7 Jun 2010

The 'spade in the ground' myth: PROOF that Hicks + Gillett did not lie about the stadium

When it comes to over-used, inaccurate Liverpool fan clich├ęs, the ‘spade in the ground’ argument against Tom Hicks and George Gillett is the worst. You can guarantee that during any discussion of the Owners, someone will say ‘but they promised a spade in the ground in 60 days!’ Apparently, the fact that the stadium was not started in that timeframe means H+G are liars, and forever deserving of criticism and ridicule. The truth is, neither Hicks nor Gillett lied about the stadium, and I will explain why.

George Gillett made the following comment in February 2007:

"The first spade will start going into the ground on that [stadium] project by March [2007]."

Despite the way the rabid anti-Owner brigade portray it, the 'Spade in the ground' comment was not an absolute promise. It was a sincere and honest statement of intent. Why would it not be? What possible motivation was there to lie? What did the Owners have to gain from lying?

At the time Gillett made the comment, a stadium plan (led by Rick Parry) was already in place, and the ‘spade in the ground’ comment was made in the belief that the existing plan was ready to go.

However, the architects brought in to examine the plans discovered that stadium design was already obsolete. As such, it had to be redesigned, and that meant restarting the complex redesign/approval process.

Here is an email I received from Tom Hicks last year explaining this:



If H+G are guilty of anything, it is misplaced optimism, and failing to thoroughly check the existing stadium plans before making the ‘spade in the ground’ statement. Factor into that the recession and turmoil in the financial markets, and it becomes very clear why the stadium has been delayed.

In the meantime, the club has continued extensive work behind the scenes on the new stadium, and over 50m has been spent on the complex design and planning process. Why would all this money be spent if the Owners had no intention of making the new stadium a reality? The club accounts verify the progress of the stadium over the years, and here are snippets from the accounts to illustrate this:

2007
2008
2009

So – there are very clear and legitimate reasons why the stadium has not been started yet. However, despite these reasons, fans (spurred on by the deliberate misinformation campaign in the media) are hell-bent on twisting the truth and ignoring the facts. Quite incredulously, that includes denying the impact of the worldwide credit crunch (!), which according to some fans, should have made no difference to the building of the stadium (!).

For obvious reasons, it would have been madness to start building a stadium during a recession. And if the building work had been started (and the club began hemorrhaging money as a result), fans would be castigating H+G for such a reckless act.

What is the big deal anyway? H+G were perhaps a little optimistic with their original estimate but why should they be labelled 'Liars' for ever more as a result of that? The insane zeal to hanging onto *anything* that might place the Owners in a bad light is really something to behold.

Yes, Gillett got confused when later asked about the stadium - he denied making the 'spade in the ground comment'. So what? That doesn't change the fact that what he originally said was declared in good faith. Gillett was being 'interviewed' by a confrontational SOS member - is it not possible he just misremembered? Why would he deliberately lie about something that could be verified in 5 seconds flat?

As a comparison: A few months ago, Rafa Benitez publicly guaranteed that Liverpool would finish in 4th place. That didn’t happen. Should we now label him a liar for the next three years?! No. At the Benitez made that statement, I’m sure he had an honest personal belief that it could be achieved. Same goes for H+G and the stadium.

In any event, the timeframe was clearly unrealistic anyway: show me one club that has announced and started the stadium building process in 60 days. It has never been done. As a comparison, consider Arsenal's new stadium.

* The new stadium announcement was made in 1999
* The projected completion date was 2003.
* Arsenal missed the deadline by THREE YEARS.

Does that mean Arsenal fans were lied to?

NO.

H+G have been at the club for a little over 3 years; Arsenal's stadium took 7 years to complete.

H+G did NOT lie about the stadium. The only lies about the stadium come from fans and the media. Designing, planning and building a stadium is a very complex process; it takes time, money and the mutual agreement of lots of competing stakeholders.

The worst thing is the fans who robotically repeat the ‘spade in the ground’ accusation without having any knowledge of the context or history behind the comment. As long as it’s something to throw at the owners, it’s mission accomplished, it seems. The details and the truth don’t seem to matter.

As I’ve outlined above, there are legitimate, unambiguous reasons why the stadium didn’t go ahead. Endlessly moaning about the 'spade in the ground’ comment is like grown adults complaining to their parents that they were lied to about the existence of Santa Claus.

No doubt, I will be accused of being a 'Yank stooge' or whatever. The intelligent, non-brainwashed fans out there will see that I am - as always - concerned only with fairness and the truth.

As I have stated over and over again, I want Hicks and Gillett to leave the club like everyone else, but I do not want to be part of campaign that seeks to achieve that with lies, deception, misinformation and deliberate twisting of the facts.

Attack the Owners with facts and evidence, not lies. Don't just perpetuate a lie because it fits in with your overall agenda.

As fans, we should be better than this, shouldn't we?



231 comments:

  1. Are you still in touch with mr hicks or is he your contact in the club.

    The reason i ask this is because i believe this site is quite good for a
    debate. but if this is your contact it is a one-sided debate and i know
    you say you want them out at regular intervals, So why defend them.
    How about an article on the mis-management of the club and how they
    dont speak to each other amongst other things.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Costa D. Yercosta3:27 pm, June 07, 2010

    I totally believe that both of our owners, Mr. Tom Hicks and Mr. George Gillett, are honest people who really want to take LFC a step forward.  They proved it by taking a very wise decision to step down Rafael Benitez.  These two men and their families have been treated unfairly and I am confident that they will show their real intentions and long-term commitment to the team by:
    1. keeping Steven Gerrard and Fernando Torres on board
    2. hiring a high  caliber manager (Guus Hiddink, Felix Magath, Louis van Gaal, Marcello Lippi, Fabio Capello) and supporting him financially as he can bring the right players at Anfield (something that Rafael Benitez didn't do!). 

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hilarious.

    Just because your pen pal says something doesn't necessarily make it true.

    £50million spent on the stadium and not one thing to show for it. Since we are using other clubs as a barometer of time spent building a stadium. How much did theirs cost in total? Stadium of Light was under £100million for example. They get a stadium and we get pretty pictures and promises.

    I suppose it was the crash of the financial markets which made them put the debt onto the club wasn't it*? Even though they said they wouldn't.

    *Ps it wasn't before you try to argue that. The credit crunch really started at least 6 months after they took over (about 5.5 months after they put the debt onto the club).

    Change your tagline - Selective critical realism.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I am curious to know if you are paid by Messr's Hicks & Gillette to write this propaganda?

    ReplyDelete
  5. What you say is correct. The worldwide derth of finance has been underestimated in a lot of peoples assessment of the Hicks Gillet reign. All the rules regarding finance availability have fundamentally changed. Debt is no longer able to be rolled around from one competing lending institution to another. We were all caught at the wrong time in the economic mess. What we need is someone with available finance that can put us back on our feet and be able to take a medium to long term view on their investment. With such a big fan base we can be self sufficient but need rid of our (their) toxic debt first.

    ReplyDelete
  6. NO.  I am not paid by *anyone* for anything.

    ReplyDelete
  7. You have just stooped to a new low Kanwar. You Tube clear evidence both you and Gillett and Hicks are telling a few fibs. Keep it up since Rafa has left everyone is really seeing what your aim is.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Fred - I have a number of contacts at the club, not just Hicks.

    And I won't write an article about mismaanagement of the club because I don't believe that's true.  Mismanagement of the football side of things is a bigger problem, and that has been rectified.

    The demonisation of the Owners is fan and media led, and like the 'Spade in the ground/ thing, it's mostly lies, exaggeration and misinformation.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think most people are aware the financial market played a part in the cancellation of building work on the stadium, I believe it's one of the more forgivable mistakes H&G made.

    However, Hicks continual "boasting" in the American press that he's set to make a fortune from the sale of our Club cannot go un-noticed.

    We've had substantial debts levied against the Club - debts they promised wouldn't exist. Hicks made a point of saying their takeover wouldn't be and isn't in the same vein as the Glazer's takeover of MU, he clearly thought the majority of our supporters wouldn't investigate those wafer-thin claims. The way in which H&G have run our Club is almost identical to that of MU, loaned money to buy the Club and then leveraged those loans against the asset.

    I can forgive H&G for speaking to quickly, I can't forgive them for everything else they've done to us.

    You can continue to fawn over Hicks attention of you like Jaimie, but I think you're only cementing the already firm opinion with most LFC supporters that you are in fact a Hicks apologist.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I think most people are aware the financial market played a part in the cancellation of building work on the stadium, I believe it's one of the more forgivable mistakes H&G made.

    However, Hicks continual "boasting" in the American press that he's set to make a fortune from the sale of our Club cannot go un-noticed.

    We've had substantial debts levied against the Club - debts they promised wouldn't exist. Hicks made a point of saying their takeover wouldn't be and isn't in the same vein as the Glazer's takeover of MU, he clearly thought the majority of our supporters wouldn't investigate those wafer-thin claims. The way in which H&G have run our Club is almost identical to that of MU, loaned money to buy the Club and then leveraged those loans against the asset.

