Topic: Martin Broughton: 22 Questions from .tv

[covi2k2]

Broughton has been straight talking though, got no reason to doubt Him.

The way he was explaining the sale process in an interview with  .TV its sounds like a closed auction is happening

My Take on it is:

They send out information to potential buyers and to people who requested it.

They then invite people to bid in a "Closed" Auction, this could mean there is a confidentiality close that says you cant talk about your own bid, so no one will know who else is involved and what their bids are.

They collate all the bids and the preferred bidder is given the chance to buy the club. He stated that the club has to be sold and the owners cant block it, like when you sell something on ebay, you put it to auction and if you don’t get the price you want for it you still have to sell and its tough shit, except this auction you don’t know what other people are bidding.

Purslow is just a useless c*nt.

[WaltonRed]

But - and in my mind - this is a huge But - it all assumes that there are bidders out htere prepared to pay what the club believes to be a reasonable price.

I doubt there are, so even if everyone involved is happy to agree a sale at a price equal to the debt there needs to be someone willing to pay that price and then fund (or borrow - difficult in todays market) at least that much again to fund the stadium which would be the only way to get the purchase money back.

My pessimism has never been, essentially, over G&H's willingness to sell for a price that allows them to cover their debts and move on.  Its that there is no buyer at that price.  And nothing I've heard in recent months gives me the slightest cause for optimism.

People on this forum and others keep blithely assuming that a billionaire will turn up but I have my doubts.  Broughton himself yesterday admitted that they hadnt received any bids yet, merely that they are hopeful they will in due course.  I continue to believe that is a misplaced hope.

[WaltonRed]

Broughton has been straight talking though, got no reason to doubt Him.

The way he was explaining the sale process in an interview with  .TV its sounds like a closed auction is happening

My Take on it is:

They send out information to potential buyers and to people who requested it.

They then invite people to bid in a "Closed" Auction, this could mean there is a confidentiality close that says you cant talk about your own bid, so no one will know who else is involved and what their bids are.

They collate all the bids and the preferred bidder is given the chance to buy the club. He stated that the club has to be sold and the owners cant block it, like when you sell something on ebay, you put it to auction and if you don’t get the price you want for it you still have to sell and its tough shit, except this auction you don’t know what other people are bidding.

Purslow is just a useless c*nt.

Im sure thats wrong.  You are arguing that there is no reserved price at all.  Thats impossible. 

So if, in theory, the only bid the club receives is for 35p and 2 Kit Kats, are you saying they would have to accept as its the highest, and therefore best, bid.

There will clearly be a reserved price - and its not impossible that we can expect lots of arguments over what is a "reasonable" reserve price.

[WaltonRed]

I'm sure he tweeted his honest opinion.   I am less sure that he gave the issue proper consideration and spoke to any relevant experts or sources.

It all comes down to a simple factual issue really.  Is this a normal sale by owners, comparable to Ashley of Newcastle?  Or is this a forced sale by owners, who are acting with the lender holding the gun of administration to their foreheads?

Kay obviously (and honestly) believes it is the former, which means that his tweet is correct.  However, when he analyses Broughton's comments in more detail, and asks around (eg colleagues on the financial section), he may well change his view.


I dunno if secrecy will be maintained or not.  But MB has claimed that LFC will make no official comment on which bids are being considered at any given time.  (I assume he is not ruling out an announcement of any period of exclusivity if there is one).

I assume that if MB receives 3 bids (A, B, C), then he discusses them with BarCap, G&H, the rest of the board, and RBS.

Having formed  a provisional view that Bid A is best, I assume he then tells B & C what they would need to do to get into pole position.  If B & C drop out, then there is a sale to A.  If B &/or C improve their offer, then MB then goes back to A and finds out what they're gonna do about it, and so on, and so on.

Meanwhile there is (imho) likely to be nothing to stop GG &/or TH trying to form partnerships with the bidders eg so that they may retain some percentage ownership, or some other rights.

In other words, I think it will be a dynamic process which may drag out for a while.  I dont think it will just be a static case (like the TV auctions for example) of the deadline for bids expiring at 4pm, and the winner being announced at 5pm or the following day, or whatever.

I admire your optimism and as I've said before I do really hope you are right.

I just worry that that optimism of yours is misplaced.

If we take Broughton at his word, the only fact we have is that Barcap have so far spent 5 months hawking the club around teh world and have not yet received a single bid ( not a lot different to Rothschilds and ML who spent 3 years doing the same thing with the same lack of result).

