Author Topic: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv  (Read 52552 times)

Offline Sajets

  • Red from Estonia
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Kopite
  • ******
  • Posts: 898
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #200 on: July 17, 2010, 11:43:51 am »
Maybe this has been asked before, but I've been thinking about one scenario and maybe someone with more financial knowledge can help me out.

Lets say, that I want to but the club and I have finances to back it up. But not through some auction that MB has been banging on about. Is it possible to go straight to RBS and offer them a deal - I'll pay £425m (or whatever total debt of the club is) on a condition that they put club into administration (they don't refinance and call in the loan which H&G can't afford to) and I will guarantee lets say £50-75m investment in playing staff if I get the club. This makes total investment of ca. £500m.

With investment in new players and keeping stars in the club 9 point deduction is not a big deal. And with no debt left to burden the club, a new stadium can be financed with normal conditions via bank loan.

Is this scenario possible?

Not that I have £500m to spare.

Offline Witherkay

  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 557
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #201 on: July 17, 2010, 12:19:21 pm »
Not that much room we are half way into July already. Take your point though, he did say initially that nothing by way of info would come out of the club so by that he could even leave an anouncement until the deal is done.

I know what you are saying, and agree to a point, but the announcements that have come out from the Club and MB in particular can be viewed a bit like Horoscopes in that they are so 'general' virtually all possible events can be interpretted from them and justified by future events. They are also Life of Brian-esque to a certain extent.

'Are we being sold?
MB 'We will not announce anything in the press until it is complete'
'So have we received any bids yet'
MB [silence]

Interpretation 1:
'ohhhh, MB's not announcing anything, that means a sale must be going through'

Interpretation 2:
'no bids = no sale'

Interpretation 3:
anything between 1 and 2 above.
Yanks, but new Yanks.  Cautiously optimistic.

Offline Witherkay

  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 557
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #202 on: July 17, 2010, 12:45:01 pm »
Maybe this has been asked before, but I've been thinking about one scenario and maybe someone with more financial knowledge can help me out.

Lets say, that I want to but the club and I have finances to back it up. But not through some auction that MB has been banging on about. Is it possible to go straight to RBS and offer them a deal - I'll pay £425m (or whatever total debt of the club is) on a condition that they put club into administration (they don't refinance and call in the loan which H&G can't afford to) and I will guarantee lets say £50-75m investment in playing staff if I get the club. This makes total investment of ca. £500m.

With investment in new players and keeping stars in the club 9 point deduction is not a big deal. And with no debt left to burden the club, a new stadium can be financed with normal conditions via bank loan.

Is this scenario possible?

Not that I have £500m to spare.

Personally, I think you are being a bit simplistic in the ability of RBS to put the Club into Administration whenever they want, however, I appreciate I may be wrong.

As I understand it, Administration is virtually the last resort (just before liquidation), not something easily used to get things on the cheap. There are so many hurdles to get over, legal obligations that both the borrower and lender have to meet to 'prove' they are honouring the original loan terms and conditions, etc, I don't think it can be used in the way you suggest.

On a more practical basis, if you had £500m to spare  :), there may be legs in the idea of offering to 'buy' the debt off RBS directly, and become the Club's/KH's creditor. You would probably still be limited by the terms and conditions agreed in the current loan agreements, but you would be much better placed to take enforcement action - i.e. seize the security for non-payment or non-compliance with the terms of the loan (said to be the shares in LFC) - than RBS may be.   
Yanks, but new Yanks.  Cautiously optimistic.

Offline Sajets

  • Red from Estonia
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Kopite
  • ******
  • Posts: 898
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #203 on: July 17, 2010, 07:00:10 pm »
Personally, I think you are being a bit simplistic in the ability of RBS to put the Club into Administration whenever they want, however, I appreciate I may be wrong.

As I understand it, Administration is virtually the last resort (just before liquidation), not something easily used to get things on the cheap. There are so many hurdles to get over, legal obligations that both the borrower and lender have to meet to 'prove' they are honouring the original loan terms and conditions, etc, I don't think it can be used in the way you suggest.

