Liverpool Takeover Thread
- Thread starter antijoke
- Start date
No no thats to obvious. Lets call him Mr. Roman A.!
Associate
Can this thread stay on topic? Banter thread this way for all your Man City spending.
I dont think MB and the board would have pushed the sale if they knew it could be challenged/vetoed by Hick & Co, hopefully LFC/RBS can provide concrete proof that MB had complete control over the sale/board process and it will be a watertight case.
Fingers crossed Hicks & Co. have appointed Rowley Birkin QC to handle their case!
I dont think MB and the board would have pushed the sale if they knew it could be challenged/vetoed by Hick & Co, hopefully LFC/RBS can provide concrete proof that MB had complete control over the sale/board process and it will be a watertight case.
Fingers crossed Hicks & Co. have appointed Rowley Birkin QC to handle their case!
Last edited:
"LFC have been renamed Royal Bank of Scotland United, and will soon be offering their own ISA with 0.4% interest!"
A few journo's are tweeting that this case is in addition to the Liverpool Board's declaratory judgment.
This is just 1 of many hurdles facing Hicks
RBS STATEMENT
RBS in its capacity as lender to the Kop group of companies received the benefit of various contractual undertakings from Mr. Hicks and Mr. Gillett in relation to the corporate governance arrangements that Mr. Hicks and Mr. Gillett agreed would apply to the Kop group of companies with effect from April 2010.
Those undertakings provided for the appointment of Mr Broughton as chairman of the board and the appointment of the chief executive and commercial director of LFC to the Kop boards.
As is well known, Mr. Hicks and Mr. Gillett purported to make changes to those corporate governance arrangements on 4 October. This was in breach of those contractual undertakings.
In light of that purported breach of contract RBS sought and obtained on Friday 8 October 2010 an interim injunction against Mr. Hicks and Mr. Gillett until a further hearing scheduled for tomorrow.
Among other things, that interim injunction prevents Mr. Hicks or Mr. Gillett taking any steps to remove or replace Mr. Broughton from his position as chairman of the board of the Kop companies or from taking any other steps to appoint or remove any directors from the board of the Kop companies.
The proceedings tomorrow represent the continuation of Friday’s proceedings and relates to breach of contract only. These proceedings do not represent steps by RBS to enforce its security or to appoint an administrator.
We are unable to provide any visibility on timing for resolution of these proceedings at this stage.
STATEMENT ENDS
RBS in its capacity as lender to the Kop group of companies received the benefit of various contractual undertakings from Mr. Hicks and Mr. Gillett in relation to the corporate governance arrangements that Mr. Hicks and Mr. Gillett agreed would apply to the Kop group of companies with effect from April 2010.
Those undertakings provided for the appointment of Mr Broughton as chairman of the board and the appointment of the chief executive and commercial director of LFC to the Kop boards.
As is well known, Mr. Hicks and Mr. Gillett purported to make changes to those corporate governance arrangements on 4 October. This was in breach of those contractual undertakings.
In light of that purported breach of contract RBS sought and obtained on Friday 8 October 2010 an interim injunction against Mr. Hicks and Mr. Gillett until a further hearing scheduled for tomorrow.
Among other things, that interim injunction prevents Mr. Hicks or Mr. Gillett taking any steps to remove or replace Mr. Broughton from his position as chairman of the board of the Kop companies or from taking any other steps to appoint or remove any directors from the board of the Kop companies.
The proceedings tomorrow represent the continuation of Friday’s proceedings and relates to breach of contract only. These proceedings do not represent steps by RBS to enforce its security or to appoint an administrator.
We are unable to provide any visibility on timing for resolution of these proceedings at this stage.
STATEMENT ENDS
Soldato
So effectively Liverpool is in administration in all but name. RBS hold all the cards and one way or another the Americans will be out of the club this time next week. Either they go quietly and loose £144m or they dig their heels in, force the club into administration proper, hand the club a nine point penalty and probably loose a £100m more. Though by the sounds of things RBS are positive the court case will go their way and won’t put the club into administration unless they absolutely have to but they're are prepared none the less.
H&G are going to court why? Either they’re completely barmy, they're fishing for more money or they've been given some extremely bad advice. I hope the judge laughs them out of court and the legal bill is very large.
H&G are going to court why? Either they’re completely barmy, they're fishing for more money or they've been given some extremely bad advice. I hope the judge laughs them out of court and the legal bill is very large.
Last edited:
If its true that we were effectively in Admin (in all but the name) for months already then Hicks cant even argue the sale price isn't fair, as in this situation the company have an obligation to pay its debt back before even considering shareholders. So paying RBS back was paramount, and had to be done urgently.
bensmith_times Ben Smith
RBS clearly extremely confident of their legal position v Hicks - they do not expect to lose this case #lfc
bensmith_times Ben Smith
RBS clearly extremely confident of their legal position v Hicks - they do not expect to lose this case #lfc
We are. I said it at the time Broughton was appointed; H&G have signed all control of the club over to RBS and they appointed Broughton as their administrator (in all but name) to recoup their money.
Reportedly this was the 2nd bidder from last week.
Edit: and they say it's Peter Lim, who according to Forbes, is not a billionaire. Worth an estimated $830m.
Agreed - as long as NESV want the club it looks to be theirs. Its only if we lose the court case that I can see the other bidders being presented an opening.
Soldato
Yep, and H&G agreed under the premise they could sell the club in the meantime at a high enough value as to recoup their losses and possibly even make a profit.
They failed miserably so why don't they just f off. The club might be undervalued if it was a secure, stable business without debt and H&G were in strong bargaining position. Everybody and his mate knows the RBS deadline date and isn't going to pay full price.
Last edited:
If this bidder has increased his offer it could aid Hicks; it may provide him with proof that the offer does not represent a fair value of the club.
However I don't know if that would be taken into account in the hearing tomorrow or whether it's simply a case of proving whether H&G could fire Ayres and Purslow or not, and therefore blocking the sale.
There's nothing to suggest that Peter Lim (if it is him) has significantly improved his bid over the NESV bid though.
However I don't know if that would be taken into account in the hearing tomorrow or whether it's simply a case of proving whether H&G could fire Ayres and Purslow or not, and therefore blocking the sale.
There's nothing to suggest that Peter Lim (if it is him) has significantly improved his bid over the NESV bid though.