23 Oct 2010

LFC POINTS DEDUCTION: How this site got it right again (and refused to jump on the doom bandwagon)

During the latter stages of the Hicks and Gillett era, the doom and gloom brigade (led by LFC websites) was collectively foaming at the mouth over the (aparently inevitable) 9 point deduction that was heading the club's way. Amid this ridiculous negative hysteria, this site was the *only* source either on or offline that consistently argued that administration was never going to happen. It obviously didn't happen, and as Premier League Chief Richard Scudamore has now confirmed, the club was never at risk...just as this site argued all along.

In a recent radio interview, Scudamore explained:

"The club was never at risk. There were bidders for it and the outcome was always what was likely to happen. I am not sure that (the level of debt) was going to threaten the existence of Liverpool Football Club".

This is precisely what I was arguing for months, as the following articles prove:

15 May 2010: Liverpool FC's debt: The lies, misinformation and exaggeration exposed

"I have no doubt that Liverpool FC will be fine: The club will get sold. New investment will be found. A new stadium will be built. The commercial side of the club will continue to improve".

I was attacked for holding this view but it was correct: despite all the ridiculous doom and gloom, the club DID get sold; new investment WAS found; the commercial side of the club HAS continued to improve, and all indications suggest that a new stadium will be built, or Anfield will be redeveloped.

24 May 2010: Anyone who sensationalises Liverpool FC's debt level is - quite simply - Anti-LFC

"The bottom line is Liverpool's debts lie squarely on the shoulders of Hicks and Gillett. If and when RBS take over the club (highly unlikely - the club will be sold before this happens), it is the holding company (i.e Kop Football Ltd) that will be forced into administration, not LFCAGL (i.e. the club). In any event, the possibility of a big point deduction is extremely remote, as the Premier League will (probably) blame H+G, not the club".


Again, everything stated here came true. RBS didn't take over, but if they had it would have been KFL that went into administration, not the club. And as Mr Scudamore has condfirmed, a points deduction was never going to happen.

6 June 2010: The future is BRIGHT for Liverpool FC. Ignore the 'Doom and Gloom' agenda

"There’s no point obsessing over the current financial situation. It will play itself out, and everything will resolve itself in time. Liverpool will not wither and die; the club will not end up like Leeds (!), and it will not enter administration/suffer a 9 point deduction".


Again, I argued that a points deduction was not going to happen. A couple of months later, I outlined the legal position re the 9 point deduction to once again hammer home the point that it was not likely to happen:

10 October 2010: LFC POINTS DEDUCTION: The legal position (and why it's not likely to happen)

I just don't see any logical reason why the Premier League would dock Liverpool points. There is no automatic need to do it, and a deliberate CHOICE would need to be made to make it happen. As I've argued previously, it is not in the best interests of the PL, or English football for Liverpool to be penalised in this manner.

This site has a record of consistently getting things right. The pattern is always the same:

* I argue that X and Y is/is not likely to happen.
* Cue abuse/attacks from people/other websites who refuse to consider the possibility.
* What I argued ends up coming true.

There are people all over the net lying and casting aspersions against this site for no other reason than the opinions put forward here do not conform to the status quo. And when I posted about how LFC would be okay/there would be no administration etc, I had shedloads of people telling me I was wrong. This is why I feel compelled to highlight times (like this) when this site gets it right.

I don't care how this comes across - it's important that fans know there is one LFC source out there that does not jump on bandwagons and tries to look at things objectively.

People may not like me, this site, or the views expressed here (makes no difference to me either way - I'm not in this to win a popularity contest), but if you want the FACTS about LFC, and if you want to know the truth about the business and financial side of the club, then this is clearly the only site to visit.

Jaimie Kanwar


23 comments:

  1. None of the Liverpool sites I went said it was going to happen either.  Typical shite journalism.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yet again you are misrepresenting yourself and other people - to claim success in predicting an outcome where you have blatantly got it wrong.

    Scudamore's comment relates purely to the chances of finding a buyer.  However RBS have had for some time the right to call in H&G's debts and therefore could have at any time placed the holding company into administration - with a  resultant 9 point discussion.

    You are mixing up two separate issues and claiming that the low risk of one outcome happening mitigates the other. The fact is that  RBS only decided against putting the Holding company into admin, once H&G were strong armed into having an independent Chairman of the Directors Board imposed - so that H&G could no longer outvote any reasonable offer for the club.  

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hey Jamie,

    I have said it before and I will say it again - not all of us may agree with all your views, however most of us greatly appreciate your tireless efforts to provide substance through serious investigation.

    So, keep it up and don't let the isolated comments get you down.

    Cheers,

    Voland

    ReplyDelete
  4. In case it's not clear I was talking about 'respected' news sources when I mentioned shite journalism.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Jamie in all fairness I think you should add that it wasn't all websites that were claiming that the 9 point deduction was a cert,it was a minority, in fact I don't recall seeing one site claiming it was a cert.

    I did see a number of threads saying that we were going to be deducted 9 points, but that was not down to the sites now was it? 