On a more practical basis, if you had £500m to spare  :), there may be legs in the idea of offering to 'buy' the debt off RBS directly, and become the Club's/KH's creditor. You would probably still be limited by the terms and conditions agreed in the current loan agreements, but you would be much better placed to take enforcement action - i.e. seize the security for non-payment or non-compliance with the terms of the loan (said to be the shares in LFC) - than RBS may be.   

Thanks..

Been reading Wikipedia about Administration and to me it seems that if a club is unable to pay off outstanding debt then it can either enter administration or face liquidation. And if RBS doesn't offer another refinancing packet for LFC and calls in their loan then club has 3 options:

1) pay up - no way they can afford it
2) enter administration
3) face liquidation

And although entering administration is up to club not creditor I'm sure bank can force clubs hand and I don't think that H&G want to face liquidation.

Offline Sajets

  • Red from Estonia
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Kopite
  • ******
  • Posts: 898
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #204 on: July 19, 2010, 12:07:50 pm »
Maybe someone else can share their wisdom and say if this scenario I described earlier is possible or not?

Offline ali

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,474
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #205 on: July 19, 2010, 09:21:42 pm »
The battle for Anfield
by Mark Jones

It's a tough business turnaround. Can Liverpool Football Club's new chairman, Martin Broughton, reward the fans' fervour by kickstarting a new golden age on Merseyside?

In the history of English football, no man has achieved more. He took over Liverpool Football Club in 1973. By the time he stepped down in 1990, the club had amassed four European Cups, and added three FA Cups and 11 championship titles to its roll of honour. Can you name the man? Here's a clue. His surname is not Shankly; nor Paisley; certainly not Dalglish. No idea? Well, he was plain John Smith—though later dubbed "Dapper John" by loyal fans and "Sir" by the Queen.

Sir John Smith was chairman of Liverpool FC. He arrived at that position in what used to be a typical route: deputy chairman of an engineering firm, sales director of a brewery—a successful local businessman who brought managerial skills to the sporting arena.

Smith paved the way for a provincial English football team to become a global brand and one of international sport's most valuable franchises—not that Smith, who died in 1995, would necessarily have understood why you would use words such as brand and franchise to talk about football.

As we approach a new season, there will be plenty of Premier League fans who may regret that link had ever been made, too. If you are in any doubt about the influence a chairman can have on a football club, consider this statistic. Since Smith stood down, Liverpool have failed, every year, to add to that tally of league titles.

The name John Smith might not mean much to many Liverpool fans today, but the fact that they have not won English football's top prize in two decades is painfully familiar.

Liverpool's new chairman, Martin Broughton, could scarcely recall Dapper John either. You can't blame him. In Broughton's chairmanship—his background, his brief, his expected tenure—there is little of Smith. Smith's philosophy was built on continuity, community and succession. Broughton, conversely, has no ties with Liverpool—and no intention of hanging around to build any. A lifelong Chelsea fan, he has been hired with one objective: to find the right new owners for the club and then move on.

Broughton is calm, wry and thoughtful. Flak doesn't bother him; he rather likes it. This is just as well, given his past and present jobs as, respectively, chief executive of tobacco giant BAT and chairman of British Airways. Usually, he is a picture of composure. But there is something about football that animates the most laid-back soul. When we begin to talk about Liverpool he suddenly starts pacing up and down the room, speaking quickly and passionately, with a football fan's genuine fervour about the job ahead.

"I've taken the role on because Liverpool represents one of two, three or four footballing icons in the league," says Broughton. "Putting them back in their rightful position is in the interests of British football and the league. Seventh [where the club finished in the Premier League last season] is not their rightful position, and neither is administration."

Suspicious fans will note the use of "them" rather than "us". And they may well focus on a much more terrifying word in that sentence... administration. The past 12 months have been traumatic enough—loss of form, loss of manager, a revolt against co-owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett. The prospect of Liverpool joining an anti-elite of basket cases—Portsmouth, Crystal Palace, Luton Town, Chester City—with all the miseries of docked points and forced player sales is still unimaginable on Merseyside. But Broughton can foresee it all too clearly. After all, the club is £237m in debt, but also owes its owners a further £144m.

