Author Topic: A Leverage Buy Out, How LFC has fallen victim to a cruel financial instrument  (Read 20920 times)

Offline Goethe

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 371
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
imo the article is pure fantasy - dont hedge funds want ridiculously high rates of return on investments?

Hedge funds do in general, yes. But if MidOcean took over the club in a private equity/hedge fund capacity, Purslow having driven down the price, then they would still have one of the world's three or four most famous clubs, with a massive loyal fanbase, good existing revenue flows, and the potential for restructuring, streamlining and rationalising (I should point out that positive as these concepts sound, they are only positive from the point of the investor; the process certainly won't be for anyone with any emotional attachment to the club) the whole operation using their own management team-the essence of private equity/management buy-out activity. They could make huge returns over a decent enough time horizon, trust me. I actually really like the article, apart from the poor level of literacy; it's intuitive, cynical and suspicious, and gets to the heart of what I know to be the case re: hedge fund and PE cultures.

EDIT: On the other hand, cretinous as they are, Tom and George are no retards; it would be surprising if they allowed Cecil to gain a position of such influence and prominence, whilst suspecting the possibility of his looking to sabotage the club's valuation through asset-stripping and deliberate inhibition of competitiveness as a means to gain a foothold for his private equity firm. But then, stranger and more retarded things have happened in corporate finance during the past few years...
« Last Edit: July 24, 2010, 07:56:13 pm by Goethe »

hoonin

  • Guest
Only just seen this. Wish I hadn't - it's probably the most concise but depressing summary of what supporters have been worrying/protesting/campaigning/arguing/denying/ignoring* for 3 years now.

Really cannot fathom why so many people I respect on here and in real life choose to ignore the alarm bells that have been ringing for some time now.

*delete as appropriate

Offline Not funny reecehenebry

  • Pitbull #2. Fanning the flames of debate since 03/06/10.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 4,806
Only just seen this. Wish I hadn't - it's probably the most concise but depressing summary of what supporters have been worrying/protesting/campaigning/arguing/denying/ignoring* for 3 years now.

Really cannot fathom why so many people I respect on here and in real life choose to ignore the alarm bells that have been ringing for some time now.

*delete as appropriate
It's hard to project the kinda failure possible onto the most successful club in England.People that support us have always had the safety blacket that was our football.We needed really dropped far even if we haven't won the PL in 20 years.
They just can't credit it.I don't think i will be real to most until it happens(fingers crossed it won't,but i really fear it will).
Why are you looking past this season?

Offline Lush is the best medicine...

  • FUCK THE POLICE - NWA
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 40,806
Only just seen this. Wish I hadn't - it's probably the most concise but depressing summary of what supporters have been worrying/protesting/campaigning/arguing/denying/ignoring* for 3 years now.

Really cannot fathom why so many people I respect on here and in real life choose to ignore the alarm bells that have been ringing for some time now.

*delete as appropriate

its a very speculative article, more of a 'what could happen' rather than what will happen

Offline Goethe

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 371
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
its a very speculative article, more of a 'what could happen' rather than what will happen

It is 'speculative', yes, but so is any statement about future developments in this field. I don't see how it diminishes the quality of argument though. its remit is to look at the situation as it stands, and the factors that are important in making it so: market conditions, the types of firms and individuals concerned, the types of investment strategies employed within the industry, etc. Within this context, the possibilities it moots are entirely consistent with the predatory nature of the private equity industry and the types of characters who populate it at this level, as well as the kind of strategies that are routinely employed when it comes to leveraged buyouts, acquisitions of targets, 'value enhancement', etc. Strapping on the old tin hat and saying 'yeah but it's only speculative' doesn't insulate any of us from the fact that a lot of what is suggested is not at all inconsistent with myriad other factors surrounding the whole stinking mess.
« Last Edit: July 24, 2010, 09:21:18 pm by Goethe »

Offline Lush is the best medicine...

  • FUCK THE POLICE - NWA
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 40,806
It is 'speculative', yes, but so is any statement about future developments in this field. I don't see how it diminishes the quality of argument though.

its pretty unlikely to be honest - its like me saying that 5 years from now i'll be married to scarlett johansen which is a totally speculative statement that is highly unlikely to happen

royhendo

  • Guest
We've seen a recent upsurge in the words 'conjecture' and 'speculative' in relation to this stuff though Goethe. A euphemism for what it represents is "analysis paralysis". A more realistic tag in my view is "moral paralysis". It's fair enough umming and awing when you're lacking conclusive corroborated proof to condemn a man to the gallows. But in this situation, where nobody's being hung until they're dead, and we're in possession of the reported finanical information over four years, with trends, analysis et al done until we're all blue in the face, it's not appropriate.

