Dipper Takeover? [Merged]

[slbsn]

who ever owns liverpool doesnt need to build hotels or casinos around its stadium because they rake in around 165 m pounds annually and though its relatively healthy operating profits in are wiped out by interest payments on their borrowings from the Royal Bank of Scotland and the US bank Wachovia due to their loan on leveraging and even after an annual interest payments of 36.5 m pounds on their loan they reported a net +80 m operating profits for the last year.Its clear this is the factor that attracts most of the investors , the only thorn being the higher valuation expected by hick & gilette who are playing late to squeeze most of the club , but that has changed after broughton was brought into the board as chairman to see a formidable sponsor who clears the debt of the club and get significant investment in.

compared to this city had
Turnover: £87.0m

Operating profit: –£34.2m

Net debt: £194.4m

Interest payment: £14.4m
but the normal rules of business do not apply to us. The latest accounts show that with a turnover of £87m running at an operating loss of £34m and with an accumulated debt to Sheikh of £194m. Since then, the club has spent £117m on players, including Emmanuel Adebayor and Carlos Tevez. But Sheikh converted City's entire £305m debt to him into equity.
this is the game all big finance guyz play and i think the current Liverpool suitors are no strange to this , even though they just have to clear a debt of around 300 m pound by buying the club and rest assured they will add on a significant amount of investment in the squad to take their turnover even higher , which is not a longshot compared that LFC enjoys a huge popularity in asia.

-- Thu Aug 05, 2010 1:44 pm --

anyone here

This is nonsense in many ways. Big finance "guyz" don't like losing money. The city deal is not and already could never be about financial return. Liverpool's revenue is not eaten up just by financing - football wage bills are crazy beasts. The Liverpool turnover without Champions League ie 2010-2011 will be £100-110m and the wage bill probably be somewhere around £85-95m so even before costs and financing it's a loss maker. And thats before we talk about the need to finance and build a new stadium. For the foreseeable future Asia is not the cash cow it's made out to be. The media deals are all collective and "shirt sales" add little to a clubs bottom line (contrary to the media myth). It's not a good "investment".

 

[fbloke]

There seems to be a suggestion that City are a less valuable club because of the historically lower turnover.

I agree with that to a point.

But the potential to make profit from City by increasing the T/O of such a well supported club, starved of success for so long is so much greater than doing so with Liverpool.

There is also the suggestion that a new owner popping over and building a 60k seat stadium will automatically mean that it is filled. That is not necessarily the case without success on the pitch.

Again you can see the opposite being true for City as an extended ground (allied to the very best supporter experience) will be done in stages and will (hopefully) coincide with the explosion of success after so many years without.

Liverpool could, possibly be doing the opposite, Investing huge sums in a new stadium at a time when the team are winning less and supporters lose interest?

Of course the wider picture is as important as well, in that the visitor attraction we all wait for info on will mean City derive massive incomes on top of the football revenues.

I cannot think of any top flight club for whom the development opportunities are so favourable.

Here is a question we should all ask ourselves, in a cold hearted business way.

With all that is said about the clubs in question, Liverpool or Manchester City which offers the brightest future and the best value option? The ask which has the most opportunity to do something truly, eye wateringly different?

The answer is of course Manchester City.

So go ahead all young Liverpool fans enjoy the fact that there may well be a new owner in place soon. I honestly and truthfully am gald to see it happening as H and G are the worse kind of owners and I feel your pain.

But remember that since Moores look and found only H and G to sell to (flawed decision or not) these new owners are likely to be of a new type and are buying Liverpool at a time where everything is now in doubt.

Will Liverpool see the top 4 place again? It certainly cannot be guaranteed as it used to be.

Will Liverpool be able to keep City, Spurs, Villa and Everton at bay?

Will the new owners be willing to build a team capable of doing that year in and year out whilst CL footie is a 50/50 possibility at best?

I know that the answer for City's owners is a resounding yes.