[covi2k2]

Im sure thats wrong.  You are arguing that there is no reserved price at all.  Thats impossible. 

So if, in theory, the only bid the club receives is for 35p and 2 Kit Kats, are you saying they would have to accept as its the highest, and therefore best, bid.

There will clearly be a reserved price - and its not impossible that we can expect lots of arguments over what is a "reasonable" reserve price.

I don't know, thinking out loud I guess.

I imagine there would be a guide price, its widely been reported that there are many interested parties.

It all going to be extremely confidential though I imagine, no one will come out and say we are looking  to buy Liverpool I am pretty confident we wont know until the deal is done, a break in the confidentiality could jeopardise the bid.

my take on it not fact, i dont know anything, never have, never will.

[covi2k2]

I admire your optimism and as I've said before I do really hope you are right.

I just worry that that optimism of yours is misplaced.

If we take Broughton at his word, the only fact we have is that Barcap have so far spent 5 months hawking the club around teh world and have not yet received a single bid ( not a lot different to Rothschilds and ML who spent 3 years doing the same thing with the same lack of result).

This could be that they have given a date to invite bids?

"If you want to buy Liverpool get your bids in by 9th of never"

People will be nervous at making the first move, so will table bids last minute

this will be what brought said "First round of bidding"

Strike off the ones that don't make the mark

then they would have a list of "preferred bidders" (Like when construction companies bid for jobs)

Barcarp would then let said bidders know they are on the preferred bidders list,

Bidders then come back submitting more details plans etc...

and the winning bidder is then awarded?

I'm just purely speculating and maybe I shouldn't, I don't know what is going on, just trying to work out the comments that Broughton has said and this method of bidding seems to fit in with it.

Rather than the type of takeovers that happen between companies but more like when firms bid for work i.e. construction or architects bidding for certain jobs.
 

[TepidT2O]

Does the lack of bidders indicate that we have mobed from a "the club is for sale make us a great offer" phase to a "ok anyone who wants the club make us any offer and we'll consider it" phase.

[Coady]

Oli kay has been wrong several times, he said once that DIC were doing due diligence. Maybe he is playing it safe now.

[Witherkay]

Does the lack of bidders indicate that we have mobed from a "the club is for sale make us a great offer" phase to a "ok anyone who wants the club make us any offer and we'll consider it" phase.

I tend to agree with Jack when he said it probably means that RBS have given H&G a set period of time to sell on their terms, but after a particular date (30th June would fit nicely!!!) the position may have changed. No bidders = no-one willing to buy at their 'price'.

Alternatively, it could just mean possible bidders are holding back, knowing that every day that passes leaves H&G in a deeper hole, so the price they are willing (or have) to accept keeps getting lower and lower..... if so, lets just hope there is something left of our club when we get to that point.

All our discussions prove is that none of us has any idea at this point, and we are just trying to fill in the blanks and work out who is telling us the truth and who is spouting shite

[Lecter]

I admire your optimism and as I've said before I do really hope you are right.

I just worry that that optimism of yours is misplaced.

If we take Broughton at his word, the only fact we have is that Barcap have so far spent 5 months hawking the club around teh world and have not yet received a single bid ( not a lot different to Rothschilds and ML who spent 3 years doing the same thing with the same lack of result).

Rothschilds & ML's prospectus had an actual price that was higher than the debt level

If I remember rightly it was over £400 million so maybe that put people off

I think someone will take the club at the debt level (to RBS)

[tamadic]

I admire your optimism and as I've said before I do really hope you are right.

I just worry that that optimism of yours is misplaced.

If we take Broughton at his word, the only fact we have is that Barcap have so far spent 5 months hawking the club around teh world and have not yet received a single bid ( not a lot different to Rothschilds and ML who spent 3 years doing the same thing with the same lack of result).

But didn't Broughton say mid-July would be the date of the beginning of the auction? It will be just 2 weeks away.

[Stretch Armstrong]

Broughton is full of shite, people seem to believe he needs to stick by his comments - may I remind peeps of the 2 Americans who promised no debt, amazing team and state of the stadium

Liers are believable that's part of their skill

[Mark Walters]

So people are actually believing Broughton now?  "Money raised from player sales will go back in to transfer pot"?  But how much of that money Martin? 10%?

"We'll be sold before the end of the transfer window". Sure we will!

[Skrtels Head]

So people are actually believing Broughton now?  "Money raised from player sales will go back in to transfer pot"?  But how much of that money Martin? 10%?

"We'll be sold before the end of the transfer window". Sure we will!