    I can forgive H&G for speaking to quickly, I can't forgive them for everything else they've done to us.

    You can continue to fawn over Hicks attention of you like Jaimie, but I think you're only cementing the already firm opinion with most LFC supporters that you are in fact a Hicks apologist.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I think most people are aware the financial market played a part in the cancellation of building work on the stadium, I believe it's one of the more forgivable mistakes H&G made.

    However, Hicks continual "boasting" in the American press that he's set to make a fortune from the sale of our Club cannot go un-noticed.

    We've had substantial debts levied against the Club - debts they promised wouldn't exist. Hicks made a point of saying their takeover wouldn't be and isn't in the same vein as the Glazer's takeover of MU, he clearly thought the majority of our supporters wouldn't investigate those wafer-thin claims. The way in which H&G have run our Club is almost identical to that of MU, loaned money to buy the Club and then leveraged those loans against the asset.

    I can forgive H&G for speaking to quickly, I can't forgive them for everything else they've done to us.

    You can continue to fawn over Hicks attention of you like Jaimie, but I think you're only cementing the already firm opinion with most LFC supporters that you are in fact a Hicks apologist.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Could you contact him again to get some more up to date timelines please? It all seems to have gone a little quiet regarding the stadium.

    Also, where do you think the funding from the stadium will come from? I think many fans could accept our level of debt if the stadium was on the way. The fact that we are saddled with debt and still have to find money for the stadium is what makes the current ownership so disastrous.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Fred - I have/I've had a number of contacts at the club over the years, not just Hicks. 
     
    And I won't write an article about mismaanagement of the club because I don't believe that's true.  Mismanagement of the football side of things is a bigger problem, and that has been rectified. 
     
    The demonisation of the Owners is fan and media led, and like the 'Spade in the ground/ thing, it's mostly lies, exaggeration and misinformation.

    I don't just accept what one of my sources tells me without question.  I've very discriminating, and like I do on this site, I question and probe; and if I don't think it's true - or someone is just saying something to advance a personal agenda - I don't post it, or reference it.

    I have no personal allegiance to any one individual: my allegiance is to the CLUB.  The more people understand this, the more they will understand where I'm coming from.

    And as I have show recently, I have been sverely critical of Hicks and Gillett in the past:

    http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2010/05/liverpool-kopcom-and-alleged-tom.html

    ReplyDelete
  14. When our fellow liverpool supports STOP playing the blame game, we might be able to get back to our job ... being 12th man.

    The last few seasons have been a waste for many reasons, one is our lack of real positive support .. Its call belief!

    We as fans have let our club down badly and its time we got back to what we are known for and are world class at ... supporting our team.

    Its simple really, we talk negative about the club, in any way, we take away confidence, the belief diluted ... its easy to blame others, its warrior like to stand tall and drive our team on to greatness ...no matter what !

    Those who can't take the pressure, please say nothing as your pulling this great club apart and I do believe some forums have helped to push our club away from success .... with bullsh*t made-up stories and negative responses ...

    We will have a good season next year and we will finish top four

    RR
    (And of course I know nothing .. only supported the club for over 45 years)

    ReplyDelete
  15. No wonder you have time to do this, no job!

    (joking)

    ReplyDelete
  16. Whatever.  Fair-minded fans will see that's not the truth.  And tell me: how can I be a Hicks apologist when I post severely critical stiff like this about him:

    http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2010/05/liverpool-kopcom-and-alleged-tom.html

    I don't fawn over attention at all: I'm interested in the *information* only.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Youtube evidence of what, exactly?  Did you not read the article?  The fact that Gillett made the 'spade in the ground' comment is not in question here.  He did.  The reasoning and context behind the comment is what's important here.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Did Hicks not lie about two weeks ago to Sky Sports News when he said Rafa would get a sizeable transfer budget to spend this summer?

    Let me guess what your defence of Hicks is , the 6 million pay off was the transfer budget Hicks was talking about so in fact he was telling the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Indirect free kick3:38 pm, June 07, 2010

    If H & G had not put the debt of buying the club on the club then they could've funded the stadium with loans for the new stadium. I don't think anyone would have an issue with paying off loans for the stadium. But to borrow money to purchase the club and then look to further borrow money to build the stadium would be bad business practice in anyone's book taking into account that football clubs are not very profitable.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I have a job that I love, thanks :)

    ReplyDelete
  21. Cuckoo Cuckoo.
    Hicks and Gillette promised not to load the club with debt a la Glazers and Man U.
    David Moores could have borrowed the equivalent of Liverpool's current debt, built the stadium and still owned the club.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Phil - Hicks did not say RAFA would get transfer money.  He said:

    "We have no intention of selling any of our top players and we have a substantial transfer budget in place".

    Where does he say that Benitez will be the one to spend it?  There is money in place for a new manager, not Benitez.

    ReplyDelete
  23. how exactly has our "Mismanagement of the football side of things" been rectified?

    surely that remains to be seen?

    ReplyDelete
  24. This is standard business practice.  The thing you're ignoring again is the impact of the worldwide credit crunch.  if that had not happened, there woudln've have been a problem.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Gillett " Shovel should be in the ground in the next 60 days or so" Parry " Yeah more or less" nods "Yeah" in agreement. Gillett "and er we intend to follow that and er i think you will see the begining of a  great big swimming pool being dug out in stanley park relatively soon, we are fully supportive of the stanley park development plan and the building of a facility that we hope will be the greatest faciltiy in this sport.. er and 1 of the reasons for that is we operate, tom and i operate some of the most successful buildings in the world" his lies there continue it's like jackanory. These are quotes from his own mouth not fiction like you would have people beleive, Mr - Hicks or Gillett - Kanwar. Realtively soon is not 3 years down the line and counting. LIVERPOOLKOP OUT. who do you even support not LFC by the looks of things so change website name. One of the successful buildings is Scumville Texas.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMyKZjxmjQE

    ReplyDelete
  26. Yes, you're right.  But removing Benitez is a step in the right direction.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I like your articles Jaimie, they are well thought out, well researched and well articulated. I agree with you on this point but we have been lied to by the owners in the most important aspect which is putting their purchasing debt on the club which is probably the only reason the club cannot get the financing to build the new stadium. Also, Tom Hicks mentioned that this summer should have been "massive" for us in the transfer market, I really can't see that happening...can you? The fact of the matter is most of the blame must rest on the shoulders of those two buffoons Moores and Parry. It was on their watch that the club declined to a miserable low. You didn't need to do extensive due diligence on H+G. At the time their combined wealth was 2B USD I could have told you without doing any background checks that this was not enough wealth to buy a football club and they had bitten off more than they could chew. Even last week that moron Moores in his article stated that he was assured by Rothschilds investment bank that H+G were good for the money....well of course they would say that you idiot they were appointed by H+G !! and therefore getting paid by them. It was completely in their interest for H+G to complete the transaction. I would mean more fees!

    ReplyDelete
  28. So basically you are saying that all this time, rather than injecting 'critical realism', you are simply a sock-puppet for the owners?

    I'm not sure what constitutes lying in your book, but saying there will be a spade in the ground in 60 days, and then denying you said it but blaming it on your partner, and having your partner deny it was said at all (as the owners are on record as saying) pretty much sounds like lying to me.

    Saying that you will not put the debt on the club, putting the debt on the club, denying you put the debt on the club and then claiming a different amount of debt on the club compared to your published accounts - is that not lying either?

    In terms of the stadium, if the timescales slip, you apologise and then re-plan. But there is no re-planning going on - H&G haven't had any intention of building the stadium once their US businesses fell on hard times. And as for the debt, we will never know, but the debt was placed on the club so soon after stating that it wouldn't be, that we can't help but assume that this was the intention from the start. The alternative would be gross negligence, and you don't get to me a multi-millionaire with that sort of track record.

    H&G know what they are doing; the numbers have yet to be finalised, but they will undoubtedly leave the club with a handsome profit for effectively zero outlay, and it is no concern of theirs that they will leave the club crippled.

    ReplyDelete
  29. So basically you are saying that all this time, rather than injecting 'critical realism', you are simply a sock-puppet for the owners?

    I'm not sure what constitutes lying in your book, but saying there will be a spade in the ground in 60 days, and then denying you said it but blaming it on your partner, and having your partner deny it was said at all (as the owners are on record as saying) pretty much sounds like lying to me.

    Saying that you will not put the debt on the club, putting the debt on the club, denying you put the debt on the club and then claiming a different amount of debt on the club compared to your published accounts - is that not lying either?

    In terms of the stadium, if the timescales slip, you apologise and then re-plan. But there is no re-planning going on - H&G haven't had any intention of building the stadium once their US businesses fell on hard times. And as for the debt, we will never know, but the debt was placed on the club so soon after stating that it wouldn't be, that we can't help but assume that this was the intention from the start. The alternative would be gross negligence, and you don't get to me a multi-millionaire with that sort of track record.

    H&G know what they are doing; the numbers have yet to be finalised, but they will undoubtedly leave the club with a handsome profit for effectively zero outlay, and it is no concern of theirs that they will leave the club crippled.

