mike channon´s windmill
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Jun 2008
- Messages
- 7,475
Thanks Joey said:
Well you know the old scouse mantra " if you can´t buy it , nick it" ! ;)
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Dipper Takeover? [Merged]
- Thread starter bluemonkey71
- Start date
Well you know the old scouse mantra " if you can´t buy it , nick it" ! ;)
Prestwich_Blue said:I believe that RBS do have a say. When they did the refinancing in April (very reluctantly as we all agree) I believe they agreed that a sale would be done by October and that they had the right to force a sale before then, even if the dynamic duo weren't amenable.projectriver said:First there is no way RBS will have a say for anything more than they are owed (inc interest). Unless they go through the process of calling in the loan as a bank would in a domestic mortgage situation they can't just sell the asset - they are a debt provider not the equity (share) holder.
And the situation with them as debt-holder is analagous to the rags situation, where the three hedge funds can take over the equity if they fail to meet certain conditions. It all depends on the actual covenants but Liverpool would have been forced to swallow whatever RBS threw at them in April as the alternative was forced sale/administration.
I don't believe the bank would have had such a forced deal right. It's really not what they do - they don't really have the skill set to judge the deal. They judge the risk profile of a lend. In the absence of covenant breach or default (I am assuming neither has taken place). The only way RBS can take control of the equity is to do just that - exercise it's rights on default or covenant breach and demand redemption. If H&G can't redeem there is a legal course of action to take control of the asset. This scenario is really not very different from a domestic mortgage.
As for United scenario, it's similar but the debt instruments are very different. In Liverpool's there is a senior debt loan but with united the pik notes are a much lower ranking debt security and the rights of the provider are worse. This is compensated by the very high interest the pik providers get at the end of the term (most or all of the interest is rolled up to the term end rather than actually paid).
Bluemoonbaldboy
Well-Known Member
The few dippers I know are doing cartwheels thing is they forget one thing as small as their debt is compared to the rags to pay off Hicks and Gillett clear the debt and build the new stadium is gonna cost near enough £1 billion thats before they even look at the squad. Call it a wild guess but any takeover where they go nuts spending on the squad means they stay at Anfield for the foreseeable future
Bluemoonbaldboy said:The few dippers I know are doing cartwheels thing is they forget one thing as small as their debt is compared to the rags to pay off Hicks and Gillett clear the debt and build the new stadium is gonna cost near enough £1 billion thats before they even look at the squad. Call it a wild guess but any takeover where they go nuts spending on the squad means they stay at Anfield for the foreseeable future
They would only complain once they got there anyway. Look at Arsenal and their wonderful home lol. lol
BoyBlue_1985
Well-Known Member
Matty
Well-Known Member
Bluemoonbaldboy said:The few dippers I know are doing cartwheels thing is they forget one thing as small as their debt is compared to the rags to pay off Hicks and Gillett clear the debt and build the new stadium is gonna cost near enough £1 billion thats before they even look at the squad. Call it a wild guess but any takeover where they go nuts spending on the squad means they stay at Anfield for the foreseeable future
The takeover of City has lead other clubs to become somewhat delusional about subsequent takeovers of football clubs. What happened to City, with ADUG buying out Shinawatra and the model they've implemented, is a one-off. Liverpool fans seem to be under the delusion that Huang will buy out the club, throw a suitcase of money at Hodgson, clear the debts, build a stadium and they'll be Champion's by February. That's not how this will work, if it happens at all (which it is highly unlikely to do). Virtually every potential football club owner out there is of the Hicks/Gillet/Glazer ilk, certainly those looking to buy the "big" footballing assets. They aren't buying for a love of the club, or for the status winning things will provide for them, they are looking to buy low, make profits, and sell high. The Glazers aren't looking at United's long term future, they are interested in taking money from the club in the present, increasing the value of the club (which seems to happen regardless of how much they fuck them over) and selling in the future. Huang will be the same. Or more likely he'll disappear over the same hill DIC went over.
bluevengence
Well-Known Member
Red dippers .....the new Portsmouth
M
M
mat
Guest
Right.
So a chinese bloke with very little information known about him want's to buy the dippers. Wheres the press coverage demanding the fit and proper testing and the chinese invasion will ruin football?
So a chinese bloke with very little information known about him want's to buy the dippers. Wheres the press coverage demanding the fit and proper testing and the chinese invasion will ruin football?
Matty
Well-Known Member
mat said:Right.
So a chinese bloke with very little information known about him want's to buy the dippers. Wheres the press coverage demanding the fit and proper testing and the chinese invasion will ruin football?
At least China has a squeaky clean human rights record, unlike Thailand and the Middle East.............