saint lard Posted 13 October, 2010 Posted 13 October, 2010 of $1.6 billion,and have been granted an injuction bt a court in Texas against the company that wants to buy liverpool. They state also that RBS are part of the "conspiracy" to sell the club without allowing them to recoup their initial investment or have some of the equity once the club is sold. They now also disclose a third bidder that was willing to shell out £4m but they both claim that this offer was not even considered by the board,this offer was too include a new stadium also. Has no one told them that rarely you make any money from owning a football club. They are clinging on by their finger nails and in my view don't deserve to get their money back.
dubai_phil Posted 13 October, 2010 Posted 13 October, 2010 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/8062845/Liverpool-takeover-Tom-Hicks-seeks-to-derail-NESV-bid-with-Texas-court-injunction.html Now if you read the Injunction, something Fishy has been going on... Offers over that from NESV, not returning phone calls... Ooh this could run as long as the Skate thread $1.6 BILLION in damages. Nice work if you can get it
GenevaSaint Posted 14 October, 2010 Posted 14 October, 2010 Offers over that from NESV, not returning phone calls... Ooh this could run as long as the Skate thread $1.6 BILLION in damages. Nice work if you can get it In fairness though Phil, the offer was accepted before these new ones cams in, so surely it's a verbal contract? Anyway, one of the other "offers" from a US hedge fund (Mills somethings) is very dodgy as they were one of the original backers of hicks or gillet and recouped their money after he defaulted on the loan! As with us, I thought the board at Anfield had to have the best interests of the club at heart and could turn down a higher bid if they thought long term they'd be better off under NESV?
Hatch Posted 14 October, 2010 Posted 14 October, 2010 damages for what exactly? The club hasn't been sold yet has it, so they havent lost anything. I dont get it.
saint lard Posted 14 October, 2010 Author Posted 14 October, 2010 damages for what exactly? The club hasn't been sold yet has it, so they havent lost anything. I dont get it. I presume for the posibility that had they accepted a prior offer, which would have given a return to Hicks and Gillet
dubai_phil Posted 14 October, 2010 Posted 14 October, 2010 What a mess. this. The article in the Telegraph shows that the idiots will not go quietly into the dark night. While the injunction may well be overturned and may well prove to be hot air bluster and Old School Tie tactics, the damage to the club continues. Liverpool are the first to go down this messy route, many articles today FINALLY starting to give detail to all thise fears that many on here have voiced for so long about Football Finance and Debt. Time is drawing in, and lessons need to be learnt from the NFL and the FIFA/UEFA no debt type rules need to be taken seriously Personally - I haven't bothered to watch a single PL game this season and don't even look at the table anymore. What I did watch last year was in the main rubbish in not full stadiums by players I had never heard of.
saint_bert Posted 14 October, 2010 Posted 14 October, 2010 (edited) I like them. EDIT: They have lost their case over the Texan injunction. Goodbye Tom and George. I for one thank you. Edited 14 October, 2010 by saint_bert
dubai_phil Posted 14 October, 2010 Posted 14 October, 2010 There'll still be a damages law suit in the US. The UK Court dismissal was enjoyable BUT somewhere there wil be a piece of paper that will allow them to use a US court. This will be a cracker. Sit back and enjoy
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now