    ReplyDelete
  30. for me its simple i dont like the two american idiots and im also begining to dislike you.i dont for one second care if the feeling is mutual.you start of this silly post trying to correct what these to idiots have been doing to this club we have been supporting for all these years.you should look at the baord  rush,souness,phil t all dicrediting them.the lies had moores come out and break his silence over the sale of the club.lie lieslies

    ReplyDelete
  31. So basically you are saying that all this time, rather than injecting 'critical realism', you are simply a sock-puppet for the owners?

    I'm not sure what constitutes lying in your book, but saying there will be a spade in the ground in 60 days, and then denying you said it but blaming it on your partner, and having your partner deny it was said at all (as the owners are on record as saying) pretty much sounds like lying to me.

    Saying that you will not put the debt on the club, putting the debt on the club, denying you put the debt on the club and then claiming a different amount of debt on the club compared to your published accounts - is that not lying either?

    In terms of the stadium, if the timescales slip, you apologise and then re-plan. But there is no re-planning going on - H&G haven't had any intention of building the stadium once their US businesses fell on hard times. And as for the debt, we will never know, but the debt was placed on the club so soon after stating that it wouldn't be, that we can't help but assume that this was the intention from the start. The alternative would be gross negligence, and you don't get to me a multi-millionaire with that sort of track record.

    H&G know what they are doing; the numbers have yet to be finalised, but they will undoubtedly leave the club with a handsome profit for effectively zero outlay, and it is no concern of theirs that they will leave the club crippled.

    ReplyDelete
  32. So basically you are saying that all this time, rather than injecting 'critical realism', you are simply a sock-puppet for the owners?

    I'm not sure what constitutes lying in your book, but saying there will be a spade in the ground in 60 days, and then denying you said it but blaming it on your partner, and having your partner deny it was said at all (as the owners are on record as saying) pretty much sounds like lying to me.

    Saying that you will not put the debt on the club, putting the debt on the club, denying you put the debt on the club and then claiming a different amount of debt on the club compared to your published accounts - is that not lying either?

    In terms of the stadium, if the timescales slip, you apologise and then re-plan. But there is no re-planning going on - H&G haven't had any intention of building the stadium once their US businesses fell on hard times. And as for the debt, we will never know, but the debt was placed on the club so soon after stating that it wouldn't be, that we can't help but assume that this was the intention from the start. The alternative would be gross negligence, and you don't get to me a multi-millionaire with that sort of track record.

    H&G know what they are doing; the numbers have yet to be finalised, but they will undoubtedly leave the club with a handsome profit for effectively zero outlay, and it is no concern of theirs that they will leave the club crippled.

    ReplyDelete
  33. "Fair-minded fans will see that's not the truth"?

    What was our debt prior to H&G's arrival? £44m.

    What is it now? £226m+

    What's not true about that Jaimie?

    You say your allegiance is to the CLUB and no individual so tell me Jaimie, have you e-mailed Hicks to ask why we have such a huge debt levied against us when he promised it wouldn't happen?

    How about asking him why he's boasting in the press about the huge profit he's going to make from our sale whilst we the fans suffer?

    How about asking him my no money has been made available for transfers over the past 18 months, or why the manager has turned a profit in the last two transfer windows?

    You claim to only have the CLUB intrests at heart, but you never ask the burning questions with regard to our Ownership, you started a "Rafa Out" Facebook campaign but then call SOS all sorts of derogatory names for doing similar in respect of the Owners!

    Hypocritical to say the least.

    ReplyDelete
  34. So basically you are saying that all this time, rather than injecting 'critical realism', you are simply a sock-puppet for the owners?

    I'm not sure what constitutes lying in your book, but saying there will be a spade in the ground in 60 days, and then denying you said it but blaming it on your partner, and having your partner deny it was said at all (as the owners are on record as saying) pretty much sounds like lying to me.

    Saying that you will not put the debt on the club, putting the debt on the club, denying you put the debt on the club and then claiming a different amount of debt on the club compared to your published accounts - is that not lying either?

    In terms of the stadium, if the timescales slip, you apologise and then re-plan. But there is no re-planning going on - H&G haven't had any intention of building the stadium once their US businesses fell on hard times. And as for the debt, we will never know, but the debt was placed on the club so soon after stating that it wouldn't be, that we can't help but assume that this was the intention from the start. The alternative would be gross negligence, and you don't get to me a multi-millionaire with that sort of track record.

    H&G know what they are doing; the numbers have yet to be finalised, but they will undoubtedly leave the club with a handsome profit for effectively zero outlay, and it is no concern of theirs that they will leave the club crippled.

    ReplyDelete
  35. "Fair-minded fans will see that's not the truth"?

    What was our debt prior to H&G's arrival? £44m.

    What is it now? £226m+

    What's not true about that Jaimie?

    You say your allegiance is to the CLUB and no individual so tell me Jaimie, have you e-mailed Hicks to ask why we have such a huge debt levied against us when he promised it wouldn't happen?

    How about asking him why he's boasting in the press about the huge profit he's going to make from our sale whilst we the fans suffer?

    How about asking him my no money has been made available for transfers over the past 18 months, or why the manager has turned a profit in the last two transfer windows?

    You claim to only have the CLUB intrests at heart, but you never ask the burning questions with regard to our Ownership, you started a "Rafa Out" Facebook campaign but then call SOS all sorts of derogatory names for doing similar in respect of the Owners!

    Hypocritical to say the least.

    ReplyDelete
  36. So basically you are saying that all this time, rather than injecting 'critical realism', you are simply a sock-puppet for the owners?

    I'm not sure what constitutes lying in your book, but saying there will be a spade in the ground in 60 days, and then denying you said it but blaming it on your partner, and having your partner deny it was said at all (as the owners are on record as saying) pretty much sounds like lying to me.

    Saying that you will not put the debt on the club, putting the debt on the club, denying you put the debt on the club and then claiming a different amount of debt on the club compared to your published accounts - is that not lying either?

    In terms of the stadium, if the timescales slip, you apologise and then re-plan. But there is no re-planning going on - H&G haven't had any intention of building the stadium once their US businesses fell on hard times. And as for the debt, we will never know, but the debt was placed on the club so soon after stating that it wouldn't be, that we can't help but assume that this was the intention from the start. The alternative would be gross negligence, and you don't get to me a multi-millionaire with that sort of track record.

    H&G know what they are doing; the numbers have yet to be finalised, but they will undoubtedly leave the club with a handsome profit for effectively zero outlay, and it is no concern of theirs that they will leave the club crippled.

    ReplyDelete
  37. "Fair-minded fans will see that's not the truth"?

    What was our debt prior to H&G's arrival? £44m.

    What is it now? £226m+

    What's not true about that Jaimie?

    You say your allegiance is to the CLUB and no individual so tell me Jaimie, have you e-mailed Hicks to ask why we have such a huge debt levied against us when he promised it wouldn't happen?

    How about asking him why he's boasting in the press about the huge profit he's going to make from our sale whilst we the fans suffer?

    How about asking him my no money has been made available for transfers over the past 18 months, or why the manager has turned a profit in the last two transfer windows?

    You claim to only have the CLUB intrests at heart, but you never ask the burning questions with regard to our Ownership, you started a "Rafa Out" Facebook campaign but then call SOS all sorts of derogatory names for doing similar in respect of the Owners!

    Hypocritical to say the least.

    ReplyDelete
  38. If H&G hadn't broke their promise and laden the club with debt, we could have borrowed, credit crunch or not.
    'Cuckoo' is dead right!

    ReplyDelete
  39. Shanks

    Don't change the subject: we're discussing the Spade in the ground comment here, not the debt on the club.

    I will be posting an article explaining that comment too in the near future.

    In any event, it's clearly pointless debating with you because you persist with blatantly untrue points like 'We've had no transfer funds over the last 18 months'.

    Right.  So Keane, Aquilani, Johnson et al were all free, right?

    ReplyDelete
  40. Ooh Jamie you're letting the cat out the bag!

    Hicks and Gillett pay your wages and the money for this site.

    That's the word on the street and it looks like money on the nose.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Right.  So the fact you don't like the Owners means that you condone lies being spread?  Great approach!

    If you don't like me, that's your right.  The simple solution is to not visit the site, is it not?

    ReplyDelete
  42. What a load of rubbish.  If people want to think that then go ahead.  You might want to consider something though: this site is hosted by Blogger, which means it's FREE.  No bandwidth costs etc.  So I have no running costs for the site.

    Yours is the typical response of someone who prefers to live in ignorance rather than accept the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Just wanted to say, Rafa got sacked for not finishing 4th, can we sack H+G for saying something that didn't happen.

    G got confused? Sounds like he shouldn't be incharge of a big club if he gets that easily confused.

    Isn't there a process call due diligence, i would hope both H+G are astute enough to be able to look at stadium plans and decide whether a stadium is viable or not and whether they could start buiding within 60 days.

    They were unlucky with the recession, but spade in the ground within 60 days, i am afraid it never happened and we are stil waiting, 3 years later.