Yep. Just like RH has been told that if we do lose any players then he will be given cash to replace them. And that is TRUE! So say we sell Torres for £60 million then RH will get about £6 million to replace him with. See, they will do exactly as they promised, someone wants to leave and the generous board(true to their word) will make cash available for a replacement.

[Zeb]

There will clearly be a reserved price - and its not impossible that we can expect lots of arguments over what is a "reasonable" reserve price.

Broughton said there wasn't... (think it was the press conference with Mr.Hodgson).

And I think you're right, that doesn't make sense and makes me doubt how true it is unless, of course, there's already sufficient indication of interest to guarantee that the Yanks walk away with profit (or at least cover their losses) which would then mean there's no need for a reserve price and Broughton would be telling the truth.

re. player sales. Broughton could be totally accurate in saying that money raised from player sales would go into the team. The club has been paying off future liabilities for a couple of seasons now and I believe we'll owe just 7.7 million (plus or minus any add-ons triggered from sales or purchases) for this current financial year (source:accounts for last year - future liabilities beyond the immediate one year owed to trade creditors).

I'd imagine Yossi's transfer would cover a sizeable chunk of that, meaning that the player account could well have money post any future player sales should none be diverted elsewhere.

It's whether that money needs to be diverted, and that will of course depend on any of these bids meaning a change of ownership. What is interesting is that Broughton says the sales process won't end until after the transfer window. This is a negative in that it means new owners will not have time to open any potential cheque book, but likewise it does seem to lock the current owners into not selling off player assets this window as to do would necessarily mean having to renegotiate the deal.

Are there bids? Why was a man with a lot of contacts in the Middle East appointed as a go between to conduct the sale? Who knows. I don't trust H&G, but there may be light at the end of the tunnel. If there's not, come January, we're going to need wings to fly above the shit.

[Mark Walters]

I aint saying that I believe his answer, but "10%" would not be consistent with what he said.

He was asked a direct question, and gave a direct answer.

He claimed that all the money received in transfer fees would be available to Hodgson. 

I dont think it will.  I think we will see Hodgson doing a Wenger and claiming that he didnt want to buy anyone else, or anyone more expensive.

But MB cannot claim that the reply he gave would be consistent with him keeping 90% for the bank debt.

Yes, you're right.  I was thinking along the same lines earlier (not sure why I didn't write it then).   What's likely to happen is that they've lied to RH and will lie again by either claiming we're on the verge of a sale which should go through before the end of August (probably after he's tracked targets for weeks leading up to this point) only to see August come and go with no new owners or they'll tell him there have been 1 or 2 stadium and commercial payments that have to be made now and the transfer fund has been reduced after selling Gerrard and Masch. 

So RH miss out on his targets and it'll be plain for all to see!

[RedJam70]

Why not BarCap?

If I am selling my house simply because I have chosen to move somewhere else, then I will use an estate agent.

Whereas if I am selling my house because my lender is insisting on it, then I will still use an estate agent.

Regardless of the circumstances of the sale, the vendor wants the best price s/he can get, and the estate agent helps with that.

Same with LFC. 

True but the banks rarely have an inhouse estate agent. If RBS had G&H over a barrel and was forcing them to sell then I'd have expected them to want a degree of control over the sale which would be easier if it was handled in-house. By using Barcap G&H seem to have a fair amount of independence and control over the sale, more a case of "you need to sell and we want to see some action showing you intend to" rather than "you need to sell and we're taking over that process to ensure you do". IMO anyway.

Alternatively, I like the idea someone else posted of everyone trying to put forward the impression that the sale is impartial. Makes sense to me.

[ali]

 Liverpool FC borrowed too much cash, says boss of RBS

Jul 3 2010 by Tony McDonough, Liverpool Echo

LIVERPOOL FC’s American owners borrowed “too much” money when they bought the club, the boss of the bank which loaned them the cash has said.

The bulk of the Reds’ £237m is owed to the government-owned Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS).

Tom Hicks and George Gillett bought Liverpool from majority shareholder David Moores in 2007 for £219m.

But they incorporated their borrowings into the club’s debt and the interest costs have seen the original figure soar.

RBS and another lender, Wachovia, were originally expecting £100m to be repayed this summer.

But in the spring, they allowed Mr Hicks and Mr Gillett another six months to find a buyer for the club and repay the debt.

In an exclusive interview with the ECHO today, RBS chief executive Stephen Hester said before the credit crunch too many businesses, including Liverpool FC, took on too much debt.

