Topic: Montreal Canadiens are to be sold...

[hansen6]

Okay ... I repeat to myself over and over again

"Liverpool Football Club exists to make money for its shareholders"
"Liverpool Football Club exists to make money for its shareholders"

"Black is white.  Down is up."

Get a grip lad.

[mooks]

The boards remit is to put the shareholders interest first.

As long as the shareholders are die-hard Liverpool fans then you're absolutely correct.

If the shareholders want to go down a particular route then that's their perogative, but the board must run the club to the benefit of the shareholders.

The only way shareholders can decide to 'go down a particular route' is at an EGM.  It is the directors who decide what route to go down.

Generally for a football club that is to win trophies as winning trophies helps increase the value of the club.

The purpose of Liverpool Football Club is to increase the value of the club?

I have the 1985/86 financial accounts that prove the club has paid a dividend out in it's history.

You need to get out more, my friend.

p.s. try seeing the forest for the trees

[scatman]

mooks can you just get your fuckin head out of your arse, many people have already said you are wrong, fucking wrong, now go back to your pigeonhole.

football clubs are businesses. get fuckin over it, this aint the 70s

[mooks]

Get a grip lad.

You mean Liverpool Football Club does not exist to make money for shareholders?  But, but, ttnbd said it so it must be the case!

[mooks]

mooks can you just get your fuckin head out of your arse, many people have already said you are wrong, fucking wrong, now go back to your pigeonhole.

football clubs are businesses. get fuckin over it, this aint the 70s

I know, I know

And Gillett & Hicks are in it to suck every dollar out of the club and that's okay.  This ain't the 70s, you know!

[mooks]

It is right that the primary objective of a business is to make money, and the primary objective of a football club is to win things. But in order to win things, a football club has to be commercially successful  and that means playing by commercial, business, rules.

You seem to be agreeing with me here so I'll leave it at that.

[scatman]

lol sorry mooks, don't take my post as being subjective of yourself, was just a nice way to vent some anger using some swears

[west_london_red]

The primary objective of G&H is to make money from LFC, winning trophies is one way to do this, BUT it is certainly not the only way. They can make money without us winning a thing very easily.

[scatman]

The primary objective of G&H is to make money from LFC, winning trophies is one way to do this, BUT it is certainly not the only way. They can make money without us winning a thing very easily.

like arsenal 

[west_london_red]

like arsenal 

Or Spurs for that matter

[scatman]

Or Spurs for that matter

ahh but they won something last year, tho ive always wondered how do they always turn a profit every year. must be charging those fans a lot of pennies

[RedJam70]

Habs sale doesn't impress Bettman

Thu, June 25, 2009

Sale happened too quickly 
By Olivier Bourque and Rita Devlin Marier, QMI
 

The sale of the Montreal Canadiens to the Molson family continues to raise questions, with many believing the sale process happened too quickly.

Quebec’s Argent news agency has learned that the speed at which Gillett wanted to sell the team didn’t impress NHL brass, notably league commissioner Gary Bettman.

“Bettman wasn’t pleased with the first few steps in the selling (process),” a source said.

Sources close to the sale suggest Bettman put a halt to the whole process at one point in April to attempt to re-organize the situation. On May 4, Bettman is said to have invited prospective buyers of the team to New York to try and find out exactly what Gillett was seeking.

Frank Brown, the NHL’s vice-president of communications, told the news agency that the Habs followed proper “policies and procedures” and refused to comment on whether the May 4 meeting took place.
 
This isn’t the first time Bettman hasn’t seen eye-to-eye with Gillett. During a press conference during the Stanley Cup finals at the end of May, Bettman said that Gillett needed to decide whether he would keep the team because there was plenty of interest from prospective buyers.

Bettman could not be reached for comment.

It seems as though Gillett’s hurry to unload the team has to do with the soccer team FC Liverpool, a team he is co-owner of in England. Gillett and co-owner Tom Hicks have to come up with a refinancing plan for the club before July 24 that will satisfy creditors including the Royal Bank of Scotland and Wachovia.

Sources with knowledge of the refinancing — which involves close to $650 million — said Gillett signed a deal with a consortium led by Wachovia bank promising that he would sell the Habs. Thus the rush to find a buyer.

“George Gillett had no other choice,” a source said. “He had signed a document.”

