Topic: Hicks - Texas Rangers Sold...

[jbdbreds]

Texas Rangers sold.  Now build us a stadium. 

... A sale price was not announced, but a source said the price tag was under $570 million, which includes the team, the lease at Rangers Ballpark in Arlington and approximately 153 acres of real estate around the park. The real estate portion of the agreement was part of a separate transaction, which transfers most of the land controlled by Hicks around the ballpark and Cowboys Stadium to the Greenberg group...

http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/mlb/news/story?id=4852837

[AriGold]

I have a question, if Hicks decides to invest this money in us, take us completely out of debt, finance our new stadium and give Rafa a fair amount to spend would people mind if he stayed? Or just get him out?

[AriGold]

It's an irrelevant question as he won't do any of those things.

I'm hopefull he can, at least take us out of the red. Obviously i'd rather him fuck off and we sell to someone who will back us better financially but i just can't see him selling up.

[DaveCharlie]

Hard to tell whether this is good or bad news. If it means money can be invested in players, a stadium, and no loan debt, it is a step in the right direction. Otherwise, and until then....there's a place for this discussion called the "Off The Pitch" forum.

[Red Viper]

Hard to tell whether this is good or bad news. If it means money can be invested in players, a stadium, and no loan debt, it is a step in the right direction. Otherwise, and until then....there's a place for this discussion called the "Off The Pitch" forum.

It'll be interesting to hear their next excuse for not giving us some transfer funds in the summer, it's gonna have to be a good 'un in light of this recent news. Maybe they'll blame poor exchange rates.

[scottishkop]

It'll be interesting to hear their next excuse for not giving us some transfer funds in the summer, it's gonna have to be a good 'un in light of this recent news. Maybe they'll blame poor exchange rates.

Inflated market due to the world cup, I'd imagine.

[Zapata316]

Now personally, as I have already stated, I don't believe that he will put significant funds into the club.

However, could it be that his recent comments about the transfer window next summer being a big one is linked to this sale?  He will have extra cash available now.

I know, I know, it's not going to happen, but let me dream for a couple fo hours before I actually fully accept the reality that they will still give Rafa nominal transfer funds.

[Des Equilibrante]

Texas Rangers sold.  Now build us a stadium. 

... A sale price was not announced, but a source said the price tag was under $570 million, which includes the team, the lease at Rangers Ballpark in Arlington and approximately 153 acres of real estate around the park. The real estate portion of the agreement was part of a separate transaction, which transfers most of the land controlled by Hicks around the ballpark and Cowboys Stadium to the Greenberg group...

http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/mlb/news/story?id=4852837

It is yet to be approved by whoever needs to approve it. That is expected to take another couple of months. But. Who knows what may happen now?

[reds88]

Hicks decided to sell the team last spring in an attempt to pay down or pay off HSG's debt. HSG defaulted on $525 million in loans last year tied up in the Rangers and the NHL's Dallas Stars, which Hicks has owned since 1996. Hicks said then that it was a deliberate move to renegotiate the loans. Initially, Hicks wanted to sell a minority stake in the club, but had trouble finding an investor or group interested. So he decided to put majority stake on the market and solicited some offers.

"The HSG holding company has too much debt," Hicks said in December. "We're no different than a lot of companies around the world. We just have to de-leverage."

Assuming Hicks offsets the entire amount in debit of $525 million, he'll pocket a gross amount of $45 million.  I don't think this benefits LFC at all.

[Zeb]

Won't this money be going to pay off HSG's debts of $525 million which they had problems covering last year, as well as paying back MLB for paying his baseball players while he was cash-strapped?

Of course that would then mean if he sold his ice hockey team lock and stock too, that would give him c. $300 million to spend where he liked.

[LiverBirdKop]

Assuming Hicks offsets the entire amount in debit of $525 million, he'll pocket a gross amount of $45 million.  I don't think this benefits LFC at all.

Good point. Every one seems to forget he's got huge debts as well. He just sold a house in Aspen as well.

[Liverbird 2010]

How much of that money does he owe to the banks?

Wasnt really listening but they where talking about it on SSN earlier and said Hicks had kept some document behind preventing the sale going through at an earlier date or words to that effect.