    Maybe they didn't lie, but it proves to me that they don't really know what they are talking about. H+G please leave.

    ReplyDelete
  44. YOU FUCKING KUNT KANWAR. YOU HICKS BUM BOY APOLOGIST. YOU ARE A DISGRACE TO THE CLUB. DIE AND TAKE YOUR FUCKING KIDS AND ALL YOUR FAMILY WITH YOU . YOU KUNT.

    ReplyDelete
  45. You seem to have a corrupted notion of what truth is. The facts are simple: a declaration was made that a spade would be put in the ground within 60days. That hasn't happened. In a technical sense, it's a lie.
    Your piece is focused on the moral idea of what a lie i.e. intention. You've used an assortment of details to come to the conclusion that the owners' intentions are genuine. Fair enough, that's your right and there is scope to argue that the owners don't get an entirely fair press. It would be more credible if you didn't dress it up as 'truth' though, particularly as there is little in your piece which convinces that you know the actual intentions of the owners.
    On the other side i.e. those that you taking to task, the lack of apparent progress on the stadium is viewed within the broader context of debt-loading, reduced transfer spending and the desire to sell the club are taken as evidence of the owners' actual intentions. Very few of are privy to their actual intentions but I know which side I'm inclined to believe. 

    ReplyDelete
  46. Right.  So the fact you don't like the Owners means that you condone lies being spread?  Great approach! And wht relevance is their nationality?  Could it be that you have something against Americans?
     
    If you don't like me, that's your right.  The simple solution is to not visit the site, is it not?

    ReplyDelete
  47. They were free to the owners because the money generated from sales paid for them.

    Thank God eh, the last thing we would have wanted would have been a bigger loan to Cayman.

    Just admit you are a plant, it is getting embarassing now.

    ReplyDelete
  48. they shouldn't have come out making statements like that at all if they didn't have the full facts available.  Sort of like Benitez and his guarantee of fourth place - if you are depending on things that are outside of your control, how can you possibly make a guarantee in the first place??

    From what you've said above Jamie, the Arsenal & Liverpool situation are quite different also.  Arsenal may have missed on their delivery date (which is pretty common in major projects), but at least they had committed to starting the project and were not likely to just give up on the developments that were already under-way.  

    In our case there are no tangible signs to indicate that there was ever any indication of even starting our new stadium project at all, much less look at with optimism, and that explains a lot of the anger and vitriol towards the American's over those statements.  It's all well and good saying that £50m(!?!) has been spent on design, planning or whatever else but the simple fact is that there is nothing for the fans to look at and say, the financial future of the club is secure as that stadium will be completed sooner or later.  From the little I know, we don't even have the land secured atm right??

    If physical development had actually started but was slipping due to external factors, I'm sure that this would be better accepted by even the Cult-ists than to just point at some ridiculously overpriced plans.  
    I just need to know the next time a stadium is being proposed so I can get involved in that planning process!!

    ReplyDelete
  49. You're one bad tit you lad!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  50. I think he was calling you a tube, you tube.

    ReplyDelete
  51. again, that enitrely remains to be seen

    if we're back amongst the top 4 then it has to be seen as the right decision.

    If we're not then the last 12 months=

    2009: Rafa wins bun fight with Parry (3m quid compensation)
    2009: G+H support manager by writing him a 5 year contract
    2010: Rafa leaves "by mutual consent" (up to 6m quid compensation)

    I don't know about you but i'd have preferred that 9m quid or so to be spent on important stuff like players or interest payments.

    Very bad administration by  whoever is in charge at LFC

    ReplyDelete
  52. Standard business practice? You have said this before claiming that most football takeovers are funded this way.

    Aside from us and Utd, what other clubs have been subject to LBO?

    Corinthians? We are not going to go there are we?

    Anymore?

    Standard business practice, yeah, very good.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Fact is they lied about placing debt on the club for their purchase, if they hadn't done this they could have loaned the money on a long term loan with less interest and we'd have a stadium.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Dan - It is not a lie.

    Definition of a lie: A lie (also called prevarication, falsehood) is a known untruth expressed as truth.

    Based on the context in which the comment was made - and on basic comment sense - there is no evidence that Gillett lied.  He was too hasty in his his comments, but he did not lie.

    ReplyDelete
  55. He 'mis-remembered'.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Any so called Liverpool fan who can rite an artical to defend these people should be ashamed of themselfs. Lie or no lie they are slowly riping our great club apart the sooner they go the beter.

    ReplyDelete
  57. KB1 - don't just raise the Corinthians situation without knowing exactlyt what happened there.  The LFC fan myth is the opposite of what actually happened.  I've researched this in detail, but for now, please read the following thread for the truth about Corinthians:

    http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=253280.0

    I wouldn't normally post a link to RAWK as I dislike the forum, but there are some sane posters over there who try and look past the misinformation.

    Read that thread, and then let's talk about Corinthians.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Pure supposition, and again ignoring the impact of the worldwide credit crunch.

    ReplyDelete
  59. I'm just glad that we got rid of 1 problem...Rafa

    ReplyDelete
  60. Anyone up for a flight to pakistan and knock this retards mudhut down?

    ReplyDelete
  61. the fact that he is an experienced sports businessmen who has built stadia before would suggest he might have knowledge that the timescale was completely unrealistic. this could point towards his statement being a LIE.

    you are speculating otherwise. your argument is based on speculation, not FACT.

    ReplyDelete
  62. You're a bad tit you lad!!!

    ReplyDelete
  63. You're a bad tit you lad!!!

    ReplyDelete
  64. all good points.


    hicks and gillet seem like nice, optimistic chaps, why would they lie?! salt of the earth these millionaire businessmen.

    ReplyDelete
  65. with regard to club mismanagement how did hicks get on with corinthians there is an example of a well managed club

    ReplyDelete
  66. You're a bad tit you lad!!!

    ReplyDelete
  67. You're a bad tit you lad!!!

    ReplyDelete
  68. You're a bad tit you lad!!!

    ReplyDelete
  69. I do know what happened there. Did Tom fill you in?

    Original point. Please denote how many football clubs are purchased through this standard business practice.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Deleted my posts were is the fairness in that Kenwar PROVED YOU WRONG.

    ReplyDelete
  71. The 'spade in the ground’ accusation is neither the here nor there. The 350 million pounds worth of debt that the club is in is the problem, the money that has been wasted on re-planning for the stadium is the problem. Surely you can see that?

    As a fan you surely must be somewhat worried by the lack of investment in the playing squad? The rise of debt levels and crippling interest repayments?

    ReplyDelete
  72. Gillett " Shovel should be in the ground in the next 60 dyas or so" Parry " Yeah more or less" nods "Yeah" in agreement. Gillett "and er we intend to follow that and er i think you will see the begining of a  great big swimming pool being dug out in stanley park relatively soon, we are fully supportive of the stanley park development plan and the building of a facility that we hope will be the greatest faciltiy in this sport.. er and 1 of the reasons for that is we operate, tom and i operate some of the most successful buildings in the world" his lies there continue it's like jackanory. These are quotes from his own mouth not fiction like you would have people beleive, Mr - Hicks or Gillett - Kanwar. Realtively soon is not 3 years down the line and counting. LIVERPOOLKOP OUT. who do you even support not LFC by the looks of things so change website name. One of the successful buildings is Scumville Texas.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMyKZjxmjQE

    ReplyDelete
  73. exactly - seeing as they were so public with their "optimistic" statements initially, surely it was also in their best interests to come out with more accurate statements later on instead of just letting all of the misinformation and resentment against them build up?

    When there is no information available from the horses mouth, other people will always be more than willing to fill in the blanks

    ReplyDelete
  74. not impressed by the spin you have put on the lies debate. Overall since G&H have been here how can our fans in general come to any other conclusion?, if the spade in the ground was an isolated incident with these two idiots i could understand but with everything else that has gone on that is pretty much all listed by other posters how can we draw any other conclusion? If you don't realise that we are now the laughing stock of english footy and you are happy with that scenario then fine numnuts!

    ReplyDelete
  75. Mr Kanwar, wake up your dreaming. If you are so good a researcher, have all these contacts, have more knowledge  than all the other reporters on LFC from other Blogs and fan sites to reporters in the national press and of course your word is the absolute truth with regards to LFC. How come until Liverpool kopholdings blog started, no one ever had heard of you? why havent the Liverpool Echo or LFC themselfs employed you? Your the ONE with your finger on the so called truth pulse.. No there is something suspicous about you and your blogs? You are a disinfo artist just like a lot of others, Your agenda is perfectly clear to me now. Tom and George are great, everyone does not know them? They can be trusted? LFC are in good hands, look i have evidence, club accounts, old press cuttings blah blah, all companys can make accounts say anything? all information can easly be distorted to suit needs, but having myself read many different reports and views during and about H&Gs reign, plus what i have seen and heard with my own senses,  you can only draw two assumptions, one is  that all LFC fans are absolutly deluded (which you think)or the other which i think the evidence points directly at is, That Tom Hicks and George Gillete are a poison on the club and are blatant LIARS. ANd for me anyone who supports them are not a true fan of Liverpool Football Club.. The fans are on to you now Mr PR...