Sources with knowledge of the Habs sale said Gillett had already started planning the refinancing of the soccer club at the end of 2008. It is likely he wanted to unload some of his assets in order to pay off debt related to the soccer franchise, the first instalment of which was due Jan. 25.

Initially, the plan is believed to have been to sell off 20 % of his ownership in the Canadiens, 20 % of his stake in NASCAR`s Gillett Evernham Racing and another 20 % stake in FC Liverpool.

Gillett is also believed to have approached several influential business men — primarily in Montreal — to find buyers, but was unsuccessful.

Meanwhile, The Woodbridge Company Limited, a private investment company owned by the Thomson family, will support the Molson family in their purchase of the Montreal Canadiens, Woodbridge spokesman David Binet said.

.................................

http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/Sports/Hockey/2009/06/25/9936686-qmi.html

Looks like Georgie boy was very desperate indeed. Would Wachovia make him sign such a document and what do they mean by consortium? RBS and Wachovia?

[No666]

Fascinating, RedJam. & slightly lifts the lid on RBS's sanguine email to SoS supporters. If the 'consortium' is actually Wachovia/RBS, it suggests the banks are pulling the strings already, particularly if we take this info alongside the suggestion that Purslow is an RBS appointee.

What debt related to us was due Jan 25 2009 btw?

[Regi]

Habs sale doesn't impress Bettman

Thu, June 25, 2009

Cheers RJ, that is an interesting read.
It seems increasingly clear that our owners are being told what to do instead of having any sort of free rein

[Dave_the_Red]

This pair of c*nts putting money fills me with dread on how or when they'll take it back.

[The Flying Pig]

Cheers RJ, that is an interesting read.
It seems increasingly clear that our owners are being told what to do instead of having any sort of free rein

Agree,it would seem that although the banks will probably agree to re-finance G+H,they are putting the squeeze on them as to how it's done.

[fry]

Agree,it would seem that although the banks will probably agree to re-finance G+H,they are putting the squeeze on them as to how it's done.

It also explains his "private finances" rant not long ago.  He was not impressed people were digging round his finances.

[ali]

Molsons Will Pay C$633 Million for Canadiens, La Presse Says
By Frederic Tomesco

July 10 (Bloomberg) -- Quebec’s Molson family agreed to pay C$633 million ($543 million) for George Gillett’s controlling stake in the National Hockey League’s Montreal Canadiens, the team’s arena and a concert-production unit, La Presse newspaper reported, citing two people familiar with the matter.

Gillett will save C$63 million by not having to pay Quebec and Canadian taxes on the sale because of the way the transaction is structured, La Presse said. Reached by the newspaper, Canadiens spokesman Dominick Saillant said Gillett or the team won’t comment on the sale until it has been completed.

The assets Gillett is selling belong to a limited partnership, La Presse said. Under Canadian tax law, capital gains on the sale of a limited partnership are taxed in the country of residence of the partners, the newspaper said. Gillett’s partners, which include members of his family, all live in the U.S., the report also said.

Gillett, 70, paid C$275 million for his stake in the Canadiens and the arena in 2001. The Canadiens said June 20 they expect the sale to the Molson family to close in August. They haven’t disclosed financial terms of the transaction.

To contact the reporter on this story: Frederic Tomesco in Montreal at tomesco@bloomberg.net
Last Updated: July 10, 2009 08:29 EDT

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...id=aJx3ZVXvQKrQ

[John C]

Molsons Will Pay C$633 Million for Canadiens, La Presse Says
By Frederic Tomesco

July 10 (Bloomberg) -- Quebec’s Molson family agreed to pay C$633 million ($543 million) for George Gillett’s controlling stake in the National Hockey League’s Montreal Canadiens, the team’s arena and a concert-production unit, La Presse newspaper reported, citing two people familiar with the matter.

Gillett will save C$63 million by not having to pay Quebec and Canadian taxes on the sale because of the way the transaction is structured, La Presse said. Reached by the newspaper, Canadiens spokesman Dominick Saillant said Gillett or the team won’t comment on the sale until it has been completed.

The assets Gillett is selling belong to a limited partnership, La Presse said. Under Canadian tax law, capital gains on the sale of a limited partnership are taxed in the country of residence of the partners, the newspaper said. Gillett’s partners, which include members of his family, all live in the U.S., the report also said.