As my old Professor Neil MacCormick used to say, "nobody's ever seen a cigarette cause cancer".

royhendo

  • Guest
its pretty unlikely to be honest - its like me saying that 5 years from now i'll be married to scarlett johansen which is a totally speculative statement that is highly unlikely to happen

It'd be like that if the national papers had run pictures of you 'out on the town' with her for four years, maybe, with a few bleary eyed escapes from her flat door papped for good measure.

Offline Goethe

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 371
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
its pretty unlikely to be honest - its like me saying that 5 years from now i'll be married to scarlett johansen which is a totally speculative statement that is highly unlikely to happen

I think it is somewhat different, because there are a lot of other factors at play which make what the article suggests may possibly happen pretty feasible; the writer of that article outlines quite a few of them him/herself. Whereas-and I hope you'll forgive my assumption-making-there probably aren't a set of already existing conditions that make the possibility of you marrying Scarlett Johansson in five years a realistic possibility (unless you're hiding something from us....?)

Offline Goethe

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 371
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
We've seen a recent upsurge in the words 'conjecture' and 'speculative' in relation to this stuff though Goethe. A euphemism for what it represents is "analysis paralysis". A more realistic tag in my view is "moral paralysis". It's fair enough umming and awing when you're lacking conclusive corroborated proof to condemn a man to the gallows. But in this situation, where nobody's being hung until they're dead, and we're in possession of the reported finanical information over four years, with trends, analysis et al done until we're all blue in the face, it's not appropriate.

As my old Professor Neil MacCormick used to say, "nobody's ever seen a cigarette cause cancer".

I agree entirely. Very well put. And the real danger, as you suggest, is allowing it to inculcate in any of us a complacency or paralysis in the absence of concrete 'proof' (as if such a thing could exist until it's far too late).

royhendo

  • Guest
Evidently you like this theme eh?

oli kay said a while ago that if chelsea made an offer torres would go, but then again thats like saying i'd be in a relationship with jessica alba if she asked me out

Offline Goethe

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 371
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Evidently you like this theme eh?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Offline Lush is the best medicine...

  • FUCK THE POLICE - NWA
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 40,806
Evidently you like this theme eh?


its a fun example :P

We've seen a recent upsurge in the words 'conjecture' and 'speculative' in relation to this stuff though Goethe. A euphemism for what it represents is "analysis paralysis". A more realistic tag in my view is "moral paralysis". It's fair enough umming and awing when you're lacking conclusive corroborated proof to condemn a man to the gallows. But in this situation, where nobody's being hung until they're dead, and we're in possession of the reported finanical information over four years, with trends, analysis et al done until we're all blue in the face, it's not appropriate.

in all honesty mate whilst this scenario is possible i think its unlikely (however i can see cecil getting together a consortium as a very real possibility but thats a totally different kettle of fish to a hedge fund), but to me a lot of this is a bit being worried about volcanoes when you live in england

Offline Paul Gardner

  • Terrace Artist
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,980
  • SOS Secretary
    • Spirit of Shankly
its a fun example :P

in all honesty mate whilst this scenario is possible i think its unlikely (however i can see cecil getting together a consortium as a very real possibility but thats a totally different kettle of fish to a hedge fund), but to me a lot of this is a bit being worried about volcanoes when you live in england

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/travel/news/article7100314.ece


hoonin

  • Guest
its a very speculative article, more of a 'what could happen' rather than what will happen

It's a half and half for me mate. Agree the 2nd part is speculative, but the first half is a good pointer to what is actually happening at LFC. We don't have to speculate about the future to understand what has already passed into history.


Offline Goethe

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 371
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
It's a half and half for me mate. Agree the 2nd part is speculative, but the first half is a good pointer to what is actually happening at LFC. We don't have to speculate about the future to understand what has already passed into history.