    ReplyDelete
  76. Your friend Tom say we are 237m in debt and facing 21m of Interest repayments a year, the echo 472.5m in debt with 40m of Interest a year, and you say that we aren't in any real debt at all?

    Why do you want Martin O Neill to be liverpool manager despite his net yearly spend being higher than the man you've been complaining since G+H hired two PR companies?

    When was the last time you wanted Liverpool to win a game?

    ReplyDelete
  77. Gillett " Shovel should be in the ground in the next 60 dyas or so" Parry " Yeah more or less" nods "Yeah" in agreement. Gillett "and er we intend to follow that and er i think you will see the begining of a  great big swimming pool being dug out in stanley park relatively soon, we are fully supportive of the stanley park development plan and the building of a facility that we hope will be the greatest faciltiy in this sport.. er and 1 of the reasons for that is we operate, tom and i operate some of the most successful buildings in the world" his lies there continue it's like jackanory. These are quotes from his own mouth not fiction like you would have people beleive, Mr - Hicks or Gillett - Kanwar. Realtively soon is not 3 years down the line and counting. LIVERPOOLKOP OUT. who do you even support not LFC by the looks of things so change website name. One of the successful buildings is Scumville Texas.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMyKZjxmjQE

    ReplyDelete
  78. The headline should be. PROOF I work work for HICKS & GILLETT.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Kanwar...

    Thanks for the post, a few good points. I was a Rafa fan however I can see it's best he moved on for us and him. I'm not anti american or anti owners but I feel very let down by our current ownership.
    I was hoping to ask you a few questions to put my mind at rest?

    1) roughly what budget will the new manager have?
    2) what are the owners stance on offers for our best players? Does every player have his price?
    3) when will the sale be done? I k ow this is a hard one but are we looking at weeks months or years?
    4) when n who will be appointed our new manager?

    These are questions that are on everyones minds. I'm hoping you can shine some light on things. I think everyone Is scared of, gerrard n torres leaving and us bringing in a poor manager as we won't have funds to attrack them...

    Hope you can put our minds to rest

    thanks

    Phil Redman

    ReplyDelete
  80. And Jaimie, whilst you're at it, please enlighten us as to why the clubs accounts show massive investment (enough to build a stadium in some european countries in itself) in a new stadium that doesnt exist?

    ReplyDelete
  81. Kanwar...

    Thanks for the post, a few good points. I was a Rafa fan however I can see it's best he moved on for us and him. I'm not anti american or anti owners but I feel very let down by our current ownership.
    I was hoping to ask you a few questions to put my mind at rest?

    1) roughly what budget will the new manager have?
    2) what are the owners stance on offers for our best players? Does every player have his price?
    3) when will the sale be done? I k ow this is a hard one but are we looking at weeks months or years?
    4) when n who will be appointed our new manager?

    These are questions that are on everyones minds. I'm hoping you can shine some light on things. I think everyone Is scared of, gerrard n torres leaving and us bringing in a poor manager as we won't have funds to attrack them...

    Hope you can put our minds to rest

    thanks

    Phil Redman

    ReplyDelete
  82. I can understand the message you are trying to convey to look deeper then face value but as fans we don't exactly have that right do we. I mean we take to heart the decisions that remain critical to the club. The area of the stadium management is completely void and in terms that you would like 'grossly mismanaged'. Who with half a brain in business has a press linked video and makes face value comments as you say without looking into the situation properly and then loses out 50 million. That would be a quick in coming lawsuit of negligence for the previous owners then of holding back necessary documentation to gnh.

    Well written and thought out but it doesn't hit any nails on the head IMO. I would like to consider myself an open minded fan as well :)

    I look forward to further articles.

    ReplyDelete
  83. I just hope that G+H don't try to go all out to please the IRWTers again and sign some big name manager to a massive long term contract just to take some heat off of themselves, much like they did when rewarding Rafa with that ridiculous 5 year contract mere weeks (and two big results) after they wanted to get rid of him.  There is always a possibility that even if we bring in a proven great manager, it may not work out between us, and I'd rather we don't over-commit and find ourselves stuck in a loveless marriage of inconvenience again.

    Hopefully if everything does work out on the playing, we don't just end up with a new cult being created either...

    ReplyDelete
  84. your article is based on supposition. the headline proclaims 'PROOF' (your capitals, not mine!)

    there is NO proof here. you are presuming they made the statement in good faith. how on earth can you proove otherwise? you might think it, and there might be truth there, but it's purely based on opinion.

    when would you say the worldwide credit crunch started? before the takeover?

    ReplyDelete
  85. that last post was from a different mark, by the way

    ReplyDelete
  86. What part of the phrase "net spend" do you not understand?

    ReplyDelete
  87. hows tom getting on with his baseball team no mismanagement there either i suppose

    ReplyDelete
  88. I'm wondering whether you can contact Mr. Hicks and ask him when he would get the hell out from Liverpool. Now lets go into the matter.

    The question now is not about the stadium or the credit crunch. OK, even though its credit crunch at that time, he could just send a statement saying that the stadium building would be postponed due to credit crunch bla bla bla. But instead of that, he made (incl. his pardner) empty promises  which angered the Kop fans. They failed to interact with the fans let alone among themselves. Hicks and Gillet shows unproffesionalism by showing their displesure among themselves and failed to negotiate whats the best for the club.

    Also they said they are gonna make profit by selling the club. What the hell is that??!! Would any fans in the world would be happy to hear that? Their new stadium is another plot to win the fans but they failed miserably.

    Fans such as ourselves ehm! only want the best for the clubs they support not want to do something that would destroy the club. H&G dosent show their love for the club but they just treated it like another business.

    If you want fresh start with Liverpool, change of ownership would be the best thing that happen now. I would make millions, if not billions of reds fans happy and its also the best for the club.

    So my friend Jaimie, don't waste your time defending the old frauds and lets do our job as the 12th men.

    Y.N.W.A

    ReplyDelete
  89. well see .. the yanks are liars .. rafa said remmber you'll never walk alone

    ReplyDelete
  90. <span>

    Hi All. Great site, First post.
    I know this is off topic, but that is where this debate has ended up, so I will give my two cents.
    For me, the people to blame for this situation are firstly, the financial authorities and regulators that allowed this type of purchase to happen in the first place. We can then go back another step and blame the government for allowing or not monitoring the way in which financial institutions lend money, but this is a global problem so where does it end?? Secondly, Dave Moores should be held to account for taking the greedy option, rather than the sound and safe option which would have had the clubs best interests at heart, but like the banks Moores took the easy option, the option that was worked out on the back of a cigarette packet rather than taking the option that was correctly risk assessed using professional people and consulting people who care and love the club. I wont get in to his extremely poor tenure as Chairman at the club which ultimately saw us drift away from Utd on and off the pitch!! Because that’s another story, although its related.
    In third place comes H&G, but only from a moral standpoint based on the current situation. They should sell the club at a reasonable price and walk away because it is the right thing to do but they cannot be blamed for the current state of the club, that thought process is uneducated and ignorant. Here is my reason. The transaction used to purchase the club was a legitimate legal and widely used process throughout the business world and is not akin to taking over football clubs. As im sure it has been pointed out already, If there had been no economic down turn then we wouldn’t be having this debate at all, in fact if we pretended that all was fine in the financial markets and borrowing was still easy and freely available then we would likely have a fantastic squad and we would have been competing with the likes of ManU and Chelsea in the transfer market, with no problems because using the same ethos of how the club was purchased, H&G would have had no problem borrowing more money to buy whatever players the manager desired. The reality is, that no consortium, no business and no individual should have been able to purchase the club based on the criteria in which LFC was purchased and that is the reality. The word Borrow is at the core problem, it is completely absurd that two businessmen could buy this club without proving that if the preverbal hits the fan in any shape or form then we must have assets secured on the purchase to re-coup or save the club in any eventuality. So in conclusion, I believe if it wasn’t H&G it would have been someone else and in the immortal words of RAFA that to be FACT!
    </span>

    ReplyDelete
  91. what a funny article.....

    ReplyDelete
  92. Thanks for the links but they down come out smelling of roses
    and they are your words. A Lot of what you have wrote could be
    construed as mis-management.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Of course, G&H made promises to start the stadium before the market collapsed.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Kenwar, You're a bad tit you lad!!!

    ReplyDelete
  95. poor article. next.

    ReplyDelete
  96. No, they were bought through the sale of other assets (read players).
    Shanks is 100% right that we've had no transfer funds for the last 18 months.

    Until you can understand the transfer market and how it works, I suggest you stop posting threads, Jaimie.

    ReplyDelete
  97. kanwar is a bellend, kanwar is a bellend la la la la...la la la la....

    ReplyDelete
  98. How were the original plans obsolete? They mirrored many modern stadia - would you suggest the Emirates is an obsolete stadium or Benfica's Estadio da Luz? The plans were already paid for, and a massive amount of work had been done to be ready to start the project.