    I think you should refrase your header.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The_unattractiveness_of_self_importance4:03 pm, October 24, 2010

    Rather than seeing it as a statement of fact, Im sure that most intelligent people would probably conclude that Scudamore's comments have a lot more to do with defending himself from the barrage of abuse that he and his organisation came under, for their silence during the height of the ownership saga.

    Peter Scudamore is not exactly known for his honesty and integrity is he?

    ReplyDelete
  7. The_unattractiveness_of_self_importance4:03 pm, October 24, 2010

    Rather than seeing it as a statement of fact, Im sure that most intelligent people would probably conclude that Scudamore's comments have a lot more to do with defending himself from the barrage of abuse that he and his organisation came under, for their silence during the height of the ownership saga.

    Peter Scudamore is not exactly known for his honesty and integrity is he?

    ReplyDelete
  8. The_unattractiveness_of_self_importance4:03 pm, October 24, 2010

    Rather than seeing it as a statement of fact, Im sure that most intelligent people would probably conclude that Scudamore's comments have a lot more to do with defending himself from the barrage of abuse that he and his organisation came under, for their silence during the height of the ownership saga.

    Peter Scudamore is not exactly known for his honesty and integrity is he?

    ReplyDelete
  9. The_unattractiveness_of_self_importance4:04 pm, October 24, 2010

    Rather than seeing it as a statement of fact, Im sure that most intelligent people would probably conclude that Scudamore's comments have a lot more to do with defending himself from the barrage of abuse that he and his organisation came under, for their silence during the height of the ownership saga.

    Peter Scudamore is not exactly known for his honesty and integrity is he?

    ReplyDelete
  10. The_unattractiveness_of_self_importance4:04 pm, October 24, 2010

    Rather than seeing it as a statement of fact, Im sure that most intelligent people would probably conclude that Scudamore's comments have a lot more to do with defending himself from the barrage of abuse that he and his organisation came under, for their silence during the height of the ownership saga.

    Peter Scudamore is not exactly known for his honesty and integrity is he?

    ReplyDelete
  11. The_unnatractivess_of_self_importance4:06 pm, October 24, 2010

    I apologise. my browser started doind strange things when I pressed send.

    ReplyDelete
  12. You are just the best. My hero.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I would suggest this site was the only one to get it wrong.  This site was the only one to say that it categorically could never happen. Never say never as they say.

    Most reasoned sites presented the possibility as a slim one, but nevertheless a possibility (and who could have predicted all that went on that week).  

    That fact that it did not happen does not mean that it could not have happened.  And Scudamore seems slightly less convinced than you.  He's say this was the "likely" outcome.

    Its almost laughable that you are now bathing in self-congratulations based on a quote that in no way endorses the hard definite black and white stance this site took.   
    <span><span><span><span>
    </span></span></span></span>

    ReplyDelete
  14. Self-congratulation.... the only congratulation Jaimie can get!!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Jaimie,
    Why don't you do an article about how you got it right about Dalgish?!
    Or how you got it right about Pique?!
    (or maybe explain why those articles are not on your site anymore!!!)

    ReplyDelete
  16. Haha. Made me laugh that did :-D

    ReplyDelete
  17. Jaimie didn't you argue that we weren't going ot get any point deducted even if we went into administration? The way i read it coming to the eventful Friday that if we couldn't sell the club and if RBS called in the loan we would have been deducted 9 points.

    Not like we would even know that for sure as the PL never came out to make a statement. All we can conclude from todays comments is that old Scudy thought we would never go into administration

    ReplyDelete
  18. Typical goalpost shifting by the master of spin. Nothing will negate your tacit support of Hicks & Gillett and your constant attacks on supporter groups who rallied against them.

    ReplyDelete
  19. This entire portion of absurd gloating is based on your guess that the club would be sold, nothing more. Nothing else of what you said was in any way insightful or correct in the face of criticism, nothing else has been validated. The sum of what you got right was this: LFC will be sold. That's it.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Jaimie is a Kanwar11:11 am, October 25, 2010

    How come you removed all the comments which were negative about you just leaving those that make you look important? How insecure are you?

    ReplyDelete
  21. Nickname, no we wouldn't have, in my opinion, been deducted points had we gone into admin. Or at least if we did, we would have almost certainly won on appeal. You would need to read Jaimie's full article on the subject but basically PL rules on the 9 point deduction are more focused\targeted towards clubs who have traded beyond their means which LFC had not.

    Jaimie, all this said, the guest above who referred to your relentless 'self congratulation' does have a point! 

    ReplyDelete
  22. Comment from Roy himself:

    "It is a very different situation to the one I found myself in at the beginning. There was talk then of staving off administration and having to let players go"

    Doesn't sound like the rosy picture JK was trying to convince us of. Tom Hicks was completely against selling the club and had he held on then I think we would have seen cost-cutting measures until he managed to re-finance. Unless JK is telling us that he somehow knew the outcome of the high court decision, something he himself said looked 50/50, his assurance that the club would be sold and everything would work out was nothing more than a guess. 

    ReplyDelete
  23. Hodgson doesn't say *who* was saying such things though; he could just be referring to the press. Anyway, what's your point?  None of that happened; both Purslow and Richard Scudamore have since said that the club was at no real risk; no administration' no cost cutting; this is a non-point.

    ReplyDelete