[In the Name of Klopp]

How much of that money does he owe to the banks?

Wasnt really listening but they where talking about it on SSN earlier and said Hicks had kept some document behind preventing the sale going through at an earlier date or words to that effect.

It's $525 mill according Bloomberg.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aNnhR1aBPsQk

[robbie96]

 Ł 354m give or take .... assuming and it's a big assumption that the MLB owners accept the sale!

[reniformis]

Well, I guess it depends on how expensive our debt is to service relative to his other debts. If he has other major debts, that is. I don't pretend to know. And how much interest he could get by investing elsewhere. He certainly won't be hiding it under the floorboards.

I guess it's like if you have the capital to pay off your 6% interest mortgage but you can get 8% by investing it, you invest it and end 2% better off. If you can only get 4% by investing it, you pay off your mortgage. So it may be the only decision he can make is to pay down our debt, unfortunately I'd expect him to then use the profit he frees up from the club to service whichever of his other debts he didn't pay down, so we'd really be no better off.

[Alonso_The_Assassin]

Don't know what to make of this. There's got to be some sort of a twist, surely?

[Passmaster Molby]

Maybe, just maybe this is the reason why Purslow has told the council the stadium will begin this April. With Hicks now having "de-leveraged" is it possible he now has more potential to borrow money for a new stadium project at LFC?

[No666]

The $525 million was before you factor in the interest payments, penalties, what he owes the MLB for making the payroll  (which he's going to have to pay back to retain a share). So don't start partying guys - he just has fewer debts than before - unfortunately they are all on LFC.

[HarryLabrador]

The $525 million was before you factor in the interest payments, penalties, what he owes the MLB for making the payroll  (which he's going to have to pay back to retain a share). So don't start partying guys - he just has fewer debts than before - unfortunately they are all on LFC.

Exactly. If he is forced to settle his debts, I'd say he just about comes away with zilch. So let's move on.

[Dave_the_Red]

I only have a feeling of overwhelming dread at this announcement. Just think it will allow them to borrow more cash, hope i'm wrong.

[dogsout]

Congratulations, Texas Rangers fans.

[PJLFC1]

I want to feel like a Texas Rangers fan does today 

[Liverbird 2010]

I only have a feeling of overwhelming dread at this announcement. Just think it will allow them to borrow more cash, hope i'm wrong.

My thoughts exactly and with Gillett selling the Canadians its gives them some credit notes and collateral to borrow against us.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

I only have a feeling of overwhelming dread at this announcement. Just think it will allow them to borrow more cash, hope i'm wrong.

unless if hsg takes hicks' stake, or even worse the stadium is built by hsg

[xavidub]

He may build the stadium, as that will greatly increase the value of the club and make him even more cash. to be honest, I really don't care who owns the club these days. They are all a shower of grabbing c*nts which is how they became rich initially.

[ali]

The American press estimate the debt could be as high as $600m, with higher interest rates kicking in since default last March and with the MLB bailing out since with running costs etc.

There's still a way to go on this with over 40 creditors and the MLB to agree the sale etc -


• The deal still isn't done because now Major League Baseball and the 40 lenders seeking payment on a $525 million loan on which Hicks defaulted must approve everything. Financing must also be completed. Bottom line: Don't expect the official transfer of the club until after the 2010 season begins.

http://rangersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/01/offical-word-on-rangers-sale.html

The he may need to arrange a new loan for the Dallas Stars, dependent upon their needs.


http://www.bbtia.com/the-clubhouse/2010/1/23/newsflash-final-agreement-reached-in-rangers-sale.html

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100122&content_id=7958194&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

[Joe Rogans Chin]

Assuming Hicks offsets the entire amount in debit of $525 million, he'll pocket a gross amount of $45 million.  I don't think this benefits LFC at all.

So he's made about 20 million, all by defaulting on loans, having the basball league step in to run the club and bascically act like a c*nt.
You have to give it to him, he's a genius.
Does the  570 include the real estate deal?

[No666]

The fact he's selling real estate in this market suggests he is desperate to get his fists on some cash, imo. If the debt is $600m, between the sale of his Aspen estate and the Rangers, he'll be just a few million shy of clearing the HSG debt. Won't go through till April according to those reports ali posted. I love the phrase about his 'emasculation.' (I have self-excised the next sentence I was going to write as not being mature enough.)