Smith once said: "We are a very modest club. We don't talk. We don't boast. But we're very professional." You can only imagine what he would have made of it all: not just the plight of his beloved club, but the public way personnel have been carrying on, with snide slanging matches between owners, manager, players and fans. As last season ended, former owner David Moores wrote an impassioned letter to The Times imploring Hicks and Gillett to get out, and get out now. Was the new chairman enraged by his intervention? "No, I just found it sad," says Broughton. "An old man trying to justify what he himself saw as a mistake by blaming everyone except himself. Who chose to sell? He just went for the most money."

For every public row, there are a dozen rumours: players unhappy, others leaving, some buyers suitable and others not so suitable, all mooted in 72-point headlines. Broughton might be comfortable with a flak jacket over his well-tailored suit but surely this is a different theatre of war? There's a long pause. "In terms of intensity it's not very different to BA, where every little detail seems to fascinate the press," he says, finally. Another pause. "The level of misreporting is about the same, but the level of fabrication is higher. Football is a unique business. In any M&A there are various stakeholders but supporters and their passion bring a new dimension."

Smith's relationship with the fans, unlike the current owners', was a model of civility. Not the least part of his genius was to coax them into accepting change. He recognised the managerial assets he had. The first was one of the most charismatic bosses ever seen in the English game, Bill Shankly.

Shankly had an eccentric egoism that seemed to make his stars half-scared and wholly loyal. He was focused: "It's all about this," he said, pointing to the League Championship trophy as it sat on his desk at the end of another high-octane season at Anfield. Shankly, like Smith, was also obsessively customer-focused. Underperforming players were ordered to think of the man on the terraces who'd paid a significant part of his wages to watch his heroes on a Saturday.

The problem with charismatic managers and star players is that they leave a big hole when they leave. At the time that Smith took over, Liverpool's more glamorous foes, Manchester United, were about to enter a period of painful decline that it would take the best part of two decades to get over as their stars, Charlton, Law, Best aged and left, and their giant of a manager, Sir Matt Busby, retired. Shankly anticipated the problem and acted: the heroes of the 1960s—Yeats, St John, Hunt—were unceremoniously let go and, almost overnight, a new generation took over, Hughes, Heighway and Keegan.

What followed was the club's most successful period. Under Bob Paisley, Liverpool secured a hatful of league titles and three European Cups before the reins were handed to other members of the famous Anfield Boot Room-first, Joe Fagan, and later Roy Evans and Ronnie Moran (see panel, right). After Fagan resigned following the Heysel disaster of 1985, Kenny Dalglish, an Anfield hero since Smith brought him to the club in 1977, took over as player manager.

Dalglish won the league and cup double in 1986 and then put together what many believe to be the finest Liverpool team. From being a highly conservative organisatio—it took the club years to accept perimeter advertising—Smith now oversaw a club that was years ahead of its rivals on and off the pitch. Then, in 1989, 96 lives were lost at Hillsborough.

The team and Dalglish soldiered on to that last title in 1990, but as the new decade dawned, the manager, the team and the ethos of the club were worn out. Smith stepped down and Liverpool became just another team—a top team, true—as managers and players came and went while Alex Ferguson at Manchester United generated team after title-winning team. Dalglish quit in 1991.

The latest managerial incumbent, Rafael Benitez, left the club in June, replaced on 1 July by Roy Hodgson. As for Broughton, it's clear that a change was always in his mind. "Remember, over the past five years, LFC is second only to Chelsea in terms of gross and net player spend. The question is whether the money has been spent wisely."

Broughton has to achieve a lot in a short time. He needs to find a buyer with deep pockets as opposed to one such as the current owners, and the unpopular Glazers at Manchester United, who offer only increasingly stretched lines of credit. "As long as we get sensible offers, we can do a deal," he says. "We are out there to find someone wealthy. But it's important that they can win popular support."

The key area of negotiation will be between the audited value of property and players—estimated at £350m—and the premium payable for the name. Broughton refuses to put a value on the club, but sees it as "a trophy asset worth a lot of money".