That's fair enough, but I would also draw a distinction between idiots indulging in perverse, morose 'wish fulfilment' type speculation-drawing up nightmare scenarios which have absolutely no basis in any kind of analysis as a sort of masochistic wankfest-and postulating legitimate speculation as to what might happen based on a reading of the institutions and individuals involved in this whole sorry mess, and the type of strategies they're used to pursuing in their wider dealings.

Offline Dr Manhattan

  • I discovered and developed fucktron. That's right, me. It's my word and, frankly, anyone trying to take credit for it is nothing short of a fucktron.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 20,345
  • Officially the 7th best poster you'll see on here.
That's fair enough, but I would also draw a distinction between idiots indulging in perverse, morose 'wish fulfilment' type speculation-drawing up nightmare scenarios which have absolutely no basis in any kind of analysis as a sort of masochistic wankfest-and postulating legitimate speculation as to what might happen based on a reading of the institutions and individuals involved in this whole sorry mess, and the type of strategies they're used to pursuing in their wider dealings.

Exactly what I've been trying to say but with much longer words involved.
I trust the King, but if we lose a few more on the trot now - he may have to step aside, and we have to purchase another manager in the middle of the season. If we are relegated, this could be the end of our ambitions to win any title the next 100 years.

hoonin

  • Guest
I'm not bothered what other people postulate on Goethe, only what can be confirmed by facts or what is reasonably deducible from a lack of said facts (or in other words, a lack of honest answers from the club).

Offline Zeb

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,571
  • Justice.
We've seen a recent upsurge in the words 'conjecture' and 'speculative' in relation to this stuff though Goethe. A euphemism for what it represents is "analysis paralysis". A more realistic tag in my view is "moral paralysis". It's fair enough umming and awing when you're lacking conclusive corroborated proof to condemn a man to the gallows. But in this situation, where nobody's being hung until they're dead, and we're in possession of the reported finanical information over four years, with trends, analysis et al done until we're all blue in the face, it's not appropriate.

As my old Professor Neil MacCormick used to say, "nobody's ever seen a cigarette cause cancer".

Danger of group thinking criticism.

The Mid Ocean links are speculative. Danger of Liverpool having a second LBO takeover? Speculative, but genuine concern. Mid Ocean directly linked to this is speculation built upon speculation. No mention of them in connection with the refinancing last year or this from any independant source. Steve Shenfield hasn't been mentioned as linked to Liverpool What is the size of the fund available to MidOcean Credit Partners currently? At start-up it was only $100m (only heh). In addition, it's shown no inclination to directly control businesses on the hedge fund model. No indication that RBS have yet passed on risk.

Role of Purslow concerning. But other possibilities exist for reasons behind actions. Financial aspect seem well and truly out of manager's hands. Would suggest that Purslow is balancing books and trimming costs on behalf of board for sale and/or trying to avert armageddon scenario is more likely than him engaging on one man power trip. Pantomime villain portrayal not useful.

If there's evidence or proof, brilliant. Until then, speculative and possibly counterproductive over focus on Purslow currently while Gillett is for some reason hovering about the team with little coverage. Legitimate questions need answers. Trial first then hang.

We've just had a summer where the club has cleared it's historic transfer debt and then gone some more and made what seems to be a profit. Brilliant stuff for the bottom line, exceptionally worrying for Mr.Hodgson and the team. Broughton was initially expecting bids for the club to start coming in from the middle of this month but not a whisper from anyone, anywhere about that and indications by Mr.Hodgson that he doesn't think anything is close to happening either.

Real dangers ahead. Danger of very brilliant, very passionate people being discredited in eyes of many for casting net too far without sufficient proof worrying. Calling a spade a spade is important. Caveats important. Over speculation unhelpful unless clearly flagged.

Drambuie hangovers bad, now need more anadin.
"And the voices of the standing Kop still whispering in the wind will salute the wee Scots redman and he will still walk on.
And your money will have bought you nothing."

royhendo

  • Guest
Maybe I've focussed on the headline and scanned the rest, but I'm pretty confident that I understand written English as well as the next man, so I'll repeat:

it's equally fair to say the writer doesn't hide that it's speculation. He talks about a theory and continues in that vein.

But we're interpreting the guy as having tried to state things as fact, and we're complaining about 'pure fantasy', when he prefixes his statement with the fact it's a theory going round. The phrase you're reaching for is possibly "I don't subscribe to that theory".