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

If this deal eventually goes ahead, and I can't see why it won't as it offers payment to the creditors, and removes a burden from the MLB then it's not bad news for us.  Even if Hicks walks away with no profit at all he has at least unleveraged himself of over $500m of debt.  In doing so that does enable him to borrow money to use towards a new stadium.

I want the two owners out as much as the next one, but I would rather they get to follow their business plan and sell a successful football club with a new stadium in 5-10 years time than end up selling a bankrupt mid-table side in a few years in much the same way as has happened to the Rangers.

The important thing for me is Liverpool FC, I don't give a shit about the owners, and if they make a tidy profit out of us I'm happy for that to happen, because in all likelihood that will mean that the club is in good shape when they sell it.  Too mnay in here want to see the americans crash and burn regardless of the consequences that would have for the club.

[No666]

I wonder whether their deleveraging in other areas makes them more attractive partners to those parties allegedly considering investment in LFC? Anyone informed be able to advise on that?

[JohnHobbes]

I can't see him making any profits on this with all the loans he has defaulted on and the MLB having to cover.

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

I wonder whether their deleveraging in other areas makes them more attractive partners to those parties allegedly considering investment in LFC? Anyone informed be able to advise on that?

I'm not qualified mate, but I think it would be a pre-requisite.  If you are looking to join the two goons as a business partner then you are presumably buying into their business of plan of adding value to the club through the construction of a new stadium with improved revenue streams.  For that to get built then clearly you and the other two are going to have to raise the money to build that stadium as soon as possible.  If one of the business partners is already over-leveraged and as a result is unable to raise his share of the building capital then it is surely a deal-breaker.

In short, If I were an investor considering coming onboard to help finance a new stadium then I would want cast iron assurances that my two prospective business partners were able to meet their share of that financing.

[Jack Slater]

Hicks $570million richer

I doubt if this deal makes him any richer.  It certainly wont make him $570m richer.

Firstly, to make him "richer" the sale value would have to exceed the paper value which he has attributed to the asset in the past.  Maybe someone can dig those up, but, from memory, havent we seen the ridiculous Forbes assessing HSG at a billion US dollars?  If so, his paper worth would be diminishing, not increasing.


But, in any event, the $570m (or whatever the true price is) wont be going into Hicks's pocket.  As of March 2009, HSG owed $525m.  It then defaulted on interest payments of $10m in each of March, June, September and December.  So that would be an extra $40m right there.  But then you have to assume that missing the interest payments will have incurred additional costs and penalties  (at the very least, the ongoing interest accrual would have increased, but almost certainly, that wont be the only additional expense).

So probably all the "sale price" amounts to is a 3 way agreement between the seller, the buyer and the lender that the buyer will take care of the debt, and the seller (HSG) is released from further liability.  In other words, HSG wont actually be receiving any cash.  At best, other assets which may have been tied up (eg as security for the loan) might now be released for use elsewhere. 

So Hicks ability to borrow from the banks might be enhanced.  If it is true that LFC's existing loan is due to end in July 2010  (and no reliable source has confirmed that, it is purely guesswork by the journalists who have suggested that date), then it may well be that G&H are now able to extend that because they can offer improved guarantees.

[Lord Roger Hunt]

Sadly, and I hope I'm wrong, but I can't see either putting any of their own money at risk by investing in LFC. It's purely a business for them, they have no emotional attachment to the club and they'll only be interested in maximizing their return on investment.

Also, they'll be awaiting, as will potential investors, Ofcom's decision on Sky's monopoly position as if they decide to outlaw it as being anti-competitive, the money in football will start to dry up. The value of LFC - and all other clubs - will drop and my guess is that they'll get rid asap, to anyone willing to pay the price they're after.

Tricky time ahead, for owner, potential investors and fans I'm afraid......

[Walshy nMeŽ]

All I want is our owners to build our stadium, invest in the squad and give us a platform to compete with the big boys.  I don't care who the owner is as long as they do this.

As said already, EVERY single one of them at this end of the game are money grabbing c*nts who cannot be trusted.