Trophies have clearly always been important to Liverpool. Now Broughton needs to persuade a buyer that the club itself is still a trophy worth chasing. As he does so, every meeting and every word will be reported upon and scrutinised by an obsessive media and an even more devoted set of fans.

Club with a global reach

"Form is temporary, class is permanent" is a well-worn football cliché, writes Andy Milligan. It also applies to brands. Every brand has its ups and downs. Perrier, Tylenol and Tiger Woods have had worse setbacks than Liverpool Football Club.

Liverpool's brand is strong: it has a unique heritage, imagery and a personality derived from its fans and the city. Its decade in the Champions League and as one of the big four in the English Premier League ensured global reach, relevance and lucrative broadcasting and sponsorship.

That's an enormous reservoir of goodwill. It carries opportunity, but also threat. The opportunity is global: the world football market is growing exponentially and consumers are eager, particularly in Asia, and especially in India. Liverpool can market its famous brand from Beijing to Bangalore and beyond: from replica clothing to downloadable content. All underpinned by strong commercial rights and ever-larger broadcasting deals.

The threat is local. Club brands originate from an authentic community; the "Chelsea" jibe, applied to Chelsea since Roman Abramovich took over expresses both fan banter and consumer misgiving. If foreign owners antagonise local fans, the brand is damaged. Worse still, what if highly leveraged owners can't even afford to maintain Liverpool's spot in the Premier League? Then the brand loses reach, relevance and revenues. If you think that's impossible, just ask Leeds United.

Andy Milligan is author of Brand It Like Beckham, an updated version of which is published by Marshall Cavendish, £9.99

The Boot Room Boys

It's a crucial question for businesses and one vital for future success... how do you replace key executives when they move on? Companies facing this dilemma would do well to look at how Liverpool tackled succession planning in their glory days under Sir John Smith's chairmanship.

The Anfield Boot Room is perhaps the most effective engine of succession management ever seen in business or sport. It was here, in a pokey cubbyhole beneath the stands, surrounded by muddy football boots, that Bill Shankly would gather his cohorts to talk, for hours and hours, about the game. Those men—Bob Paisley, Joe Fagan, Roy Evans and Ronnie Moran—would all manage the club when their turn came.

After Shankly left in 1974, there was a clamour for Smith to bring in a big name—Ron Greenwood, perhaps, or even Brian Clough. But Smith went straight to the Boot Room. The job went to Paisley, a tongue-tied Geordie as self-effacing as Shankly was ebullient. He became the most successful manager in British football.

When he retired the mantle passed to Fagan. But what happened next showed the power of events, especially tragic events, to wreck the most well-run company. At the end of Fagan's second season, with Liverpool having motored to another European cup final, fighting between fans at an inadequate Heysel stadium in Brussels led to the deaths of 39 people.
In the post-traumatic shock, Fagan resigned and Smith skipped the Boot Room boys to appoint star striker Kenny Dalglish as player manager. But later he would tap this valuable talent source again with the appointments of Moran and Evans.
July/August 2010: Director Magazine

http://www.director.co.uk/MAGAZINE/2010/7_July_August/liverpool_football_club_63_11.html
for those of you watching in black and white Liverpool are the team with the ball

Offline shelovesyou

  • andyouknow youshouldbe glad OOOOOOH!!!
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 17,251
  • Yes
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #206 on: July 19, 2010, 11:24:02 pm »
"An old man trying to justify what he himself saw as a mistake by blaming everyone except himself. Who chose to sell? He just went for the most money."




Spot on that.
the easiest way for me to grow as a person is to surround myself with people smarter than I am

Offline RayO'Biscan

  • Who controls the past, controls the future.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,971
  • Pass 'n' Move!
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #207 on: July 19, 2010, 11:25:41 pm »

The latest managerial incumbent, Rafael Benitez, left the club in June, replaced on 1 July by Roy Hodgson. As for Broughton, it's clear that a change was always in his mind. "Remember, over the past five years, LFC is second only to Chelsea in terms of gross and net player spend. The question is whether the money has been spent wisely."

WTF? Broughton obviously don't care about facts.

Online west_london_red

  • Knows his stuff - pull the udder one! RAWK's Dairy Queen.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 21,955
  • watching me? but whose watching you watching me?
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #208 on: July 19, 2010, 11:53:44 pm »
Spot on that.