Gillett, 70, paid C$275 million for his stake in the Canadiens and the arena in 2001. The Canadiens said June 20 they expect the sale to the Molson family to close in August. They haven’t disclosed financial terms of the transaction.

To contact the reporter on this story: Frederic Tomesco in Montreal at tomesco@bloomberg.net
Last Updated: July 10, 2009 08:29 EDT

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...id=aJx3ZVXvQKrQ

Interesting stuff.

[allpool]

very interesting seen as the cut of date for refi is 24th july hmm maybe neither those fucking dickheads will have the cash to put up for the securities on the club and will be forced to sell by RBS.

[electricghost]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/canadiens-sale-almost-a-done-deal/article1281881/

It took three months of haggling over the details and a $75-million loan from the Quebec government, but the $575-million (U.S.) sale of the Montreal Canadiens is all but done and dusted.

Outgoing owner George N. Gillett, in the midst of a financial squeeze over his ownership of English soccer club Liverpool FC, took the stage at the Habs' annual charity golf tournament to hand the keys over to Geoffrey E. Molson, whose brewing family is acquiring the team for a third time in its 100-year history.

Molson said the closing will happen, at worst, "in a matter of a few weeks".

The new ownership group includes BCE and the Woodbridge Group, who together control CTVGlobemedia, which owns the Globe and Mail. It also includes former Montreal stock exchange president Luc Bertrand, Hamilton businessman Michael Andlauer and Molson said "two-thirds of our ownership group is Quebecois."

The bilingual, 38-year-old Molson said "we are proud to be the owners, but don't forget we are fans.

"We are children of the Canadiens," said Molson, who will be the general partner and chairman of the board.

Molson also said the new ownership group will acquire the 19.9 per cent of the team still owned by the Molson Coors brewery. The sale is subject to approval by the NHL board of governors.

A visibly emotional Gillett called his family's ownership of the team "the best eight years of our lives" and choked back tears as he began his remarks.

"This is a happy, but very sad day for me to be here," Gillett said.

Gillett insisted that throughout his stewardship of the club the main consideration was never a financial one, and that all conversations "started with what was best for the team, what was best for the fans and what was best for the community." The decision to sell the team, Gillett insisted, had nothing to do with Liverpool, although he allowed that he considered several options before going ahead.

And as for regrets? The Colorado-based magnate has but one.

"We never won the (Stanley Cup) ring . . . I apologize for that," he said.

   

[Canada Loves Anfield]

You sold the wrong team you c*nt!

[No666]

all conversations "started with what was best for the team, what was best for the fans and what was best for the community."

Obviously to Gillett, Liverpool doesn't deserve the same consideration.

[rocco]

Will he make $350m profit ?

[scatman]

fuckin c*nt, why could you not sell us, punk ass bitch.

[Dave_the_Red]

A visibly emotional Gillett called his family's ownership of the team "the best eight years of our lives" and choked back tears as he began his remarks.
   

Worst fucking two years of my life since you and your fucking mate have been at LFC

[buchigo!]

Worst fucking two years of my life since you and your fucking mate have been at LFC

hear hear.

[Met]

You sold the wrong team you c*nt!

It's funny because it's true!

[Liverbird 2010]

Worst fucking two years of my life since you and your fucking mate have been at LFC

hear fuckin hear.

From another forum someone heard him on the radio, such a fuckin liar. 

He was on the Radio sports show here in Toronto tonight.Just caught the last few minutes.
He said the club was in excellent financial shape, a new major world-wide company would be announced as a new shirt sponsor in the next 7-10 days and hicks and him both reckon the new stadium (60-72,00 capacity) will be built if and when the world-wide financial situation sorts itself out.He mentioned we were in better financial shape than the other "major" cubs in the premier league.

[i_wun_bite]

what a muthafurkering liar.

[MikeD]

Will he make $350m profit ?

rough back of a beer mat calculations.

he borrowed $240m (CAN) to buy them so it looks like about $390m (CAN) profit.

There's a small matter of the $75M (USD) springfield (mill financial) loan taken out in 2008 to secure the LFC refinance last year. It was at 19% interest so it could be closer to $90M (CAN)  so taking that off he may have about $300m (CAN)

Who knows what other debts he may have for his other interests, motorsports, ski etc.

[xerxes1]

Who knows what other debts he may have for his other interests, motorsports, ski etc.

Or profits.

[Joe Rogans Chin]

hear fuckin hear.