    Hicks tore them up on a whim - he wanted to build something on this side of the pond to mirror the new Dallas stadium going up. Vanity has cost us another 50m and years worth of delays, nothing more, nothing less.

    ReplyDelete
  99. So, "myth busted" ? So what, they are not fit to run the club no matter what.The only thing you managed to prove through all this is that Tom Hicks really likes your work.What a marvelous achievement.....

    But I have a a challenge for you; next season,why don't you show up at Anfield in the new home-jersey with Kanwar on your back ? Show that you are a real fan who's willing to stand up to the rest ? ;)

    ReplyDelete
  100. R U Duncan Oldham??5:19 pm, June 07, 2010

    You seem to come out with the same sort of rubbish he does

    ReplyDelete
  101. You really are misguided Jaimie!!!! You have a two paragraph email from a Tom O Hicks, which he most probably did not write himself. They have never had the money and will never get the money for a new stadium and your naivety is unreal.
    The club is in complete and utter turmoil and you are stating that it has been managed correctly besides the football side. The club is in £351 million of debt and do not make excuses for the Kop Cayman loan, that is part of our debt however you look at it. Liverpool FC has always been looked upon as one of the best run football clubs in the world and these two have completely managed to rip that apart inside 3 years.
    We have a Chairman that is a Chelsea fan and about as concerned about the best for Liverpool FC as Alex Ferguson and a CE that has no experience in sport nevermind football and the club is without a manager. How is that a well managed club????? Surely if you are going to part company with the current boss you should have a shortlist of potential successors who have a better record or are we going to get a 2nd rate journeyman manager like the ones printed in most of the press.
    You seriously need to look at your viewpoint on Liverpool FC and realise that we are in serious trouble. There will not be a new stadium whilst they are in charge, not because of the credit markets but because they are defaulting on more or less everything they owe so why would any bank lend any further money to these clowns. WAKE UP!

    ReplyDelete
  102. Who pays your wages Jamie?

    ReplyDelete
  103. The point remains that they have placed debt on the club when they clearly said that, that would not be the case. You should also stop using the excuse of global credit crunch as all parties (including T&G) agree that we are now in better times. However, they have yet to make any move to remove the debt on the club.

    The definition of lie by merriam webster is "To create a false or misleading impression". And this is something which they have constantly adhered to.

    ReplyDelete
  104. Are we to believe that the planning process for the stadium cost £50M without even a hole being dug. I'm not an expert but that is a vast amount of money on plans that have never seen the light of day. G + H are very astute businessmen and I suspect in a few years we will see them walk away with a healthy profit for no actual out lay and our club in the hands of administrators a la Texas Rangers.

    ReplyDelete
  105. Kanwar all I can I say is your a tool Fella, for how many years have you been campaigning to get Rafa out ?

    3 years is it ?

    Which basically coincides with Tom & Georges arrival so whilst the current regime have been underfunding our manager and short changing fans for the past three years leading to the club being almost technically insolvent.

    These two pair of cowboys bought us via a leveraged buy out I'e borrowed money with no capital out lay of their own a practicse that is illegal in the United States, we lose 110,000 per day on interest repayments, thats 40,150,000 that could be invested in the squad each year, yet you defend them, whilst the club suffers.

    That leads me to beleive you have a payroll number in Hicks & Gillet PR department and that your quite happy to cosy on up to them whilst teh club you "Alledgedly" love suffers at their hands and that my friend is why you are a tool.

    ReplyDelete
  106. Hicks quotes -
    "Liverpool has a really big universe of interested buyers,”
    “There are a number of wealthy people all over the world, particularly in the Middle East and Asia, who are enormous Liverpool fans.”

    A BIG UNIVERSE OF WEALTHY PEOPLE ALL OVER THE WORLD WHO HAVE YET TO MAKE A BID FOR THE CLUB ACCEPTABLE TO H&G

    Watch this space, Hicks will not sell the club for less than £600m unless forced to do so by the banks, in the meantime the club continues to go down the pan. He cares nothing about Liverpool FC, he was offered £500m 2 years ago by DIC and rejected it. All Liverpool's current problems stem from the owners and they will just get worse until it is sold. You don't have to have a long memory to recall the days when Liverpool was the best run club in the country. This is tragedy unfolding before our eyes. The real danger is that the club decline could be unstoppable.
    ANYONE WHO BELIEVES WHAT TOM HICKS SAYS IS A NAIVE AND GULLIBLE FOOL - just like David Moores.

    ReplyDelete
  107. Hicks quotes -
    "Liverpool has a really big universe of interested buyers,”
    “There are a number of wealthy people all over the world, particularly in the Middle East and Asia, who are enormous Liverpool fans.”

    A BIG UNIVERSE OF WEALTHY PEOPLE ALL OVER THE WORLD WHO HAVE YET TO MAKE A BID FOR THE CLUB ACCEPTABLE TO H&G

    Watch this space, Hicks will not sell the club for less than £600m unless forced to do so by the banks, in the meantime the club continues to go down the pan. He cares nothing about Liverpool FC, he was offered £500m 2 years ago by DIC and rejected it. All Liverpool's current problems stem from the owners and they will just get worse until it is sold. You don't have to have a long memory to recall the days when Liverpool was the best run club in the country. This is tragedy unfolding before our eyes. The real danger is that the club decline could be unstoppable.
    ANYONE WHO BELIEVES WHAT TOM HICKS SAYS IS A NAIVE AND GULLIBLE FOOL - just like David Moores.

    ReplyDelete
  108. Hicks quotes -
    "Liverpool has a really big universe of interested buyers,”
    “There are a number of wealthy people all over the world, particularly in the Middle East and Asia, who are enormous Liverpool fans.”

    A BIG UNIVERSE OF WEALTHY PEOPLE ALL OVER THE WORLD WHO HAVE YET TO MAKE A BID FOR THE CLUB ACCEPTABLE TO H&G

    Watch this space, Hicks will not sell the club for less than £600m unless forced to do so by the banks, in the meantime the club continues to go down the pan. He cares nothing about Liverpool FC, he was offered £500m 2 years ago by DIC and rejected it. All Liverpool's current problems stem from the owners and they will just get worse until it is sold. You don't have to have a long memory to recall the days when Liverpool was the best run club in the country. This is tragedy unfolding before our eyes. The real danger is that the club decline could be unstoppable.
    ANYONE WHO BELIEVES WHAT TOM HICKS SAYS IS A NAIVE AND GULLIBLE FOOL - just like David Moores.

    ReplyDelete
  109. Sorry but it is disingenuous in the extreme to claim that Statton and Waldorf (ok, G + H if you insist!) were not misleading the fans when they made the spade comments. Here's why:

    What reason did they have to lie? Simple: to ingratiate themselves with the majority of fans who were highly suspicious of them from the start. They wanted to make popularist comments and they did so by the bucketload. we now know what those buckets contained (hint: you can grow good mushrooms in it!)

    The credit crunch 'hit' a few weeks later and screwed all their plans? What utter nonsense. The credit crunch wasn't an overnight thing, financiers, economists and other experts all predicted it many months before it came and many months before the spade comment. If G&H didn't realise it was coming then that is down to inept business management.

    The credit crunch only affected people who relied on credit. Why the hell did we ever sell our club to a couple of Americans who had no or little hard finance to buy the club with? They used massively expensive credit to buy the club using the club as collateral which actually means virtually anyone could have done the same. We now spend more than the price of a David Villa, Steve Gerrard or Gareth Barry every year just in paying interest when that money could have been buying us players to stop us falling out of the top 6 like we did this year.

    How is that not financial mismanagement? Assuming G&H are not complete and utter fiscal morons, how is what they said at very best not misleading? They MUST have known they could not fulfil what they were saying. They have left us at a massive pecuniary disadvantage yet they are demanding a massively over-inflated price to sell the club. How is that not screwing the club for all they can get without giving a damn about the genuine fans?

    Getting a 'personal' email from Thomas O Hicks defending the Americans does not mean they weren't attempting to deceive and as far as I am concerned 'attempting to deceive' is nothing more than a euphemism they use in parliament to avoid saying 'they're lying!'

    ReplyDelete
  110. Why is it a step in the right direction?
    He's good enough for the European Champions, the ripple effect will be negative (think of the Academy, goalkeeping coach etc etc), and we will only be able to attract or afford a lesser manager. And please don't tell me ANY of the possible options that have expressed interest are a step up.
    He may have had his faults but now was not the time to take this action. 

    ReplyDelete
  111. You are a completely deluded lunatic. Or a Manc.

    ReplyDelete
  112. But then changes had to be made to the plans and the market collapsed. We all know this, or should anyway. I don't blame G&H for not having built the stadium, what I blame them for is putting debt on the club and especially Hicks doesn't appear to understand Liverpool is not acting the Liverpool way of things.

    ReplyDelete
  113. Yankie Doodle Don't6:24 pm, June 07, 2010

    I guess we'll see how apt they are at lying very soon. Tom Hicks did promise a big summer of spending if I recall correctly in another mail to a fan. Let's see how that one pans out shall we? I suspect it is more likely to go the other way!