Zeb, for 'balancing books and trimming costs' read 'profiteering' no? They've not put a penny of their own money in to 31st July last year, and we have nothing but assurances since that they've paid down some of the debt. Do we swallow those assurances in the absence of proof to the contrary? It's a question of trust.

The man at the reins, we're now being told, is just a good Red who happens to have a track record in things he might not want your average matchgoer to know about. Should we just leave people unaware of his background? Personally I'd prefer to know these things, so I don't think any focus on Purslow is counterproductive. But when I do write in future I'll be careful to quote the man directly, and to present stuff that's been reported in the national media (which will no doubt be dismissed as idle speculation by many).

At the bottom of this entire cause it comes down to this. If you had two four year old kids on the brink of starting at your local school and it emerged that two of the assistant Headmasters had been tried for paedophilia but that the case (Scotland here) had been dismissed as 'not proven', would you happily send them off with their packed lunch and crayons every morning?

Fair enough, train the guns on the proven figureheads, I've argued as much from the early stages because I agreed it'd be divisive. But some aren't nearly suspicious enough and will happily misrepresent things clearly labelled as 'theory' rather than acknowledge the unease and leave it at that.

royhendo

  • Guest
What I am more interested in is whether, in behind the reportage, we've assessed the background information correctly.

MidOcean (and its previous names). What's the nature of their business? We've seen hedge fund tags thrown around, but it needs attention.

For example, how would you describe its role, and Purslow's role, here.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/article847022.ece

http://www.altassets.com/private-equity-news/article/nz7223.html

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/leisure/article519772.ece

"Middle Market Private Equity Firm" is a very different thing to a hedge fund. We've seen stuff about how their expertise is in leveraged buyouts and asset stripping, but can we substantiate that? Where did it come from?

Offline dwesty

  • No new LFC topics
  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 261
  • No new LFC topics?
Is this the article source?

onthekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=23109.0
Oh Liverpool we love you.

Offline dwesty

  • No new LFC topics
  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 261
  • No new LFC topics?
When asked if he'd be playing a 3-5-1 or a 4-4-2 Roy replied, "you might be better off asking Mr Purslow about that one..."
Oh Liverpool we love you.

Offline AKABillyGee

  • AKA Le Pétomane... hasn't read the rules
  • Main Stander
  • ***
  • Posts: 204
  • Being suspicious served me well
Odd, it would appear that CP engineered a leveraged buyout of LA Fitness that delivered an immediate paper loss of Ģ17.25m by the purchasing company. If that level of financial competence is being translated into the LFC boardroom no wonder we are experiencing financial 'problems'.

Offline Goethe

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 371
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Maybe I've focussed on the headline and scanned the rest, but I'm pretty confident that I understand written English as well as the next man, so I'll repeat:

But we're interpreting the guy as having tried to state things as fact, and we're complaining about 'pure fantasy', when he prefixes his statement with the fact it's a theory going round. The phrase you're reaching for is possibly "I don't subscribe to that theory".

Zeb, for 'balancing books and trimming costs' read 'profiteering' no? They've not put a penny of their own money in to 31st July last year, and we have nothing but assurances since that they've paid down some of the debt. Do we swallow those assurances in the absence of proof to the contrary? It's a question of trust.

The man at the reins, we're now being told, is just a good Red who happens to have a track record in things he might not want your average matchgoer to know about. Should we just leave people unaware of his background? Personally I'd prefer to know these things, so I don't think any focus on Purslow is counterproductive. But when I do write in future I'll be careful to quote the man directly, and to present stuff that's been reported in the national media (which will no doubt be dismissed as idle speculation by many).

At the bottom of this entire cause it comes down to this. If you had two four year old kids on the brink of starting at your local school and it emerged that two of the assistant Headmasters had been tried for paedophilia but that the case (Scotland here) had been dismissed as 'not proven', would you happily send them off with their packed lunch and crayons every morning?

Fair enough, train the guns on the proven figureheads, I've argued as much from the early stages because I agreed it'd be divisive. But some aren't nearly suspicious enough and will happily misrepresent things clearly labelled as 'theory' rather than acknowledge the unease and leave it at that.