He said: “With hindsight, I think there are some businesses which borrowed too much money and Liverpool FC was one of them.”

His comments came less than 24 hours after Anfield chairman Martin Broughton admitted there had so far been no offers for the club.

But he added: “There are a number of interested parties. There is no specific deadline. We are looking to the middle of July-ish for a first round of bids.

“The process is well underway. I have been brought in to oversee the sale process.

“The two owners have stepped aside. Barclays Capital is running the process.”

Mr Hester was speaking after addressing members of Liverpool Chamber of Commerce at a breakfast event at the city’s Hope Street Hotel.

Recently he found himself on the receiving end of an email campaign by Reds’ fans urging him to reconsider the financing deal with the club.

He added: “It is very clear Liverpool FC has a huge resonance with many people.

“We understand that and we try to be extra-sensitive in the way we behave.

“I think like any business we have to be sensitive to the context in which we are doing business.

“That is why we have been exceptionally understanding when working with this issue.

“It seems to me that it is in everyone’s interest to have an early resolution.

“Everyone involved is working hard to try to get that but it has to be the right resolution.

“I think obviously the club needs to have stability for the future and that is not just a question of ownership.

“It is not just about who owns the club, but also about what their plans are.

“We have not starved Liverpool of money and we have been working closely with the owners.

“But I think all football clubs in the UK would say borrowing in the future is likely to be lower than it has been in the past.”

On Wednesday, Liverpool unveiled former Fulham boss Roy Hodgson as their new manager.

At the press conference, Mr Broughton said the new coach was the right man to bring some stability to the club.

He also gave a very public assurance that Liverpool will not be forced to sell star players like Steven Gerrard and Fernando Torres in order to service their debts.

He said: “We do not need the money. We do not have any desire or need to sell players to pay down debt.”

The chairman also insisted that the process of selecting a new owner would be as carefully done as choosing the manager was.

He added: “This is an auction. When the winning bid comes through, we will do a deal with the best bidder.

“The best bidder may not be the highest bidder. This is more than just money. It is about the stadium development, it’s about the team, it’s about the whole piece.

“Once we go through that process, the best bidder gets it.”

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-fc/liverpool-fc-news/2010/07/03/liverpool-fc-borrowed-too-much-cash-says-boss-of-rbs-100252-26777353/3/

[lfctitch]

Sounds like informal admin that does Ali. Thanks for posting

[Coady]

Surely if a buyer was about they would want to of bought the club by now. We had no manager, the transfer window was open and we have all our assets still at the club. In six months time we might by 6th in the league, a manager on a 3 year contract and Torres and Gerrard elsewhere. Why would someone wait.

[covi2k2]

Surely if a buyer was about they would want to of bought the club by now. We had no manager, the transfer window was open and we have all our assets still at the club. In six months time we might by 6th in the league, a manager on a 3 year contract and Torres and Gerrard elsewhere. Why would someone wait.

This is true however , if the club is out to auction then they will have to abide by the rules of tat auction, so first round of bidding in by set date ect....

I think this is the best way to find the best set of owners, hopefully

[dwesty]

If Martin Broughton sells anyone else to Chelsea I will be very, very angry.

[oojason]

If Martin Broughton sells anyone else to Chelsea I will be very, very angry.

After Yossi?

[Coady]

Could this be what has happened so far?

In terms of due diligence, I'm told that BarCap appointed a big four accounting firm to undertake a vendor due diligence piece of work several weeks ago and my understanding is that this is now practically finished. This means that when the first round of bids is received in mid July, a small number (usually 2-3) of the best bidders will be given access to this report. It would be usual for these bidders to then be asked to reconfirm their bid in a second round 2-3 weeks later - this second bid would include any upwards/downwards revision in each bidders proposed price (once they have seen the vendor due diligence report), any top up due diligence requirements (which would ordinarily be relatively small), confirmation of the source of their funds and a timetable to completion. You'd expect one bidder to be given exclusivity at that point to get the deal wrapped up in 3-4 weeks, although this timescale practically always slips from my experience! And obviously, there are still no guarantees that a deal will get done even at this point.

At least the largest piece of outstanding work (the due diligence) appears to have been started a while ago. Hopefully this should mean that IF a decent offer comes in, there is a chance that it can move relatively quickly.

[stewy17]

Sounds like informal admin that does Ali. Thanks for posting

Right, i've heard this phrase being lashed about quite a lot lately.

Pardon my ignorance, but what exactly is "informal administration"?

Can you provide examples of this happening before or any legal precendent or anything like that? Does "informal administration" really exist?

