Re: Club Refinance Thread
this is from the telegraph, gives a decent amount of detail:
Liverpool chairman Martin Broughton and the other non-owner directors are understood to be ready to pursue advanced negotiations with one or both bids but met opposition from American co-owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett at the meeting.
An attempt to refinance the club by Hicks and Gillett is also understood to have been discussed and was rejected by Broughton and the UK-based directors.
The impasse means that the future of the club remains in the balance, with lawyers engaged by the non-owner directors said to be examining whether they have the power to sell the club against the wishes of Hicks and Gillett, who own 100 per cent of the equity.
NESV is part-controlled by John W Henry, a futures trading adviser whose fortune has been estimated at more than $600?million. Television producer Tom Werner is also a shareholder, as is the New York Times Company.
The provenance of the second bid is unknown, but both bidders are understood to be offering about £300?million. That is enough to cover approximately £280?million in loan and fees owed to Royal Bank of Scotland.
Neither bidder is willing to pay the Americans’ valuation of their equity in the club, and with Hicks and Gillett maintaining that their investment demands a return, they yesterday rejected both offers.
Relations between the owner directors Broughton, managing director Christian Purslow and commercial director Ian Ayre, and the American owners are understood to have almost completely broken down.
Sources have indicated that Broughton and his UK-based colleagues are content that both potential owners would mark a considerable improvement on Hicks and Gillett, and would satisfy the demand that new owners would be better guardians of the club’s image and future.
Crucially, both bidders are understood to be acceptable to RBS, whose loans to the club become due on Oct 15.
The Premier League is also understood to have been informed of the identity of the two new bidders, though neither has yet formally begun clearing the regulatory hurdles set out by the league.
The new bids come with Liverpool rooted in the bottom three after a dismal start to the season which has largely been blamed on the instability off the pitch.
The impending deadline of the RBS loan deadline has led to a series of increasingly fraught negotiations.
In August several potential bidders made their interest public, including Chinese sports marketing agent Kenneth Huang and Syrian businessman Yahya Kirdi. Neither could demonstrate that they had the funds to proceed and withdrew.
Last month Hicks attempted to refinance the RBS debt with Blackstone, but was told by Broughton and his UK-based colleagues that a leveraged alternative to RBS was not acceptable.
In June the non-owner directors also rejected an attempt to refinance the debt.
The future of the club may ultimately rest on the attitude of RBS, which is considering whether to refinance the Americans or force them out.
The bank is reluctant to take control of the club given the public-relations risks involved, but it is applying pressure to try and force the Americans to accept a sale.
Hicks and Gillett say they have added value to the club and that it is worth in excess of £400 million. With no bidder willing to meet their demands, though, the impasse continues to undermine Liverpool.
this is from the telegraph, gives a decent amount of detail:
Liverpool chairman Martin Broughton and the other non-owner directors are understood to be ready to pursue advanced negotiations with one or both bids but met opposition from American co-owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett at the meeting.
An attempt to refinance the club by Hicks and Gillett is also understood to have been discussed and was rejected by Broughton and the UK-based directors.
The impasse means that the future of the club remains in the balance, with lawyers engaged by the non-owner directors said to be examining whether they have the power to sell the club against the wishes of Hicks and Gillett, who own 100 per cent of the equity.
NESV is part-controlled by John W Henry, a futures trading adviser whose fortune has been estimated at more than $600?million. Television producer Tom Werner is also a shareholder, as is the New York Times Company.
The provenance of the second bid is unknown, but both bidders are understood to be offering about £300?million. That is enough to cover approximately £280?million in loan and fees owed to Royal Bank of Scotland.
Neither bidder is willing to pay the Americans’ valuation of their equity in the club, and with Hicks and Gillett maintaining that their investment demands a return, they yesterday rejected both offers.
Relations between the owner directors Broughton, managing director Christian Purslow and commercial director Ian Ayre, and the American owners are understood to have almost completely broken down.
Sources have indicated that Broughton and his UK-based colleagues are content that both potential owners would mark a considerable improvement on Hicks and Gillett, and would satisfy the demand that new owners would be better guardians of the club’s image and future.
Crucially, both bidders are understood to be acceptable to RBS, whose loans to the club become due on Oct 15.
The Premier League is also understood to have been informed of the identity of the two new bidders, though neither has yet formally begun clearing the regulatory hurdles set out by the league.
The new bids come with Liverpool rooted in the bottom three after a dismal start to the season which has largely been blamed on the instability off the pitch.
The impending deadline of the RBS loan deadline has led to a series of increasingly fraught negotiations.
In August several potential bidders made their interest public, including Chinese sports marketing agent Kenneth Huang and Syrian businessman Yahya Kirdi. Neither could demonstrate that they had the funds to proceed and withdrew.
Last month Hicks attempted to refinance the RBS debt with Blackstone, but was told by Broughton and his UK-based colleagues that a leveraged alternative to RBS was not acceptable.
In June the non-owner directors also rejected an attempt to refinance the debt.
The future of the club may ultimately rest on the attitude of RBS, which is considering whether to refinance the Americans or force them out.
The bank is reluctant to take control of the club given the public-relations risks involved, but it is applying pressure to try and force the Americans to accept a sale.
Hicks and Gillett say they have added value to the club and that it is worth in excess of £400 million. With no bidder willing to meet their demands, though, the impasse continues to undermine Liverpool.