This^^^.  Re: Purslow's 'cost-trimming' and spending cuts: I also find it strange that so many people can accept this as simple housekeeping, to make the club look more attractive to potential buyers due to reduced debt/expenditure. I mean, for fucks sake, we're more or less 400m in debt; what difference is a small surplus in terms of this season's transfer budget going to make to potential saviours? To add to this, we were promised a buyer sooner rather than later; such 'trimming around the edges' in terms of saving costs would make sense if they were repeated year on year and if we were looking to make the club seem financially viable when we are several years down the line, not as a tiny saving now to render it a more attractive proposition to an immediate buyer, because it simply isn't anything like a real sweetener for prospective owners given the bigger financial picture.  Not giving the manager a proper budget-with Hodgson as with Benitez-will have a proportionally far greater impact on the club's competitiveness than its overall financial status; this will probably, in turn, render it less attractive to potential rescuers. Finally, with the amount of debt with which we are loaded, I just can't see us representing a good investment to any economically-rational investment institution or individual, using the standard asset valuation techniques; our salvation would probably have to be, accordingly, an oligarch style Arab/Russian/benevolent consortium of buyers. A 15m saving is hardly going to tip the balance for this type of buyer. This is the kind of reason why Cecil needs to be watched like a fucking hawk.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2010, 11:16:46 am by Goethe »

Offline Zeb

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,571
  • Justice.
Maybe I've focussed on the headline and scanned the rest, but I'm pretty confident that I understand written English as well as the next man, so I'll repeat:

But we're interpreting the guy as having tried to state things as fact, and we're complaining about 'pure fantasy', when he prefixes his statement with the fact it's a theory going round. The phrase you're reaching for is possibly "I don't subscribe to that theory".

Problem with theories not grounded in some factual basis is that those who comment upon them seem to be getting tarred with same brush. Danger Will Robinson. ;) Lots of sniping of SoS because identifiable members passed this on. Unfair? Yes. eg Some of the Hicks stuff I post in that thread I don't subscribe to - just passing on different viewpoints articulated by commentators. Different from me passing comment on it. But equally, highlighting that the speculation has no basis in verifiable fact seems to cause upset for some. Not sure why. We want answers. Investigating different avenues is cool, must be careful that campaigns don't pass them off without sufficient caveats though or causes credibility gap. Heaven knows what is going in some people's heads when our current chairman can mention "administration" but any discussion of likelihood or not is labelled as 'doom and gloom'-ing or 'chicken little'-ing. *shrug*

Quote
Zeb, for 'balancing books and trimming costs' read 'profiteering' no? They've not put a penny of their own money in to 31st July last year, and we have nothing but assurances since that they've paid down some of the debt. Do we swallow those assurances in the absence of proof to the contrary? It's a question of trust.

Have they ever put their own money in as equity? Purslow said to SoS something along the lines of "we must live within our means - the owners put money in but it wasn't good for us". Club cannot afford to keep running up losses. Losses are primarily caused by owners debt and them totally misrepresenting just how they were funding initial transfer purchases. But situation now seems different. Belt truly being tightened. Preparation for end of year results? Have commented elsewhere that it may be possible to buy now, sell later with players - perhaps after 1st August? The bigger the purchases, the more that will have to be sold. But how will that look to those who are counting things just as this summer's purchases profit/loss? "But you lot said that we'd have to sell..." hubbity-bubbity.

Key assets seem to have been identified as Gerrard and Torres. We know that Gerrard did/does have a price. We also know that he had an offer from elsewhere to mull over (speculation was Madrid - Mr.Hodgson did not mention which club). Similar story for Torres? Assertions of hanging onto them make sense to me if club is preparing for sale but why was Gerrard in a position where he could be mulling over an offer already on the table? But Lawro flying kites is intriguing - he's the whining harbinger of many things. I hope Torres is giving Purslow absolute hell though.

Quote
The man at the reins, we're now being told, is just a good Red who happens to have a track record in things he might not want your average matchgoer to know about. Should we just leave people unaware of his background? Personally I'd prefer to know these things, so I don't think any focus on Purslow is counterproductive. But when I do write in future I'll be careful to quote the man directly, and to present stuff that's been reported in the national media (which will no doubt be dismissed as idle speculation by many).

Fair points Roy. But he's becoming a lightning rod - if owners go will he stay? Some of the dumbfuckery around the Cole signing would have made me laugh but it was so sad to see people ignoring such massive ticket rises and forgetting that Cole is not coming in on a transfer fee while we're stripping the squad to the point where Mr.Hodgson is asking for confirmation from the club that it's ok to jib Europe this year. But... too many gaps in our knowledge about internal workings of club. Mr.Hodgson fingering Purslow every time a transfer is mentioned should be cause for concern. How often do you hear a manager say, in essence, "I've not got a clue what's going on"?

