Owners

Remove this Banner Ad

chef said:
Click to expand...


I don't like having them around if they are looking to maximise their return on the asset. Kinda explains the refusal to sign a midfielder that Jurg wants. The way they see it is it won't add any real value to the club so why bother?

I'm so jelly of Boehly even if he was a bit too hands on initially.
 
Zidane98 said:
I don't like having them around if they are looking to maximise their return on the asset. Kinda explains the refusal to sign a midfielder that Jurg wants. The way they see it is it won't add any real value to the club so why bother?

I'm so jelly of Boehly even if he was a bit too hands on initially.
Click to expand...

Surely if they sold to someone who valued the club at less than that, the new owner wouldn't see it as worth investing in heavily either?
 
SM said:
Surely if they sold to someone who valued the club at less than that, the new owner wouldn't see it as worth investing in heavily either?
Click to expand...

I would imagine any new owner would have to agree to further investment as part of the deal - just like Boehly had to after buying Chelsea for 2.5b.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Zidane98 said:
I would imagine any new owner would have to agree to further investment as part of the deal - just like Boehly had to after buying Chelsea for 2.5b.
Click to expand...

Why would they have to do that? Who did Boehly 'have to' agree that with? What a ridiculous suggestion.
 
SM said:
Why would they have to do that? Who did Boehly 'have to' agree that with? What a ridiculous suggestion.
Click to expand...

FSG have the suppprters trust on the board. They cant just dump the club on anyone who coughs up 2.7 billion. There is a responsibility to ensure the new owner does the right thing.

This is why Boehly has an obligation to invest a further 1.5 billion into Chelsea following his purchase of the club for 2.5 billion.

So not a ridiculous suggestion at all.
 
Zidane98 said:
FSG have the suppprters trust on the board. They cant just dump the club on anyone who coughs up 2.7 billion. There is a responsibility to ensure the new owner does the right thing.

This is why Boehly has an obligation to invest a further 1.5 billion into Chelsea following his purchase of the club for 2.5 billion.

So not a ridiculous suggestion at all.
Click to expand...

Boehly committed to a certain level of spend to beat out a competitor's bid, if no one is offering to buy Liverpool at the price that means there's no competition, someone can just offer what they want and if FSG accept it then that's that.
 
SM said:
Boehly committed to a certain level of spend to beat out a competitor's bid, if no one is offering to buy Liverpool at the price that means there's no competition, someone can just offer what they want and if FSG accept it then that's that.
Click to expand...

Well no it doesn't work like that. The supporters trust have a say. Potential new owners have to go through the fit & proper persons test.
 
Zidane98 said:
Well no it doesn't work like that. The supporters trust have a say. Potential new owners have to go through the fit & proper persons test.
Click to expand...

You think the fit & proper persons test has a box marked "Will you promised to spend a billion pounds on a new midfield"?
 
SM said:
You think the fit & proper persons test has a box marked "Will you promised to spend a billion pounds on a new midfield"?
Click to expand...

No it doesn't. FSG can't turn the club over to a random African dictator though all because he is paying them the most money. The supporters trust are very much involved in the sale process. They've got a duty of care to make sure the new owner is a responsible entity. In the case of Chelsea it was a forced sale organised by the government. Therefore the government had to do due diligence to ensure it couldn't be blamed for forcing a sale to an incompetent owner ruining the club. If that happened the legal implications would be enormous. Ie if you want to buy the club you have to be prepared to invest x amount on y after the sale has been completed.
 
Zidane98 said:
No it doesn't. FSG can't turn the club over to a random African dictator though all because he is paying them the most money. The supporters trust are very much involved in the sale process. They've got a duty of care to make sure the new owner is a responsible entity. In the case of Chelsea it was a forced sale organised by the government. Therefore the government had to do due diligence to ensure it couldn't be blamed for forcing a sale to an incompetent owner ruining the club. If that happened the legal implications would be enormous. Ie if you want to buy the club you have to be prepared to invest x amount on y after the sale has been completed.
Click to expand...
That's a given but there's not a set number they sign off on spending.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Zidane98 said:
No it doesn't. FSG can't turn the club over to a random African dictator though all because he is paying them the most money. The supporters trust are very much involved in the sale process. They've got a duty of care to make sure the new owner is a responsible entity. In the case of Chelsea it was a forced sale organised by the government. Therefore the government had to do due diligence to ensure it couldn't be blamed for forcing a sale to an incompetent owner ruining the club. If that happened the legal implications would be enormous. Ie if you want to buy the club you have to be prepared to invest x amount on y after the sale has been completed.
Click to expand...

That's all well and true but utterly irrelevant to the original point that if no one is interested in Liverpool at their asking price, then if they do find someone who will buy it there's no need to promise huge investment to take the club off their hands, regardless of what the Supporters Trust wants. Of course they'll come in and promise a lot of good stuff but it doesn't guarantee any particular level of spending on the squad.
 
Jatz said:
That's a given but there's not a set number they sign off on spending.
Click to expand...
www.abc.net.au

Chelsea to be sold for $7.41b to group led by LA Dodgers co-owner

A consortium led by LA Dodgers part-owner Todd Boehly wins the bid to acquire English Premier League football club Chelsea in a deal worth $7.41 billion.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au
This is just one of many articles but it was part of the sale they'd have to reinvest 1.75B into the club and not to able to sell or take dividends for 10 years after buying, this was on top of the 2.5B to purchase the club. This was Romans condition and all the tenders new this before submitting their offers to the Raine Group who handled the sale.
 
chef said:
www.abc.net.au

Chelsea to be sold for $7.41b to group led by LA Dodgers co-owner

A consortium led by LA Dodgers part-owner Todd Boehly wins the bid to acquire English Premier League football club Chelsea in a deal worth $7.41 billion.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au
This is just one of many articles but it was part of the sale they'd have to reinvest 1.75B into the club and not to able to sell or take dividends for 10 years after buying, this was on top of the 2.5B to purchase the club. This was Romans condition and all the tenders new this before submitting their offers to the Raine Group who handled the sale.
Click to expand...
Wasn't that because Roman wasn't going to make the money from the sale anyway?

If FSG have a choice of selling the club for £2bn with a firm commitment to spend £1bn after the sale, or just sell the club for £3bn with no commitment I'm pretty confident of the choice they'll make.
 
moomba said:
Wasn't that because Roman wasn't going to make the money from the sale anyway?

If FSG have a choice of selling the club for £2bn with a firm commitment to spend £1bn after the sale, or just sell the club for £3bn with no commitment I'm pretty confident of the choice they'll make.
Click to expand...
Yeah, he gave away the club and wiped the debt pretty much.

I doubt a sale like ours will ever happen again and they were unique circumstances.
 
SM said:
That's all well and true but utterly irrelevant to the original point that if no one is interested in Liverpool at their asking price, then if they do find someone who will buy it there's no need to promise huge investment to take the club off their hands, regardless of what the Supporters Trust wants. Of course they'll come in and promise a lot of good stuff but it doesn't guarantee any particular level of spending on the squad.
Click to expand...
It will go to a vote.

Which if there's 7 on the board and the supporters trust is 1 vote, and will go 6-1 in favour of the sale. Supporters trust serve a purpose being on the board but ultimately dont have much pull on big matters like this
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top