From another forum someone heard him on the radio, such a fuckin liar. 

He was on the Radio sports show here in Toronto tonight.Just caught the last few minutes.
He said the club was in excellent financial shape, a new major world-wide company would be announced as a new shirt sponsor in the next 7-10 days and hicks and him both reckon the new stadium (60-72,00 capacity) will be built if and when the world-wide financial situation sorts itself out.He mentioned we were in better financial shape than the other "major" cubs in the premier league.

With the mancs debt double ours, Arsenals is bigger due to Stadium costs and Chelsea a joke when it comes to becoming self sufficent, that line will always be trotted out.

Differance is, the leadership at all those clubs can get hands on money if needed, whereas ours can't.

[ttnbd]

Or profits.

or people can just admit that they don't know what the state of either Gillett or Hicks' finances are in.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

With the mancs debt double ours, Arsenals is bigger due to Stadium costs and Chelsea a joke when it comes to becoming self sufficent, that line will always be trotted out.

Differance is, the leadership at all those clubs can get hands on money if needed, whereas ours can't.

which is exactly where we would be 3 years after a new stadium is complete

[southern scouse]

rough back of a beer mat calculations.

he borrowed $240m (CAN) to buy them so it looks like about $390m (CAN) profit.

There's a small matter of the $75M (USD) springfield (mill financial) loan taken out in 2008 to secure the LFC refinance last year. It was at 19% interest so it could be closer to $90M (CAN)  so taking that off he may have about $300m (CAN)

Who knows what other debts he may have for his other interests, motorsports, ski etc.

He also had a mortgage charge against the Bell Centre, so would have to pay that back as well. It was on these threads sometime in 2008 for the exact amount, as reported by the local press.

We simply are only guessing to what "profit" he has made....

[west_london_red]

which is exactly where we would be 3 years after a new stadium is complete

We have a massive purchase debt, Arsenal dont.

[Milly B]

Liverpool co-owner George Gillett has claimed that the Premier League club has "never been stronger" from an economic perspective, while underlining that he has a long-term view of his association with the Reds.


Questions were raised regarding Liverpool's financial muscle during the summer transfer window but Gillett, who purchased the club along with Tom Hicks, is adamant that the economic situation at Liverpool is very much robust.

Having purchased the club for £435m in 2007, with money borrowed from both Wachovia and the Royal Bank of Scotland, he and co-owner Hicks were forced to refinance their debts in July. Doing so, says Gillett, has put the club on solid financial ground.

"The club is in outstanding shape," he told The Fan 590 - a Toronto radio station. "Economically, it's never been stronger. We just paid down our debt very substantially. We have less debt per dollar than any club in the league."

To make the payments, Gillett sold his interest in the Montreal Canadiens ice hockey club, valued at £200m ($334m) by Forbes magazine. Worth an estimated £660m ($1.1bn) in November 2007, a full year before the economic downturn, he was forced to sell one of his sports properties to fulfil what he termed "family commitments". The Canadiens, he admitted, were simply more sellable than Liverpool.

As for the tenure of his Liverpool ownership, Gillett stated that an assumption that he was in it for the long haul was "probably the correct conclusion". But, he added, "If someone gets beamed in who's got bags of money, things may change."

Gillett also confirmed that Liverpool will unveil a new shirt sponsor on September 18, stating: "I think people will be pleased and surprised. It will be one of the great, worldwide corporations. And I think it will be a sponsor people will be pleased and surprised to be [associated with] Liverpool."

Addressing the club's demand for tickets - which he estimated at 75,000 - he said both he and Hicks would revisit their plans for a new stadium "as the world economy gets better - if and when it gets better."

"We were going to build an iconic stadium previously," he said. "The world economy has certainly suggested that that would be a good suggestion. But in the normal world, building a stadium in the 65,000 to 75,000 seat range - we would look forward to that."




http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=675180&sec=england&cc=3436

[RedGirlSuzie]

Gillett also confirmed that Liverpool will unveil a new shirt sponsor on September 18, stating: "I think people will be pleased and surprised. It will be one of the great, worldwide corporations. And I think it will be a sponsor people will be pleased and surprised to be [associated with] Liverpool."

Is it bad that the highlighted part actually worries me rather than makes me happy? The "suprised" to be associated with LFC makes me slightly nervous!!

[scatman]

very interesting George