Quote
At the bottom of this entire cause it comes down to this. If you had two four year old kids on the brink of starting at your local school and it emerged that two of the assistant Headmasters had been tried for paedophilia but that the case (Scotland here) had been dismissed as 'not proven', would you happily send them off with their packed lunch and crayons every morning?

Fair enough, train the guns on the proven figureheads, I've argued as much from the early stages because I agreed it'd be divisive. But some aren't nearly suspicious enough and will happily misrepresent things clearly labelled as 'theory' rather than acknowledge the unease and leave it at that.

Aye. People in glass houses shouldn't throw orgies, so I'm not. Just highlighting that pursuing speculative stuff which doesn't have firm foundations to begin with may undermine credibility. New season upon us, it's miserable reading, people don't want to hear bad news (Murrow speech playing through my head - what would he have made of Fox or Sky?). Sad to see people fleeing to the hills as a result. Sober, sane, rational and irrefutable stuff badly needed. Will get off arse and try writing something for peer review. Won't be sane or rational. Unlikely to be sober. Will try for irrefutable instead ;) Where's our fricking money gone? Let's open the books and get the boffins studying it. Transfer budget every year courtesy of RBS was it? Bastards.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2010, 11:44:54 am by Zeb »
"And the voices of the standing Kop still whispering in the wind will salute the wee Scots redman and he will still walk on.
And your money will have bought you nothing."

Offline No666

  • Married to Macca.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 16,766
I subscribe to Zeb's view that in the search for answers we must ask questions and exploring different avenues is 'cool' - but we must be careful not to open ourselves up to accusations of 'doom-mongering' by failing to emphasise when a theory is merely a theory.

Bearing the above caveat in mind:

Has anyone else seen this theory which originated with a poster on RAOTL apparently? (Apologies if it's already been posted; don't remember seeing it.) I'm assuming the scenario outlined in point 14 - that Mid Ocean provided the credit for the RBS loan to LFC is speculation, but does it seem at all credible? (If so, more questions for CP and his arrival at LFC are engendered by this one.)

1. We've paid 85.3 mill in interest since Feb 2007.

2. During 08-09 financial year interest rate payments went up from 36.5 mill to 40.1 mill. That increase is due to further finance from Kop football (Cayman) limited - owned by Hicks and Gillett

3. Trading profit in that FY08-09 was 27.1 mill, but clearly that doesn't cover 40.1 mill owed in interest. Estimates for profits for FY09-10 suggest 30-35 mill. This will drop for 10-11, due to no CL football.

4. Net debt shot up by 51.6mill during FY08-09 to a total of 351.8 mill. Gross debt figure - 378.6 mill -

5. 234mill is owed to RBS and 144 mill is owed to Cayman Limited. Interest on RBS loan is LIBOR plus 5 per cent, Cayman interest is 10% a year.

6. Accounts say this interest has not yet been paid for FY 08-09 - but this is simply added to the growing debt.

7. Cayman limited loan owed to Hicks and Gillett is repayable on demand, but cannot be progressed if it would cause the company to become insolvent.

8. 110 mill of the total 297 mill credit facility with RBS is secured by letters of credit and personal gurantee from the owners, 187 mill is secured by the club's assets.

9. The RBS loans are extremely short term in nature and keep having to be renegotiated - refinanced. Some reports suggest 250 mill repayment is due September 2010, others suggest that they H+G managed to push this back to March 2011.

10. During 2009, RBS got H+G to pay back 60 mill in return for a 12 month extension. RBS insisted that Barclays capital were brought in to find a buyer.

11. It's possible that Purslow becoming de facto CEO was also part of this deal.

12. Purslow's principal business background - is founder and still a partner (non exec board member) in mid Ocean finance. They are a private equity firm that involved the manager's of Deutsche Bank's private equity arm setting up themselves - a spinout - (Purlsow was MD of DB capital partners). It was worth about 1.3 bill - one of the biggest private equity deals in history.

13. In 2009 they branched out and formed Mid Ocean credit partners and invested in bank loans. What seems to be a mid ocean trait is to pilot their people into the companies they invest in to secure their investments and revenue streams.