My position on Broughton is neautral so far, i'll just about hold judgement on him, but that comment about Moores is bang on and it was about time someone finally said it.
Thinking is overrated.
The mind is a tool, it's not meant to be used that much.
Rest, love, observe. Laugh.

Online HarryLabrador

  • went broke, so had to get the retrievers in.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 7,263
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #209 on: July 19, 2010, 11:53:59 pm »
Martin Broughton "We are looking to the middle of July-ish for the first round of bids...and we are on course, pretty well, with where we would have expected to be."

-----------------------------------------------------

Are we still on course, Martin? I believe 'middle of July-ish' has come and gone?

SoS Membership Number: 387

Offline mulfella

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 4,308
  • Hedgehogs are boss
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #210 on: July 19, 2010, 11:57:59 pm »
Thats an utterly fascinating interview - don't know quite what to make of it yet
A place full of grammer Nazi's?
'Grammar' and no apostrophe in 'nazis'.

Offline shelovesyou

  • andyouknow youshouldbe glad OOOOOOH!!!
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 17,251
  • Yes
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #211 on: July 19, 2010, 11:58:17 pm »
Martin Broughton "We are looking to the middle of July-ish for the first round of bids...and we are on course, pretty well, with where we would have expected to be."

-----------------------------------------------------

Are we still on course, Martin? I believe 'middle of July-ish' has come and gone?



It was a loose quote at its best mate, July-ish leaves a lot of room for change, even so he isn't exactly going to confirm that we have had bids is he ?!
the easiest way for me to grow as a person is to surround myself with people smarter than I am

Offline Raz

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,068
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #212 on: July 20, 2010, 12:57:28 am »
The comments about gross and net spend over the last five years are surely bollocks? How about City, Spurs, Villa? (I would include the Mancs too but selling Ronaldo for £80m has obviously levelled things out a bit).
He then starts trying to punch the ghost and starts telling it to fuck off

Online oojason

  • The Official RAWK Audio Visual God. Founder Member of the Ricky Gervais' 'David Brad Fan Club'.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 24,045
  • The Awkward Squad
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #213 on: July 20, 2010, 03:56:03 am »
The comments about gross and net spend over the last five years are surely bollocks? How about City, Spurs, Villa? (I would include the Mancs too but selling Ronaldo for £80m has obviously levelled things out a bit).

From July '05 to present we have spent £203.1m
From July '05 to present we have got back £151.2m (including £5m for Insua if/when he goes/gone)

So that's £51.9m over 5 years


(used the figures from the superb www.lfchistory.net website)


for the whole of Rafa's reign it was...

£230.6m in player purchases
£166.7m in player sales (including £5m for Insua)

so that's £63.9m over 6 years.



I haven't a clue on other clubs - though I imagine Man City would be up there?



I don't understand Broughton questioning whether the amount spent/recouped on players was done 'wisely'?

how does he quantify that?

and what business is it of his to go over events from the past (before he was appointed) when he should be concentrating on his sole aim of getting the club sold?


Seems to me like he's trying to question or undermine the spending/selling of players under the previous manager.
« Last Edit: July 20, 2010, 04:10:04 am by oojason »
.
Some 'Useful Info' for following the football + TV, Streams, Highlights & Replays etc - www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=345769

A mini-index of RAWK's 'Liverpool Audio / Video Thread' content over the years; & more - www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=345769.msg17787576#msg17787576

Offline manifest

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,536
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #214 on: July 20, 2010, 06:07:23 am »
From July '05 to present we have spent £203.1m
From July '05 to present we have got back £151.2m (including £5m for Insua if/when he goes/gone)

So that's £51.9m over 5 years


(used the figures from the superb www.lfchistory.net website)


for the whole of Rafa's reign it was...

£230.6m in player purchases
£166.7m in player sales (including £5m for Insua)

so that's £63.9m over 6 years.



I haven't a clue on other clubs - though I imagine Man City would be up there?



I don't understand Broughton questioning whether the amount spent/recouped on players was done 'wisely'?

how does he quantify that?

and what business is it of his to go over events from the past (before he was appointed) when he should be concentrating on his sole aim of getting the club sold?