    In relation to the stadium I read today that should the stadium not go ahead the tens of millions propping up the club's balance sheet will have to be removed. Making the club technically insolvent. I wonder how long the club can keep that asset on their balance sheet for!

    ReplyDelete
  114. Jamie, why do you only seem to answer the posts people leave that have no substance? Lots of replys have raised points which could do with answering but you seem to not want to answer those but instead reply to some of the posts you have an answer for? :-E

    ReplyDelete
  115. The credit crunch only affected people who relied on credit.

    I suggest you do some research instead of making statements like this.

    ReplyDelete
  116. Right.  So, after only a couple of months of the club being officially for sale, you expect new owners to be found.  Like it's that easy.  Someone peoples' criticism are just ridiculous.

    ReplyDelete
  117. That is quite simply ridiculous. Clearly this "email" from the supposed Mr Hicks is a fake (and an exceptionally poor one at that). Dissapointing, as there has previously been a selection of good, well researched articles posted on this site....

    ReplyDelete
  118. Jaimie (is that an American iteration of the name Jamie?), your stated intention of bringing balance to the H+G debate is flawed given it is obvious where your loyalties lie and your energies are sadly misplaced when the fabric of this great insitution continues to crumble around us. The impact of the credit crunch can't be ignored yet it is obvious that using this as the sole defence for failing to deliver on significant promises is no longer the sole preserve of failing governments or normal "liars." These two buffoons with no knowledge or affiliation for English 'soccer' or its fans - as evidenced by the disgraceful behaviour of TH junior had one key objective 'buy low and sell high' and in the meantime use the club as a cash float to fund their other personal and business enterprises. Years of commercial mismanagement and underutilising and failing to optimise the famous LFC brand made us ripe for the taking. Promises to build a new stadium, invest in the team - with their funds not the clubs revenue streams - to take it to the new level that Moores couldn't, have been blatant smokestreams. Rafa warned us of this after Athens and fought until the end, unable to build a squad as he had to flog players to build a team and all the while looking over his shoulder for the next Klinsmann. It boils down to this, what have H+G contributed to LFC since taking over from Moores except saddle the club with huge debt? When they do finally walk away having made huge returns with little personal investment what side of the fence will you be on then, assuming you wont be carrying their bags?

    ReplyDelete
  119. Any further pointless, derogatory comments like this and I will ban you.

    ReplyDelete
  120. The thing is Jamie, as you have pointed out your self, that H & G are businessmen. You claim that they did not lie, and that the credit crunch is to blame for not building a new stadium. The content in your article does not proove this, that is just your assumption. A similar assumption would be that the credit crunch came at a good time for the two men. If this was the case, how convenient wouldn't it be that the Parry-lead design had to be redesigned, a legitimate reason for postponing the building, and then came the crunch. The market has been stable for some time now, and it has to be said; the new design might have take a few months to work out, but not three years. You got the mail fram Hicks jr. in november last year, and he claimed that they were still in hard work over the project. The thing is though, that by then the banks were allready calling for the loans allready existent for the club to be redused. The  banks pushed the owners to put the club up for sale because they were not able to handle the loan allready attained by the club. So believing that they would be able to loan further money for building a new stadium is a bit daft. This leads to the question of why H & G would work on a project that they would never be able to see through? There might be a sane conclusion to this question. As I started by saying, the owners are businessmen, and in it for the money they will raise from selling the club. They never had a long term perspective for buying the club. So to keep protests at a minimum, one will claim that the stadium project is going strong. In the meantime the club is up for sale, and H & G gets away with a couple of hundred million pounds more than they invested.

    These are all assumptions, just as your "proof" are assumptions on your behalf. They don't proove anything.

    ReplyDelete
  121. Jay - What inaccurate statements did they come out with after the 'Spade in the ground' comment?

    I agree with you though - H+G's communication with the fans has  been pretty atrocious, which is why people are filling in the blanks for themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  122. meanwhile, back on planet earth...

    ReplyDelete
  123. The thing is Jamie, as you have pointed out your self, that H & G are businessmen. You claim that they did not lie, and that the credit crunch is to blame for not building a new stadium. The content in your article does not proove this, that is just your assumption. A similar assumption would be that the credit crunch came at a good time for the two men. If this was the case, how convenient wouldn't it be that the Parry-lead design had to be redesigned, a legitimate reason for postponing the building, and then came the crunch. The market has been stable for some time now, and it has to be said; the new design might have take a few months to work out, but not three years. You got the mail from Hicks jr. in november last year, and he claimed that they were still in hard work over the project. The thing is though, that by then the banks were allready calling for the loans allready existent for the club to be redused. The banks pushed the owners to put the club up for sale because they were not able to handle the loan allready attained by the club. So believing that they would be able to loan further money for building a new stadium is a bit daft. This leads to the question of why H & G would work on a project that they would never be able to see through? There might be a sane conclusion to this question. As I started by saying, the owners are businessmen, and in it for the money they will raise from selling the club. They never had a long term perspective for buying the club. So to keep protests at a minimum, one will claim that the stadium project is going strong. In the meantime the club is up for sale, and H & G gets away with a couple of hundred million pounds more than they invested.

    These are assumptions, just as your "proof" are assumptions on your behalf. They don't proove anything.

    ReplyDelete
  124. The thing is Jamie, as you have pointed out your self, that H & G are businessmen. You claim that they did not lie, and that the credit crunch is to blame for not building a new stadium. The content in your article does not proove this, that is just your assumption. A similar assumption would be that the credit crunch came at a good time for the two men. If this was the case, how convenient wouldn't it be that the Parry-lead design had to be redesigned, a legitimate reason for postponing the building, and then came the crunch. The market has been stable for some time now, and it has to be said; the new design might have take a few months to work out, but not three years. You got the mail from Hicks jr. in november last year, and he claimed that they were still in hard work over the project. The thing is though, that by then the banks were allready calling for the loans allready existent for the club to be redused. The  banks pushed the owners to put the club up for sale because they were not able to handle the loan allready attained by the club. So believing that they would be able to loan further money for building a new stadium is a bit daft. This leads to the question of why H & G would work on a project that they would never be able to see through? There might be a sane conclusion to this question. As I started by saying, the owners are businessmen, and in it for the money they will raise from selling the club. They never had a long term perspective for buying the club. So to keep protests at a minimum, one will claim that the stadium project is going strong. In the meantime the club is up for sale, and H & G gets away with a couple of hundred million pounds more than they invested.

    These are assumptions, just as your "proof" are assumptions on your behalf. They don't proove anything.

    ReplyDelete
  125. And even if he said that "Rafa would get a sizeable transfer budget to spend this summer" he still wouldn't have said that it would be at Liverpool F.C.

    ReplyDelete
  126. So do you think investment will be provide for a new manager to make any signings Jamie? I personally cannot see it happening. I dont see why proving that the whole spade in the ground comment was taken out of context goes anyway to defending the owners and due to the rest of the issues they have caused including plunging our club into debt. Personally since they have done all they have and they fact they are valuing the club so high it will be difficult for a investor to see it is as a good opportunity, due to this i dont see why you would defend them at all.

    ReplyDelete
  127. Where in this definition does it say that the context should be taken into account?

    ReplyDelete
  128. OK, even if I were deranged enough to fall for that rubbish about intent, what about not loading the club with debt?

    ReplyDelete
  129. I read the beginning of that thread, first three postings. And, surprise, surprise. Someone wrote something that differs from the herd's opinion. What happens next? Next poster tries to change the subject. Is that the best us Liverpool supporters can come up with?

    ReplyDelete
  130. Working for Alex Ferguson by any chance?

    Youve spent years now spouting utter drivel about Benitez, but now he's gone you're struggling for something to create an arguement about so 'Hey Presto' lets take the exact opposite point of view to every sane Liverpool fan when it comes to the owners. 

    What next Jaimie;  Dalglish was shit? Shankly was a plank?  Paisley was lucky?

    How about some truth?  Something like Jaimie Kanwar only set this site up to create controversy and make money from hits from indignant fans?

    ReplyDelete
  131. They were paid with re-invested money from sales.  Wake up Kanwar

    ReplyDelete
  132. This is getting silly now.  Neither did he say that Bugs Bunny wouldnt get the money. 

    How old are you?

    ReplyDelete
  133. ER, there was no credit crunch within the time fames giving by your buddies. 

    They CHOSE note to build the stadium. 
    They CHOSE not to provide money for transfers. 
    They CHOSE to count salaries as transfer money as pass it off as the same. 
    They CHOSE not to reinvest funds from sales. 
    They CHOSE to take a salary for doing f all
    They CHOSE to load the club with debt
    They CHOSE to go bragging about how they'd still make millions

    ReplyDelete
  134. He was talking out of his *rse.  Something that you're also quite good at

    ReplyDelete
  135. "Some peoples' criticism are just ridiculous."  And some people's efforts at journalism are even worse.

