at their job and the bid to be rejected.

 

Can't see a court allowing someone to lose that kind of money either, not in a quick decision which has been put on due to the deadline, and likely will be appealed and the sale with still not go through if the court favours the bid.

 

H&G should sell stakes in other investments and cover the loans and own the club in full then sell it. It's certainly worth more than £300m, we were worth £135m carrying £80m of debt.

 

 

[Liam Liam Liam O]

High Court hearing 10.30am on Tuesday, be amazed if anything other than the sale being allowed is the outcome.

 

Whoever loses will, no doubt, put in an appeal against the decision.

 

Would have thought so, but I still can't see it being blocked.  The biggest chance of it falling though is probably still the buyer getting sick of the delays if there is an appeal.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

I just can't see how someone you hire (and then sack) have the right to sell your business.

 

They were there to find a buyer, for a price H&G deemed acceptable, they've not met those requirements therefore really failed at their job and the bid to be rejected.

 

Can't see a court allowing someone to lose that kind of money either, not in a quick decision which has been put on due to the deadline, and likely will be appealed and the sale with still not go through if the court favours the bid.

 

H&G should sell stakes in other investments and cover the loans and own the club in full then sell it. It's certainly worth more than £300m, we were worth £135m carrying £80m of debt.

 

 

 

Whether that bit in bold exists in the terms of his agreement with them will more than likely be the cause of the problem.

[Guest gggg]

I just can't see how someone you hire (and then sack) have the right to sell your business.

 

Because it's not theirs anymore.

[Dokko]

I just can't see how someone you hire (and then sack) have the right to sell your business.

 

Because it's not theirs anymore.

 

bank hasn't called it yet. Surely the bank should call in the debts before anyone has that kind of power.

 

 

[Guest neesy111]

I just can't see how someone you hire (and then sack) have the right to sell your business.

 

Because it's not theirs anymore.

 

bank hasn't called it yet. Surely the bank should call in the debts before anyone has that kind of power.

 

 

 

That's exactly what they bank has to do.  Ridiculous that Gillett and Hicks value liverpool at £600M

[quayside]

I just can't see how someone you hire (and then sack) have the right to sell your business.

 

They were there to find a buyer, for a price H&G deemed acceptable, they've not met those requirements therefore really failed at their job and the bid to be rejected.

 

Can't see a court allowing someone to lose that kind of money either, not in a quick decision which has been put on due to the deadline, and likely will be appealed and the sale with still not go through if the court favours the bid.

 

H&G should sell stakes in other investments and cover the loans and own the club in full then sell it. It's certainly worth more than £300m, we were worth £135m carrying £80m of debt.

 

 

 

Whether that bit in bold exists in the terms of his agreement with them will more than likely be the cause of the problem.

 

Yes that will be the key to it.

 

Last week Martin Broughton said:

 

"Part of me taking on the role - and I was appointed by Tom and George - was that they gave a written undertaking that only I could change the board, they wrote that into the articles of the two companies Kop Football and Kop Holdings. They also gave a written undertaking to RBS that they would not frustrate any reasonable sale and this is frankly a flagrant abuse of those two written undertakings."

 

 

Whether Hicks and Gillett still had the power to remove two directors is fairly easy to decide. Whether they gave a written undertaking not to frustrate a "reasonable sale" is also quite easy to decide. However what is not going to be so easy to decide is whether the deal with John Henry is a "reasonable sale".

 

 

 

[Dokko]

Rbs win court injunction to stop h&g sacking the board...guess that's the start of pools luck changing...