Seems to me like he's trying to question or undermine the spending/selling of players under the previous manager.

exactly.... and that, coupled with the premiership wages list that paints another picture.

bought-one swallowed purslows and "the media's" version of the stats....they believe this nonsense I think, because they want to. A rationalisation to hide the truth that Rafa held the owners feet to the fire, was too aligned with the workers and not the management, and they all felt uncomfortable with a truth-teller in their midst.  Everything else is bullshit. 

Offline Uhoh AureliOs

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,655
  • Fabio!
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #215 on: July 20, 2010, 08:21:15 am »
Broughton is a douche. 

royhendo

  • Guest
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #216 on: July 20, 2010, 09:32:54 am »
He talks about fabrication and being misrepresented, then proceeds to come out with a load of crap of his own.

royhendo

  • Guest
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #217 on: July 20, 2010, 09:35:21 am »
Needs to be on the main forum that interview, surely.

Offline Jon G

  • I'm Jim Rockford, at the tone leave your name and number and I'll get back to ya. PM Jon Hall if you can read this...
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 9,705
  • 78 stone wobble
    • not mine
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #218 on: July 20, 2010, 09:50:04 am »
Burn him!
NOTHING GREAT HAS EVER BEEN ACHIEVED WITHOUT PASSION - CARRAGHER 23

Offline Uhoh AureliOs

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,655
  • Fabio!
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #219 on: July 20, 2010, 10:14:03 am »
Well why 5 years? Rafa was here for 6. Then the owners have been here for 3. So why 5 years? He's talking out of his arse.

City have outspent us within the last 2 years, so again it's a load of bullshit.

Offline RayO'Biscan

  • Who controls the past, controls the future.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,971
  • Pass 'n' Move!
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #220 on: July 20, 2010, 10:43:22 am »
Apparently there was an article in Sunday Times that used the same timeframe and made a similar claim...

For those interested in facts, from Paul Tomkins:

When adjusted with TPI [price inflation], Liverpool’s net spend is only £4.1m over the last two seasons, but increases to £51.8m when including the previous season, principally from the purchase of Fernando Torres and Javier Mascherano.

This places the team in 5th place overall in TPI Net spending since 2007, behind Manchester City (£243.3m), Sunderland (£87.0m), Tottenham (£86.7m) and Birmingham (£57.1m). The last of these, Birmingham, have accumulated this spend in only two seasons, having been relegated for the 2008-09 season. Are Birmingham benefiting from Alex Mcleish’s canniness, or surprisingly deep pockets? And when will Steve Bruce be taken to task for what seems like massive underachievement at Sunderland in relation to the club’s outlay?

Offline Zeb

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,571
  • Justice.
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #221 on: July 20, 2010, 11:24:44 am »
He talks about fabrication and being misrepresented, then proceeds to come out with a load of crap of his own.

There's a narrative being formed isn't there? It's nice and easy and simple to follow and confirms to a lot of existing prejudices. Paul Tyrrell is a very good professional and providing he keeps the leeches out of the limelight (and keeps stuffing hotdogs into Hicks' mouth to prevent him speaking publicly about Liverpool), he's got good material to work with. In another time, I'd have applauded the club getting so good at presentation and media work. "Benitez spent all the money and bankrupted the club" is a nice implication to make to fit in with the narrative, no?

If he gets the club sold to decent owners, I don't care what shite Broughton comes out with now. He shouldn't be there, but it is what it is and one cardboard cutout is as good as another in some respects if the various interests require a neutral party to be front of house.
"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
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #222 on: July 20, 2010, 11:40:39 am »
Yup - bake in the myth, that's definitely true.

Offline No666

  • Married to Macca.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 16,774
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #223 on: July 20, 2010, 12:14:23 pm »
I just don't see what relevance it has for us to go chasing him on these figures. We need to target our firepower on the owners. Broughton is not going to here long; Rafa has gone - the only thing that matters now is shifting Jabba and the dwarf.

