Liverpool Takeover Thread

From what I know, the Texas ruling isn't binding here. However if RBS chose to ignore it, it could be detrimental to RBS future dealings in the USA.

Also, could someone explain why there is so much hate for the owners. I keep up with football however I've never really had interest with the club or its dealings. Though I'm aware that supporters have hated the owners for ages now.
 
TS7 said:
Also, could someone explain why there is so much hate for the owners. I keep up with football however I've never really had interest with the club or its dealings. Though I'm aware that supporters have hated the owners for ages now.
Click to expand...

Failed promises. A spade in the ground within 100 days (for the new stadium) years on, and nothing.

Also the way they have handled this sale has been diabolical.

I hope to god we haven't been sold out by Hicks to Mill financial, who will pay the RBS debt, then who know what will happen next.

*breathe*
 
One thing that I think will come out of all this is that when we sell to NESV (and I still firmly believe we will), I reckon that Broughton will remain on as permanent Chairman of Liverpool. I think he has impressed enough in the last few weeks that I can see Henry wanting him to stay on.
 
Liverpool co-owner Tom Hicks remains in control of his share of the club and has not sold out to Mill Financial, Press Association Sport has been told.

Reports on Thursday morning suggested the hedge fund, a branch of Washington-based Springfield Financial, had acquired the Texan's 50 per cent share having already taken ownership of his fellow co-owner George Gillett's half.

However, a UK-based spokesman for Tom Hicks told Press Association Sport Mill Financial had not acquired Hicks' shares.
Click to expand...

http://www.football365.com/story/0,17033,8652_6444318,00.html?
 
F365's take on the TRO etc..

Mediawatch is no legal expert, although it does know a few more lawyers than is ideal.

However, even us with our tiny, non-legal brains can see that the temporary (and that seems to be the crucial word here) restraining order taken out by Tom Hicks is, frankly, bull**** and bluster.

Quite apart from the figure of $1.6billion he is seeking in compensation that has apparently been picked out of his **** (backside) (a little under four times what they paid for the club, and $600,000 more than even their wildest and most optimistic valuation of Liverpool), reading the actual order makes for entertaining reading.

For a start, each piece of evidence for the granting of the order is prefixed 'Based on the allegations...' of Hicks and co., and the judge has scrawled 'solely' after every instance of the word 'Based' - 17 times in total.

So this basically amounts to Hicks turning up at the 160th judicial court in Dallas, saying 'Them Brits are being mean to us', the judge raising a quizzical eyebrow and saying 'We'll look into it in a few weeks'.

Other amendments from the pen of the judge are equally telling. RBS, Martin Broughton et al are accused of 'unlawful acts' in the original text, only for the judge to scribble out the word 'unlawful'. So just 'acts', then. And in the summary of the final orders, the instruction for the defendants to refrain from 'Taking any action in any other court to effect or impede this lawsuit' is scrubbed out altogether.

In short, if we were Liverpool fans, we wouldn't worry too much.


Questions, Answers?
So, if Hicks is prepared to go to court to prove Broughton and friends have been conspiring in this 'epic swindle', and that he received bids for Liverpool worth around £400million, we do have a couple of questions.

1) Why didn't you bring this up in the High Court on Tuesday, when it might've done some good?
2) Why, if these bids were received as you claim on October 4, have you not mentioned them before?
Click to expand...
 
You know...I really actually find this all very interesting !! Thank god for it really, its bad enough being at the bottom of the league and not much to talk about in terms of on the pitch performances but at least this is kind of exciting and gives the fans something to talk about. I much prefer that to being at the bottom of the league and not having anything to talk about :)
 
3.02pm: QC Snowden speaking for RBS: Argues that an injunction granted in a foreign country should not be allowed to take force when companies involved are all English. Describes H&G claim of "epic swindle" scurrilous.


2.59pm: "Court proceedings interrupted: it seems H&G are currently in court in Dallas arguing Lfc board were in contempt of US court y'day!" tweets Dan Roan


2.58pm: AbyKopite‎ tweets: "Why does Peter Lim release his press statements when Liverpool are in court? #LFC"
 
3.05pm: Lord Grabiner QC now speaking for Liverpool: "simply incredible" that facts of this case were not revealed in Dallas court. "They want second bite of cherry and if it wasn't so serious, it would be a joke."

3.02pm: QC Snowden speaking for RBS: Argues that an injunction granted in a foreign country should not be allowed to take force when companies involved are all English. Describes H&G claim of "epic swindle" scurrilous.
 
3.21pm: Peter Lim says he will not proceed with his bid because the board is intent on selling to NESV "at the exclusion of all other parties...In these circumstances, I am not able to proceed with my intention to acquire the club." He added that "if current events cause the circumstances to change, my interest in acquiring the club remains."
Click to expand...
That is nothing more than proof that this guy has been colluding with H&G to scupper the best deal on the table.
xxalxx said:
2.58pm: AbyKopite‎ tweets: "Why does Peter Lim release his press statements when Liverpool are in court? #LFC"
Click to expand...
See above.

EDIT: If the outcome of this case concludes they can go ahead with the deal it should be done, right away, outside the court room. It was mistake to give H&G time to raise another legal proceeding.
 
Last edited:
Stretch said:
If the outcome of this case concludes they can go ahead with the deal it should be done, right away, outside the court room. It was mistake to give H&G time to raise another legal proceeding.
Click to expand...

They have to be included as they are on the BoD. If we exclude them then they can block the sale.
 
shine said:
They have to be included as they are on the BoD. If we exclude them then they can block the sale.
Click to expand...
Maybe I was being a little extreme for effect. But you get the idea. Besides they can be included in the board meeting but everyone knows full well there's no point in them being there.

3.57pm: QC Chivers now speaking for NESV. It appears that G&H may have no-one in this courtroom....
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom