Albertini

Barcelona don't appear to have the right financial model either. I read the other day they're something like £400 million in debt and remember they had to take out that bridging loan in the summer to pay wages. Aren't Real something likke 700 Million euros in debt? Real & Barca's financial models don't appear sustainable in the mid to long term. They are going to have to rein in at some point.

Also would both of them need RBS approval before they can transfer their shares to a third party with their obligations still unpaid with the bank?

Here's what i don't get. How can Gillett have used his shares as security with MILL whilst the loans were in place with RBS? Will RBS have allowed him to do this?

Good questions and just what i was thinking. It's not about the board voting on the issue that counts here. It is whether Hicks and Gilett have the power to sell their shares without the bank's approval, particualry when they have been in default accoridng to reports since the 6th or 7th.

No it's not at all. He was appointed by C&A. He had a free hand to vote for what he wanted. If some were to be believed on here he would have voted for whatever kept him in the job. Backing C&A would have given him the greater opportunity for him to carry on playing Football Manager. He has done more than his job when his job has been undermined and usurped by the owners all along. Had the owners simply accepted the first offer and not tried several times to refinance and change the board I would agree with you. Under those circumstances he had simply done his job. But to sit here and simply state that “he’s done his job” when he’s had the owners at him and the fans at him as well I think is wrong and is motivated purely by the f*** ups he’s made on the footballing side. I don’t want him to stay I want him to go for the football decisions he’s made but given the obvious s**** he’s had to put up with from all sides I will give him credit for the way he has played his part in getting rid of the owner’s, which was more than the remit of his job IMO.

No they wouldn't suffer damage to their reputations at all if they failed to sell the club. This has not been a normal sales process and they have been working with the owners (and many fans) against them at every turn. With the games cancer and aids have been playing with the whole process no one would have begrudged them walking away saying they don’t need the hassle. In fact wasn’t there a rumour yesterday Broughton was walking tomorrow? Equally Purslow could have walked last night but choose to fight on with Broughton. The point is whilst there is understandable and perfectly valid criticisms of Purslow (and to a lesser degree Broughton) they haven’t taken the easy option and they have gone above and beyond simply doing their job which is what you claimed. You’re carrying your criticisms over football matters over to how they have handled the sale of the club, which I thought was wrong and out of order. Don’t know where “not acceptable” came from”. Didn’t mean that, I meant it’s out of order as far as I’m concerned.

Hang on a minute. Done what they’ve brought in to do? It’s not like stacking shelves at Tesco. Broughton could potentially be personally liable if their challenge is successful and Purslow rejected being fired. The easiest thing for both of them was to walk and not take the hassle, grief and s**** that is coming their way from these two c****. They didn’t they stood their ground and fought for the future of the club. Purslow has been a disaster in many areas but simply saying they were doing their jobs in selling the club is not acceptable. Credit to them for the way they have handled selling the club.

No wonder they're trying to block the sale. It's a dream scenario for us from the point of view that if it is £300 million, not only will they walk away with nowt, they are down on their £140 million Kop loan as well. Absolutely dream result if it goes through from the point of view of sticking it to cancer and aids.

You would like to think now that this is going down to the wire these two c***s are having sleepless nights about all this and the potential losses they face if it gets repo'd. Hope the feckers are sh**ing themselves, they should be. The action of the last few weeks over all the fora has been truly a sight to behold. Where ever they go, wherever they whore themselves, everyone irrespective of which forums they post on has come together and headed them off. Some real stars across all LFC forums. Keep it up lads, not long now until we're rid of these t***s.

Not just that but from what i can gether from around the web their personal guarantees to RBS extend to £110 million! That's why Hicks is whoring himself round every bank in America. So if the best bid in admin was £160 million RBS coukld hit them personally for £110 million. Bye bye largest house in Texas!

Yep and he was doing so well upto that point.

How the hell can the dwarf use shares that have a debenture against them already as collateral for another loan? Surely RBS and the US lender MILF (snigger) will have picked up on it and prevented it from happening in the first place?

And that’s the six million dollar question (or £280 million pounds one in this case). He can only be working to two rationales. First one is that he is not prepared to take the hit now, refinance the debt to buy him more time to do something (what the something is I have no idea because as your post alluded to there doesn’t appear to be any golden new revenue streams falling out of the sky that will get him out of the hole). Perhaps it’s simply human nature combined with his ego. Second option is that perhaps he knows something we don’t and he’s banking on either future internet revenues or leniency in the money markets in the short to medium term to allow him to borrow more to complete the stadium. Of the two I think the first point is more likely.

Absolutely but don’t misunderstand me. I’m not suggesting sympathy for his actions. He clearly is an asset stripper and a massive c**t to boot. My point is given his limited options which basically boil down to giving the club back to its lenders and facing a massive personal loss he was always going to look at trying to refinance. Anyone in his position would do exactly the same. Whether he can get the refinance though is another matter entirely.

Let’s not get too downbeat at the moment. I ain’t going to start slitting wrists on the back of a couple of reports just yet. The board have already blocked a refinance so why would their position change in the matter of a few weeks? For all his c**tishness you can’t blame Hicks for trying to get himself out of the hole he’s got himself in. He doesn’t want to see RBS effectively foreclose so he has to look at all options. Attempting to refinance is the only thing he can do to stop the ship from sinking for him and his dwarf mate. Looking to refinance and actually refinancing are two completely different things. If he does get refinance how long has that given him and what can he do to hold back the dam? The club’s profits can’t sustain ever increasing interest payments. I personally can’t see him getting it for all the reasons mentioned, but I’m not surprised he’s trying to do it when the only option he has at the moment is to hand the keys back to RBS and take a massive loss.

Yep, it's a natural instinct to assume "they've no intention of selling us, they want to keep us to make loads of money" but what money is that then? The club has made massive losses over the last three years. What will change to turn that into a big profit when the only real source of increasing income is a stadium they can't afford to build. In fact the losses will continue to increase as the debt increases. Sell star players and accept mediocrity? Well that's fine to a point but your income drops correspondingly and you're chasing your tail to reduce your costs in line with reducing income in an ever decreasing circle. I really can't see why they would want to hold on when they don't have the money needed to develop the club which would generate these large profits in the future.

Is it not possible that they could take over the club without putting it into Administration, like the Icelandic banks did with West Ham? What's the nature of clauses on these kinds of deals? Is there any debt for equity swaps built in as penalty clauses in the event of default to allow banks to take over a defualting company without putting it through formal adminstration? If not how the feck did West Ham get away with it?

From Football Rumour's new LFC offshoot site.

He's probably leveraged the £14 per month hosting fees.

That this Syrian fella, with G&H, have inserted viruses in both TLW & RAWK to bring their sites down!! They're going to be even more paranoid on RAWK when the site goes live again.

Yes& yes. If we get to October and still no sale it won't be far off.

Also these PIK notes are no more than increased security for RBS. This is no extra money they have lent the owners, that remains £237 million. The alleged £60 million is simply a charge for extending the £237 million. In the event of a sale though it means RBS get first call on £350 million+ rather than £237 million. If the club gets more than they then it's trebles all round at RBS they've made a whopping profit on the £237 million. If they have to take it over and sell it they are basically covered for all the proceeds of any sale in the future plus they have their PG's of £110 million to call on as well. Whilst these finance costs are scandalous perversely they are a good thing for the club because they further remove options for the owners and increase further the pressure on them. If these figures are true it seems that RBS have been hard balling them since the last refinance.

I can see RBS having no issue doing that all. They clealry want a line drawing under it and to get these feckers out and get the debt repaid. How much more interest will they have to find if we're not sold by Ocotber and they have to refinance again? Another £60 million for a further 6 months? That would take the debt to the bank alone over £400 million. They aren't going to let it contine to spiral beyond a safe vale of the club. All signs pointing to RBS saying it's October or bust. These two c**** are trying to maximise the sale price and are not interested in clinging on. They are only interested in the sale price. The court angle they'll go down is "we had a bid of a £600 million for the club on the table, you accepted £350 million so you didn't carry out your fiduciary duties". Where that would stand in law and who they would sue (the club, the bank, Broughton) i have no idea. Seems a bit lame to me if they have signed off on this process to then try and fight it later. You are having a laugh aren't you? Good debtors? Every sports investment they've got involved in is either bankrupt, fire sold or defaulting on loans. They ain't a good risk mate and RBS will be acutely aware of that. RBS will not let the value of the debt exceed a safe and conservative value of the club.

Translation: We stood no chance of buying LFC

To be fair you can't blame Brougton or Barcap when certain people decide to do their bidding through the media. Broughton has been true to his word in that as far as he and the club is concerned this won't be played out in the media. That's why i think Kenny's tactics in going public will have pissed off Broughton. He's been encouraging bidders then Kenny comes out of the woodwork and other bidders think the club are sre sticthing them up. Kenny can't have done his bid much good by undermining the work of the man who has the casting vote.