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

Sadly, and I hope I'm wrong, but I can't see either putting any of their own money at risk by investing in LFC. It's purely a business for them, they have no emotional attachment to the club and they'll only be interested in maximizing their return on investment.

I don't think that anyone is suggesting they will mate.  The problem for Hicks was that he was so over-leveraged that in the current, more sane, markets nobody would even lend him their money to play with.  If this deal goes through he may have just dug himself out of that hole and put himself in a position where he can borrow again.  Whether he is planning on using that facility to fund a new stadium or simply to refinance the existing debt is anybody's guess.  Although there are whispers in the SoS / Purslow thread that there are grounds for optimism.

[Jack Slater]

If this deal eventually goes ahead, and I can't see why it won't as it offers payment to the creditors, and removes a burden from the MLB then it's not bad news for us.  Even if Hicks walks away with no profit at all he has at least unleveraged himself of over $500m of debt.  In doing so that does enable him to borrow money to use towards a new stadium.

I agree that it will increase Hicks ability to borrow.  But it wont enable him to obtain a big enough loan for a new stadium.  The banks have not been happy with LFC's current debt.  They will now be happier with the current debt, but that doesnt mean that they will suddenly be prepared to lend (much) more.

I want the two owners out as much as the next one, but I would rather they get to follow their business plan and sell a successful football club with a new stadium in 5-10 years time than end up selling a bankrupt mid-table side in a few years in much the same way as has happened to the Rangers.

The owners claim that their business plan is to build a stadium.  Of course, according to their claims, building was due to start in 2007.

What is telling is that when they produced a prospectus with a view to obtaining further investment, the new stadium was not included in the plan.  When a company is preparing a prospectus, there is a legal obligation to be truthful and (reasonably) accurate.  Since the new stadium was not included in the plan (which included projections for the next 5 or 6 years), we can deduce that EITHER:
a) there is no intention at all of building a new stadium (ie saying differently would be untruthful) OR
b) the likelihood of the new stadium being buillt is not great enough that the claim could be made (ie it wouldnt be a reasonably accurate claim).

The important thing for me is Liverpool FC, I don't give a shit about the owners, and if they make a tidy profit out of us I'm happy for that to happen, because in all likelihood that will mean that the club is in good shape when they sell it.  Too mnay in here want to see the americans crash and burn regardless of the consequences that would have for the club.

There is no "good" outcome for us (same for MU).  Either G&H's plan fails, and the club is ruined as a result.  Or G&H's plan succeeds, and the club is severely damaged as a result. 

To be clear, G&H are not going to do things that increase the club's value substantially (eg build a new stadium); that isnt their plan.  (Obviously they will work on increasing revenue from internet, branded products, etc).  They are simply planning to stay as owners for long enough for the natural value of the club to increase, so that they can sell at a profit.

If their plan fails, and the natural market value never goes up, then LFC will be stripped of any valuable assets and sold as a rump.

If their plan succeds , and the market value does go up, then the value of other PL clubs will also go up.  Relative to those clubs, we'll have lost valuable ground.

[Lord Roger Hunt]

I'm am both encouraged and intrigued.  Thanks for that.

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

I agree that it will increase Hicks ability to borrow.  But it wont enable him to obtain a big enough loan for a new stadium.  The banks have not been happy with LFC's current debt.  They will now be happier with the current debt, but that doesnt mean that they will suddenly be prepared to lend (much) more.

Not disputing that mate.  As I said in my subsequent reply to No666, I think that in order to fund a stadium they still need this mysterious third investor to come in.  All I see this sale doing is putting Hicks back into a position where he can guarantee his third of the loans required for a stadium build if that extra investment happens.

As for whether a stadium is in there plans, you may be right, I may be right. We'll just half to wait and see I guess.

[rocco]

my take on it .... please add if possible ?

All this does is clear $525 million loan owed by the HSG holding company to the banks {The American press estimate the debt could be as high as $600m with interest payments etc }..id say he probably owes other money as well to the banks besides what he owes from putting us into debt.
So basically all this will do is pay most of the $600m to the banks but still be a bit short of the total debt owed by the HSG holding company and most important to Hicks it will give him leverage to borrow money for a New stadium with Gillett if a new 3rd investor is found ?


Anybody the sitaution with Hicks Dallas Stars NHL side .....