14. So Mid Ocean invested in and provided credit for RBS bank loans, including the credit facilities to Liverpool. This means that the principal creditor (Purslow) to the owners is now running the show and protecting his initial investments, managing LFC finances to ensure that the loans continue to be serviced in a fashion that most suits the creditors.

15. That means trimming the squad and expanding revenues, so as to value skim by stealth. It doesn't seem to mean outright drastic, panic driven asset stripping. To protect the total value of the club is in their interest, so the club will maintain a decent market value, while extracting the returns on their investment through debt re-servicing costs. In the meantime there doesn't seem to be much incentive for them (mid Ocean and Purslow) to rush to find a buyer - LFC is a nice earner. Concerns that LFC are not solvent and creditworthy don't matter so much if the lead creditor is at the helm, and is free to implement a value skimming strategy.

16. Meanwhile, as a one day a week chairman Broughton, who is supposedly in charge of the sale seems little more than a figurehead constitutional monarch.


Offline SMD

  • Shit streamer. Can't be found by drive man.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 34,014
Is that a massive conflict of interest though?
"The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy."

Offline No666

  • Married to Macca.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 16,766
If he took up a place because of the loans then his position was always to secure the interests of the creditors. But I dunno mate. Getting my head round this stuff takes several goes.

Online west_london_red

  • Knows his stuff - pull the udder one! RAWK's Dairy Queen.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 21,898
  • watching me? but whose watching you watching me?
what does this mean:

"14. So Mid Ocean invested in and provided credit for RBS bank loans, including the credit facilities to Liverpool. This means that the principal creditor (Purslow) to the owners is now running the show and protecting his initial investments, managing LFC finances to ensure that the loans continue to be serviced in a fashion that most suits the creditors."

Surely RBS are the main creditor, not Mid Ocean?
Thinking is overrated.
The mind is a tool, it's not meant to be used that much.
Rest, love, observe. Laugh.

Offline Zeb

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,571
  • Justice.
Hmmm, as of mid-March 2010, RBS was still the lead bank. Not a whisper of MidOcean in any form taking on any of the risk.

MidOcean Credit Partners entire initial capital would not be sufficient to take on even Wachovia's portion of our debt.

There has been no sign or even whisper of RBS passing on the debt, in part or in totality.

Purslow doesn't need to have MidOcean's (or any subsidiary of it) money at stake in order for him to be obliged to protect creditors interests in circumstances when a company looks like it is or is feared to be financially failing.

It's on a similar level of proof as claims that British Airways are about to buy us. Just seems like people are trying to find an ulterior motive for Purslow's appointments when the most obvious ones would seem to explain everything - prior links to the owners, knowledge of running LBOs, prior links to respected members of the ex-playing and management staff.

----

@Goethe - reasons for trimming costs etc. is that the club is not currently financial viable without external investment coming in and for us external investment is debt (whether increasing our bank debt or increasing our debt to owners via their intercompany loans). If you trim down costs then any new owner will be in a position to decide whether or not to invest further in the playing side rather than having their hands forced straight away to begin pumping in more money above any initial purchase price.
"And the voices of the standing Kop still whispering in the wind will salute the wee Scots redman and he will still walk on.
And your money will have bought you nothing."

royhendo

  • Guest
I wondered about that - they seem to be deal makers really don't they?

Offline Zeb

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,571
  • Justice.
MidOcean Partners Roy, or Purslow/Broughton?
"And the voices of the standing Kop still whispering in the wind will salute the wee Scots redman and he will still walk on.
And your money will have bought you nothing."

Offline GeturDirkOut

  • Kemlynite
  • **
  • Posts: 43
  • Nothing better than a red and white kop.
I emailed MidOcean a few weeks ago when I became suspicious about whether they were planning any involvment and received the following response. Obviously their European Manager could be lying but I doubt it given the swiftness of his response. Anyway, make of it what you will...



From: martin docis [mailto:m*******************]
Sent: 14 June 2010 00:49
To: Graham Clempson
Subject: Liverpool Football Club

 

Dear Graham,

Thank you for taking the time to read my email.

I am contacting you for the following reasons:

Firstly, I notice that on the MidOcean website under "MidOcean Principles", the first paragraph states that your business is conducted with "honestly and integrity" - thought someone should highlight the typing error.