If it does, what is the point of it? Can you explain a little bit more for those of us who aren't familiar with the process?

[west_london_red]

Right, i've heard this phrase being lashed about quite a lot lately.

Pardon my ignorance, but what exactly is "informal administration"?

Can you provide examples of this happening before or any legal precendent or anything like that? Does "informal administration" really exist?

If it does, what is the point of it? Can you explain a little bit more for those of us who aren't familiar with the process?

I'll have a bash based on what I've leant here:

Its when a company is unable to meet its obligations, but the creditor (to who the oustadanding obligation is owed - RBS in our instance) rather then take the company into formal administration - ie either take ownership of the company or arrange its sale via an adminstrator, leaves the current owners in place on the understanding that they will sell the business or assets to pay off the creditors at that point.

Its basically a face saving exercise rather then go through the hassle and embarassment of formal adminstration.

Past examples have been mentioned on here a few months back, but I dont think they were with names we would easily recognise.

Hopefully someone with more knowledge on the subject will provide a better definition but thats my starter for 10.

[stewy17]

Cheers mate, so its a real thing then? its not just scare mongering?? See the way I see it is that the bank are simply putting pressure on us because they want their money back, doesn't necessarily mean we're in administration does it?

If this is the case then its not really cricket is it? The Premier League should step in and dock us points. I'm not saying that is what I want but if we're in administration bar the shouting then we're cheating the system aren't we?

I personally don't think we're in informal administration, but that is based more on hope than actual knowledge.

[Coady]

.

[Billy1561]

Now that Broughton has come out and said it's an auction does anyone know how that has come about? Has there been bids that are unacceptably low to the owners and as such they have not been taken up. Thus, Broughton has changed the sale terms to an auction to generate interest? Even a very low starting bid could flush out the serious players?

[Lush is the best medicine...]

Now that Broughton has come out and said it's an auction does anyone know how that has come about? Has there been bids that are unacceptably low to the owners and as such they have not been taken up. Thus, Broughton has changed the sale terms to an auction to generate interest? Even a very low starting bid could flush out the serious players?

he probably did this to get some publicity/interest that he wouldnt have otherwise gotten

[Billy1561]

Trouble with the likes of Broughton and Cecil is they can't lie straight in bed so you never know what to believe.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

Trouble with the likes of Broughton and Cecil is they can't lie straight in bed so you never know what to believe.

to be honest if he was lying he wouldnt be saying stuff like 'first deadline in 2 weeks', it'd be more like 'first deadline in october' and would have been more vague

[Billy1561]

to be honest if he was lying he wouldnt be saying stuff like 'first deadline in 2 weeks', it'd be more like 'first deadline in october' and would have been more vague

I guess time will tell. Should all be a lot clearer (or murkier) in 2 weeks or so.

[Vulmea]

If any of this is true then why has the due diligence report not spoken with shareliverpool or SOS - isn't that a significant financial consideration for any prospective buyer - the fact that a key revenue stream is at risk? Regardless of the fact that the best hands for the club to be in are those of the fans - there is also the distinct possiblity of a bid for at least 10% of the club - isn't that financially significant?? Doesn't anybody looking for the 'best ' solution obliged to look at that option?

The club assets appear to be a key cost driver and even if the club does not need to sell players - the players themselves unfortunately have a massive say -Hodgson has confirmed he can't control them  (good start) - Benitez asked for and was refused assurances about being able to re-use money from player sales - now bizarrely Broughton is providing assurances about money being available from player sales - have I missed something?

If something walks like a duck and quacks like a duck - its generally a duck and not much of this stacks up imo

we've sent out a request for interest , there's no guarantee of any responses - we didn't even ask for expressions of interest but sent out info to anybody we could think of who'd shown interest before  - (but not the fans) - that would seem to restrict possible owners to a rather select band - ( I presume Steve Morgan didn't get a copy) - the type of people who've expressed an interest before or are buying up clubs now aint really any people I'd want here

then there is the asking price which is either huge or non existant depending on who you believe - the idea that Hicks would calmly acceppt somebody else's valuation is a joke  - this is a bloke who threw his home town baseball team to the wolves , made the baseball association pay their wages and then claimed he was hard done by and was being magnanimous whilst insisting he got his money back via one of his subsiduary companies - pleading he made losses whilst actually coining it in - and he's going to sit back and let RBS dictate a sale price - no bleeding way -

the idea that this is just business is very alluring but its also bollocks - we are in the hands of a different beast

[Lush is the best medicine...]