Offline RayO'Biscan

  • Who controls the past, controls the future.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,971
  • Pass 'n' Move!
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #224 on: July 20, 2010, 12:49:06 pm »
I just don't see what relevance it has for us to go chasing him on these figures. We need to target our firepower on the owners. Broughton is not going to here long; Rafa has gone - the only thing that matters now is shifting Jabba and the dwarf.

True about the focus, but those figures show Broughton's lack of knowledge, and how his decision making is based on media myths, not on facts.


Online oojason

  • The Official RAWK Audio Visual God. Founder Member of the Ricky Gervais' 'David Brad Fan Club'.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 24,045
  • The Awkward Squad
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #226 on: July 20, 2010, 01:39:01 pm »
True about the focus, but those figures show Broughton's lack of knowledge, and how his decision making is based on media myths, not on facts.

or just like Gillet, Hicks and Purslow - following the party line of 'it's not our fault' - its' the recession, him, her, Rafa, etc - NEVER their fault...
.
Some 'Useful Info' for following the football + TV, Streams, Highlights & Replays etc - www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=345769

A mini-index of RAWK's 'Liverpool Audio / Video Thread' content over the years; & more - www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=345769.msg17787576#msg17787576

Online HarryLabrador

  • went broke, so had to get the retrievers in.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 7,263
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #227 on: July 20, 2010, 02:01:38 pm »
Jim Boardman posted this earlier: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/7887377/BA-annual-meeting-live-striking-cabin-crew-air-taxes-Iberia-merger.html 

Thanks for that, Roy. What an arrogant worm Broughton is. Here are some excerpts from the meeting:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BA annual meeting live: striking cabin crew, air taxes, Iberia merger
The battle for British Airway's future continues at today's annual meeting in Westminster, London. We follow the proceedings live.

11.25am ... Broughton gets the boot in

First up is Martin Broughton, the Chelsea supporting chairman who doubles up with a job at Liverpool FC. He wastes no time going in two-footed at Bassa - the militant wing of the Unite union that represents the cabin crew.

"They have misrepresented management to their members. They have misrepresented their members' views to management," he says. "The board's patience with Bassa has now been exhausted. "We will win the right to manage."

11. 44am ... Doors to manual

Now for questions.

Broughton starts off by defining a question as "a sentence that ends with a question mark".

Up pops retired employee Sid Thatcher, congratulating Spain winning the World Cup. "That's not a question," shouts one shareholder.

Thatcher then has a go at the striking cabin crew. He gets a slow hand clap.

Then he praises Walsh's "outstanding" handling of the dispute. That gets applause.


Tit for tat

Another shareholder helpfully points out that he's not "being paid to ask questions" before criticising Broughton for having two jobs.

"You probably don't understand corporate governance nowadays," says Broughton. "Chairman are meant..."

The shareholder interrupts him.

"Are you looking for an answer or not," snaps Broughton.
..........................
SoS Membership Number: 387

Offline Raz

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,068
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #228 on: July 20, 2010, 03:03:23 pm »
FFS. God help us.
He then starts trying to punch the ghost and starts telling it to fuck off

Offline manifest

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,536
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #229 on: July 20, 2010, 05:24:53 pm »
or just like Gillet, Hicks and Purslow - following the party line of 'it's not our fault' - its' the recession, him, her, Rafa, etc - NEVER their fault...

from the telegraph:
"Broughton, looking cross, agrees workers have a right to strike but adds: "It's absolutely right that people should know the consequences of their actions and they did."

Broughton's kind of manager never faces the consequences of his actions.....it's always someone else as you say. Like Rafa getting sacked because of H&G's actions or rather their lack thereof.

Now I understand Broughton's big "reputation": he always sides with the owner/money. The equivalent of Bill O'Reilly for Rupert Murdoch. A bought stooge.

Offline tamadic

  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 620
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #230 on: July 20, 2010, 05:43:43 pm »
Martin Broughton "We are looking to the middle of July-ish for the first round of bids...and we are on course, pretty well, with where we would have expected to be."

-----------------------------------------------------

Are we still on course, Martin? I believe 'middle of July-ish' has come and gone?



2010? 2011? 2012? or 2020?

Offline Djimi_Case

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Main Stander
  • ******
  • Posts: 184
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #231 on: July 20, 2010, 10:32:02 pm »
Not sure if this has been posted elsewhere...

As ever with the Liverpool of Hicks and Gillett, though, even after 48 hours of such positive news, the club’s reality remains a fragile one, and on Tuesday Liverpool’s chairman, Martin Broughton, provided a timely reminder of how precarious Anfield’s finances – mired in £237 million of debt – are.
The British Airways chairman – appointed in April to secure new owners for the club and hopeful of completing a deal by the end of August – raised the spectre of a very real financial catastrophe at Anfield should he fail in his task by admitting that “seventh place is not [Liverpool’s] rightful position, and neither is administration”.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/leagues/premierleague/liverpool/7900402/Steven-Gerrard-insists-he-will-not-quit-Liverpool-after-Joe-Coles-arrival.html

Tacked on to the end of the Telegraph article on the Steven Gerrard story today. 

Doesn't give any context to those remarks so not quite sure what to make of them?  They certainly don't sound reassuring.
We are Liverpool... tralalalala...

Offline liverbnz

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,520
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #232 on: July 20, 2010, 11:51:55 pm »
The owners and their amigos are certainly trying to shovel as much of the shit they have caused firmly at the previous manager's door. I've noticed they have taken all programmes off the tv channel that have anything to do with Rafa. I fucking really hope that they are pardoning themselves from sacking Rafa rather than anything else.
One thing you will discover is that life is based less than you think on what you've learned, and much more than you think on what you have inside you from the very beginning

Offline Lush is the best medicine...

  • FUCK THE POLICE - NWA
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 40,806
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #233 on: July 20, 2010, 11:59:35 pm »
Doesn't give any context to those remarks so not quite sure what to make of them?  They certainly don't sound reassuring.

The full interview is a page or two back - wouldn't say so much its taken out of context but there is a touch of scare tactics in there

Offline In the Name of Klopp

  • smann. Talks as if he/she/they single handedly saw off H&G in 2010.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,753
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #234 on: August 27, 2010, 11:53:26 am »
How is it going, Broughton?! We're still waiting!


Dont trust him and never will!
“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”

Offline No666

  • Married to Macca.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 16,774
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #235 on: August 27, 2010, 12:03:17 pm »
Been wondering: if Huang's was indeed the only bid on the table, would we continue in radio silence like this or is it an indication that something might still be going on behind the scenes?

Offline shelovesyou

  • andyouknow youshouldbe glad OOOOOOH!!!
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 17,251
  • Yes
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #236 on: August 27, 2010, 02:11:48 pm »
How is it going, Broughton?! We're still waiting!


Dont trust him and never will!

Its very sad that a lot do not trust the man even though he has so far given us NO reason to distrust him. None at all.
the easiest way for me to grow as a person is to surround myself with people smarter than I am

Offline Dave D

  • Dozy, Beaky, Mick and Tich
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 5,682
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #237 on: August 27, 2010, 02:17:37 pm »
Its very sad that a lot do not trust the man even though he has so far given us NO reason to distrust him. None at all.


The fact that he was appointed by the owners gives me a reason. He talks a good talk though, I'll give him that.

Offline shelovesyou

  • andyouknow youshouldbe glad OOOOOOH!!!
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 17,251
  • Yes
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #238 on: August 27, 2010, 02:29:10 pm »
The fact that he was appointed by the owners gives me a reason. He talks a good talk though, I'll give him that.

Kenny Dalglish was appointed by the owners.
Oh but dont tell me, thats different.
Its double standards mate. Not having a go at you like.
the easiest way for me to grow as a person is to surround myself with people smarter than I am

Offline Dave D

  • Dozy, Beaky, Mick and Tich
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 5,682
Re: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv
« Reply #239 on: August 27, 2010, 02:48:00 pm »
Kenny Dalglish was appointed by the owners.
Oh but dont tell me, thats different.
Its double standards mate. Not having a go at you like.

I thought the owners played no part in appointing Kenny, it was other people within the club, but I could be wrong.
The owners however, did go out of thier way to appoint a chairman. Broughton was the one they picked, alarm bells are still ringing.