I would also very much like to seek reassurance from you that there are no plans to utlilise MidOcean Partners' capabilities in relation to Liverpool Football Club?

You will no doubt be aware that Christian Purslow is currently in situ as (temporary) Managing Director of LFC and he is also still listed as a member of your executive board. It has come to my attention recently that Christian was presented with an offer for finance for our supposed new stadium a few months ago. I have heard that this offer was turned down without any due consideration and without returning to discuss the offer's respective merits with a view to striking an accord with the proposer. Given Mr Purslow's links with your organisation, I am apprehensive that a conflict of interest could have arisen and that he might seek to take advantage of the relationships he has with MidOcean Partners and arrange the finance himself. I would be utmostly grateful for any reassurance you or anyone else within your organisation are able to provide in this regard to distance yourselves from this assumption.

Thanks and regards,

Martin Docis
Liverpool FC Supporter

 
From: "Graham Clempson" <GClempson@midoceanpartners.com>To: "martin docis" <m*************************>

Dear Martin

Firstly – many thanks for pointing out our typo.

Secondly with respect to Christian Purslow; Christian retired as a partner of MidOcean over 18 months ago, and although he remains on our Executive Board, he does so in a completely non-executive capacity.

Finally, I can assure you that Mr Purslow has not at any point discussed an investment in Liverpool FC with MidOcean, and neither has he requested, nor have MidOcean any plans to make any such sort of investment in the future.

Regards

Graham Clempson

European Managing Partner


MidOcean Partners
No. 1 Grosvenor Crescent
Belgravia
London  SW1X 7EF



Tel: 020 3178 8494

Fax: 020 3178 8493

Email: gclempson@midoceanpartners.com
Feel free to hand me a permanent ban if DD hasn't started the first week of November, at the very latest.

Offline Mutton Geoff

  • 'The Invigilator'
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 32,663
  • Life is a journey, not a destination.
its a fun example :P

in all honesty mate whilst this scenario is possible i think its unlikely (however i can see cecil getting together a consortium as a very real possibility but thats a totally different kettle of fish to a hedge fund), but to me a lot of this is a bit being worried about volcanoes when you live in england

guess the people stuck in english airports  thought volcano's didnt affect them as well.
A world were Liars and Hypocrites are accepted and rewarded and honest people are derided!
Who voted in this lying corrupt bastard anyway

Offline Mutton Geoff

  • 'The Invigilator'
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 32,663
  • Life is a journey, not a destination.
They hide behind UK company law by saying they cannot stop such things, but in Spain now they are working on a dedicated Sports Law so it is possible to make the changes required.

if Spain make this law should lobby all our various euro mp's to get them make it European law and then get it in here through the back door?
A world were Liars and Hypocrites are accepted and rewarded and honest people are derided!
Who voted in this lying corrupt bastard anyway

Offline Torben Piechniks Y-Fronts

  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 606
  • A Liverbird, upon my chest
Excellent piece, very concise and shocking.
It is so murky now it is hard to believe this is the same club that was there a few years ago.
Well, I suppose in financial terms it isn't.
This will reverberate for us for years, we have fallen so far behind now.
The only positive I can see is how the campaigns have grown and people now realise that the next billionaire owner is not the be all and end all.We now have a voice that perhaps we never did before off the pitch and that is power in itself.
"Liverpool was made for me and I was made for Liverpool."

Offline Monkey Red

  • Jacques Cousteau
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 5,431
  • Just add salty water
Sometimes, when I am out scuba diving, I see some poor little fish with parasites dangling off it, itīs an awful sight and you know the fish canīt do a thing about it and will die, eventually, eaten alive by the parasite.
Whatīs happening to Liverpool FC at the moment, with these two yanks reminds of those parasite infested fish, slyly attaching themselves to our club sucking it dry with their LBO, getting fatter and fatter while we become leaner and leaner.
'It'll whisper to them of Liverpools five glorious European Cup victories"

Offline fatherjack

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 378
  • Keep the faith and Walk On.
Having just read right through this thread again i am convinced more than ever that the best way to secure our clubs future is to go with SOS- ShareLiverpoolfc's plan to try to secure supporter ownership of our club and therefore get supporter representation on the board.

www.spiritofshankly.com
SOS member 3252

LiverpoolFC............Did you think we would leave you dying?