 

[S04]

who ever owns liverpool doesnt need to build hotels or casinos around its stadium because they rake in around 165 m pounds annually and though its relatively healthy operating profits in are wiped out by interest payments on their borrowings from the Royal Bank of Scotland and the US bank Wachovia due to their loan on leveraging and even after an annual interest payments of 36.5 m pounds on their loan they reported a net +80 m operating profits for the last year.Its clear this is the factor that attracts most of the investors , the only thorn being the higher valuation expected by hick & gilette who are playing late to squeeze most of the club , but that has changed after broughton was brought into the board as chairman to see a formidable sponsor who clears the debt of the club and get significant investment in.

compared to this city had
Turnover: £87.0m

Operating profit: –£34.2m

Net debt: £194.4m

Interest payment: £14.4m
but the normal rules of business do not apply to us. The latest accounts show that with a turnover of £87m running at an operating loss of £34m and with an accumulated debt to Sheikh of £194m. Since then, the club has spent £117m on players, including Emmanuel Adebayor and Carlos Tevez. But Sheikh converted City's entire £305m debt to him into equity.
this is the game all big finance guyz play and i think the current Liverpool suitors are no strange to this , even though they just have to clear a debt of around 300 m pound by buying the club and rest assured they will add on a significant amount of investment in the squad to take their turnover even higher , which is not a longshot compared that LFC enjoys a huge popularity in asia.

-- Thu Aug 05, 2010 1:44 pm --

anyone here

As long as Liverpool play in the Champions league and City are midtable in a build up phase.

Those numbers will be very different soon as Liverpool will lose revenue while City is lining up major sponsors.

 

[samharris]

6 weeks ago it was all.." we want to get an owner close to home someone who has the heart of the club in their agenda"

Today its all.." get rid of the yank cowboys and get in anyone with money"


lol.

 

[waspish]

If people who are buying are loaded what would happen is " breaking news Liverpool been bought buy so and so" Liverpool want it in the public domain for one reason only to smoke out real buyers because they are flapping....... They are in the shit if they don't sell to someone who is billion air!!!!!!!

Still stick by this! They are trying to smoke em out! its like an agent trying to get the best for his player, he'll tell you there a que of clubs willing to pay big bucks! and bottom line is there is only one

 

[laserblue]

Mr Huang would also like to deny that there is any involvement of Mainland China state-owned enterprises in his business dealings.

this is interesting. if there's one thing the chinese government hate it's the country being referred to as 'mainland china' as, in their view, this legitimises taiwan as an independent country which they have never recognised. if huang is involved with cic he's in line for a huge bollocking. however the quote suggests he can't be. we shall see.

 

[The Fixer]

who ever owns liverpool doesnt need to build hotels or casinos around its stadium because they rake in around 165 m pounds annually and though its relatively healthy operating profits in are wiped out by interest payments on their borrowings from the Royal Bank of Scotland and the US bank Wachovia due to their loan on leveraging and even after an annual interest payments of 36.5 m pounds on their loan they reported a net +80 m operating profits for the last year.Its clear this is the factor that attracts most of the investors , the only thorn being the higher valuation expected by hick & gilette who are playing late to squeeze most of the club , but that has changed after broughton was brought into the board as chairman to see a formidable sponsor who clears the debt of the club and get significant investment in.

compared to this city had
Turnover: £87.0m

Operating profit: –£34.2m

Net debt: £194.4m

Interest payment: £14.4m
but the normal rules of business do not apply to us. The latest accounts show that with a turnover of £87m running at an operating loss of £34m and with an accumulated debt to Sheikh of £194m. Since then, the club has spent £117m on players, including Emmanuel Adebayor and Carlos Tevez. But Sheikh converted City's entire £305m debt to him into equity.
this is the game all big finance guyz play and i think the current Liverpool suitors are no strange to this , even though they just have to clear a debt of around 300 m pound by buying the club and rest assured they will add on a significant amount of investment in the squad to take their turnover even higher , which is not a longshot compared that LFC enjoys a huge popularity in asia.

-- Thu Aug 05, 2010 1:44 pm --

anyone here

As long as Liverpool play in the Champions league and City are midtable in a build up phase.

Those numbers will be very different soon as Liverpool will lose revenue while City is lining up major sponsors.

Can you see a major sponsorship deal coming from the middle east S04??

 

[fbloke]

Fixer mate.

I would be staggered and hugely disappointed if at least 3 more sponsorship deals werent in play this season.

I would suggest one US Technology Company would be amongst them.

Just educated guesses of course.

 

[Rammyblues]

To be perfectly honest I couldn't give a shit about this takeover, even if they get in done in time even if they have bucket loads of cash to spend, even if they spend it on top quality players and even if they turn their fortunes around and win the prem league next season, all I care about is City being in the top four, if we are there and Liverpool are there and Chelsea and Arsenal are there it means someone not too far away is out and personally that would be more fun.

 

[The Fixer]

Fixer mate.

I would be staggered and hugely disappointed if at least 3 more sponsorship deals werent in play this season.

I would suggest one US Technology Company would be amongst them.

Just educated guesses of course.

Lol mate, "educated guesses" :o)
I get the feeling we're going to land a mega deal like 200 mill 5 year sponsor.