If any of this is true then why has the due diligence report not spoken with shareliverpool or SOS - isn't that a significant financial consideration for any prospective buyer - the fact that a key revenue stream is at risk?

to be honest i really dont think they need to - think the sale is for 100% of the club and no 'part offers' are to be considered (rules out SLFC) and dont really see why SOS have to be consulted, esp when you consider the size of the membership in the grand scheme of things (although it would be a benefit)

[Vulmea]

to be honest i really dont think they need to - think the sale is for 100% of the club and no 'part offers' are to be considered (rules out SLFC) and dont really see why SOS have to be consulted, esp when you consider the size of the membership in the grand scheme of things (although it would be a benefit)

yep initially I took that view - the same one Broughton used when dismissing the request to meet SOS - if I met you I'd have to meet every fan group - well actually if you wanted to do a professional job you probably would meet all those fan groups that requested a meeting, if you were full time and doing your job properly it would probably be high on your list of things to do  - given SOS has some 6,000 + paid up members, given they are vocal and have an impact on LFC yep anybody who actually is above board should consider meeting them but he isn't is he -

but its the idea that this type of movement is irrelevant to any prospective owner - if you were selling your house and the bloke next door had just started a rock band then the onus would be on you to tell any prospective buyer and probably to find out when and where the guy was planning to rehearse - the idea that SOS wouldn't be important to any buyer is bonkers - the idea that Broughton's view would be unbiased is also bonkers - so if they haven't been spoken too - if they haven't been consulted any bidders are likely to need to do their own work - and that work could scupper any deal - so what does that suggest about the idea of selecting the best bid not the highest? SOS has 6,000 members but it has 30,000 followers on face book - the least it is is a lobby group that can sway public opinion, the most it could be is a catalyst for mobilising the entire fan base -

It suggests the best bid is going to be based around some form of business assessment a business model that makes no allowance for fan pressure or input - but gets Hicks money for architect plans - not for the benefit of LFC because those plans are shite but because it gets Hicks more money - it'll be based on how the deal is structured not on whether there is an element of fan representation (which our government, uefa, fifa and the FA all say is deseriable and in some cases essential) - in other words the bloke is talking bollocks and if he's talking bollocks about this he's probbaly talking bollocks about everything

he wants to come across as a business man intent on a sale but his remit could just as easily be to string out a sale for ever - did Chelsea court Abramovich or City their buyers or did those guys see the opportunity and step in - people with the type of wealth we are looking for have their own researchers to find them business opportunities - they dont need cold selling -  we are being sold a crock of shite with enough information to make it plausible -  we've been fed it so many times - even if there were reasonable people out there interested dont underestimate how unreasonable our two cowboys are - its  a perfect scam to buy them more time to leech more money and when low and behold  another deal falls through who'd have thought it  -

[Red Genius]

I'll have a bash based on what I've leant here:

Its when a company is unable to meet its obligations, but the creditor (to who the oustadanding obligation is owed - RBS in our instance) rather then take the company into formal administration - ie either take ownership of the company or arrange its sale via an adminstrator, leaves the current owners in place on the understanding that they will sell the business or assets to pay off the creditors at that point.

Its basically a face saving exercise rather then go through the hassle and embarassment of formal adminstration.

Past examples have been mentioned on here a few months back, but I dont think they were with names we would easily recognise.

Hopefully someone with more knowledge on the subject will provide a better definition but thats my starter for 10.

In addition to this, banks generally keep a distinct seperation between holding a stake in the business and actually taking it onboard and running it. Remember all the bank want is to be paid back in any means possible. I suspect much of the reason rafa got walked out the back door was down to rafa being difficult and not following the party line. In that the club is in a state of self preservation, as a result a cautious and conservative approach to running the club by our bankers gave rafa no guarantees as the  two held entirely different priorities. Problems arose when the bankers running our show lied to rafa knowing he commanded the opinion of a growing minority (sos) probably felt this would kill two birds with one stone. How wrong they were

[tamadic]

Kinda remember that MB said the club is accepting bid starting July 15th... still doesn't have any publish yet?

[shelovesyou]

Kinda remember that MB said the club is accepting bid starting July 15th... still doesn't have any publish yet?

He actually said he would expect a 1st round of bids to perhaps come in around mid july. No specific dates were given and was said in a way to leave lots of room for maneuver.

[Billy1561]

He actually said he would expect a 1st round of bids to perhaps come in around mid july. No specific dates were given and was said in a way to leave lots of room for maneuver.

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.