    ReplyDelete
  136. for the past couple of months i have regulary visited this site
    and have come to the conclusion that you are pro  hicks and
    gillet.wether this is intentional or not i am not sure but regarding
    your post on (spade in the ground in 60 days) youre beleife that
    this statement made by hicks was a genuine intent  on his part
    is very doubful to put it mildly.what is quite clear though is that hicks and gillet are the most dishonest ,ruthless and greedy  buisnessmen.
    and are from the exact mould of people wich has ruined the banks and other financial institutions,wich has left the world on th brink.
    these two RATS will let the club burn rather than accepting a reasonable offer.you say that you care about the club well prove it.
    by focusing youre attention on hicks+gillets many faults rather than
    defending them wich is what you are most definately coming across as.

    ReplyDelete
  137. And what exactly were they relying on to build the stadium then Jaimie?  Magic beans?  I think - and correct me if Im wrong - it was CREDIT.

    ReplyDelete
  138. Strictly speaking, they did not lie. Site Investigations took place following G & H taking over the club. Therefore, they did put a spade in the ground in pre construction works. And Jamie is right - the old stadium design was a mess and I am so pleased we did not proceed with it.

    ReplyDelete
  139. Good to see your usual journalistic standards holding up. Proof?. You've proved nothing. Your whole argument seems to be.. "I believe they told the truth and wanted to build it...", and thus it becomes fact.  And then you accuse others of twisting the truth. 

    Why would it be better to build during a recession?. Number 1 lower interest rates. Interest rates now are the lowest they've ever been for stable businesses. Number 2 less building projects going on so costs are lower. 

    I'm not sure what your vested interest in all this is. But you've got even less credibility than the two judas'es Tom & George. Your pathetic apologistic act for them after what they've done to the club is sickening to see. You should be ashamed of yourself. 

    ReplyDelete
  140. Jaimie, Ive struggled to find ONE article in which you have actually given any due credit to benitez. and hear you are backing Hicks and Gillette ?!
    Yes they did lie.  How much debt is on LFC and Kop Ltd (the company that owns LFC) ?
    WHY wasnt benitez given MORE cash to spend?
    Why did he spend some of the past transfer windows working with a negative budget?

    Are you telling me NO manager makes mistakes?
    Veron for £28m ?
    Mourinhos purchase of Paulo Ferreira?
    Wengers purchase of Reyes?

    Mark Hughes £18m on santa cruz?
    Moyes signing of beattie?

    Every manager does it.  You talk about s*** players like pennant, and bellamy.
    but did you ever speak to benitez?
    or actually see WHO he was ALLOWED or ABLE to buy ?

    Take a look at Simao, a player who was on the plane, coming to anfield before Parry cocked it up.

    Why dont you look at how  G+H and Purslow are running the club as a way for G+H to make a profit.
    Yes those fancy figures you are twisting look great, but what as LFC benefitted from for 2 years?
    Nothing. No budget. No players.  Our wage bill is 5th in the premier league, soon it will be 7th.

    Take a look at Valencia, when Rafa left them, they struggled, they had debts (like us), and eventually (after 6 seasons) they are still no way near to where they were.

    I would LOVE to see how you will twist the facts when Gerrard, Torres, Mascherano, Benayoun and god knows who else leave the club.

    How on earth you think the take over has been good is beyond me!
    yes we have had a great Commercial income increase, but couldnt that have been achieved by sacking parry and getting purslow or anyone with half a brain in?

    Couldnt Moores have spent £300m on a new stadium? That debt would have been worthwhile!!

    You seem happy with the progress, £50m for a new stadium design ?!
    Are we building world monument?

    Ive read  quite a lot of your posts, and you seem to be a man with a grudge for benitez!

    Why dont you write about Hicks' statements about selling for £800m ?
    Why dont you look at how s*** he's ran his US teams to the ground?

    Why dont you look at the s*** promises of 'a big budget' when they just sacked rafa.

    Id even go on record as saying any NEW manager will spend LESS than they sell!

    Benitez is being approached by inter, is that luck? or a manager who is acknowledged as being one of the best in the world?

    and who will we get? Martin O'neill? wow. European world beater.. is he your preferred choice by any chance?

    ReplyDelete
  141. I can certainly see your POV, and you're right - it's possible to interpret the situation that way.  However, I feel that on the balance of probabilities, it's more likely that H+G are telling the truth about the stadium.

    Why spend so much money planning it if their goal is to make money?

    ReplyDelete
  142. interesting piece. cheers

    ReplyDelete
  143. Having read the snippets from the accounts. I am not really any the wiser on the stadium costs to date.

    It is not reasonable to suggest that £45.5m could have been spent on consultants alone (as implied to justify the 'asset').

    Even alowing for a FULL team (which would be unusual) designing it twice to planning consent stage, the whole design team (project managers, architects, engineers, services consultants, quantity surveyors, landscape architects, surveyors etc etc) might have cost about £17.25m.

    You have to wonder where the other £28m went...

    ReplyDelete
  144. So what have we got for our £50million so far?

    ReplyDelete
  145. Willmott - Benitez was given money *every year* to spend.  Why would the club change its policy now with a new manager.  The Ne Spend cult try and tell us that Aquilani and Johnson were brought in for free but anyone can see that's a cretinous argument.  Benitez was not given more money because he could not be trusted with more money.  It's that simple.

    You and others need to stop taking the simplistic route and arguing that I'm 'defending the owners'.  I am not.  I am defending the truth.  I am defending the club.  Spurious misinformation about H+G  = misinformation about the club.  This stupid accusation about lying re the stadium has been endlessly disseminated for years, and it's just wrong.  I can't stomach lies being spread about the club, which is why I wrote this post.

    ReplyDelete
  146. You're coming ascross as a bit of a stooge with this article, JK. I know you like to be controversial but this is almost comical. In a recession it is actually cheaper to get something constructed, it's a buyers market. The problem arises when you haven't actually got any money to pay for the construction work. Or else, if you are trying to get another buyer to pay for the proposed work, as though it is a work in progress. Whether the spade in the ground statement is a lie or not, the bigger picture is that H + G are still trying to sell the club as though the new stadium build is happening, which is misleading to say the least. I don't think H + G care enough about the fans to be bothered to lie to them, the comments they make are about misleading potential buyers.
    You are too intelligent not to appreciate this, JK, and should not make excuses for them unless you have a hidden agenda. My guess is that you just like to light the blue touch-paper and watch the fireworks.
    I bet you voted Tory and then told everyone you voted Labour or v.v. just to see their reaction. Then again, you may not even be British, but American, which would make more sense in regard to your recent articles.

    ReplyDelete
  147. You're coming ascross as a bit of a stooge with this article, JK. I know you like to be controversial but this is almost comical. In a recession it is actually cheaper to get something constructed, it's a buyers market. The problem arises when you haven't actually got any money to pay for the construction work. Or else, if you are trying to get another buyer to pay for the proposed work, as though it is a work in progress. Whether the spade in the ground statement is a lie or not, the bigger picture is that H + G are still trying to sell the club as though the new stadium build is happening, which is misleading to say the least. I don't think H + G care enough about the fans to be bothered to lie to them, the comments they make are about misleading potential buyers.
    You are too intelligent not to appreciate this, JK, and should not make excuses for them unless you have a hidden agenda. My guess is that you just like to light the blue touch-paper and watch the fireworks.
    I bet you voted Tory and then told everyone you voted Labour or v.v. just to see their reaction. Then again, you may not even be British, but American, which would make more sense in regard to your recent articles.

    ReplyDelete
  148. One more thing: whether you like it or not, Hicks and Gillett are part of Liverpool FC at this moment.  This means they should be treated *fairly*.  This is our obligation as fans.  Give them intense criticism where it's deserved, bit don't spread lies and minsinformation just because ythey're disliked.  That's ignorant behaviour, and Liverpool fans are supposed to better than that.

    I have a absolutely no problem with criticism of the Owners, or indeed anyone at the club, as long as there is a fair basis for it.  Repeatedly arguing that they lied about the stadium is wrong, and on the balance of probabilities, the context and the facts (arguably) show otherwise.

    ReplyDelete
  149. Jamie - my point was that they didn't put out any further statements once the plans had been changed; instead allowing all of the misinformation and hype to build up in public unabated.  

    In the same way that they released the initial positive information, it would've been a lot easier to come back, say that they were wrong and release the negative information in a controlled manner themselves, rather than allowing the misinformation to spread and snowball, at which point it becomes impossible to control and any attempt to do so just looks like desperate attempts to save face.  Some of the more hardcore IRWTers would've inevitably jumped on them regardless, but it would've looked a lot better on them to the more reasonable fans to have been honest upfront

    ReplyDelete
  150. don't know why the post appeared twice, feel free to delete the second one, I inadvertantly sent is as "new JS-Kit Account" whatever that is!

    ReplyDelete
  151. Roadender - From your posts on this site I know that you're an intelligent fan who looks at things in a constructive, non-sensationalised manner.

    I appreciate what you're saying, but take away all the anti-Owner bias and misinformation and just look at confluence of events re the stadium:

    1. Stadium design - which was driven by Rick Parry - on the table when H+G bought the club

    2. We know that the sale to H+G went through very quickly, and that Moores' personal due diligence was pretty negligible.

    3. Hicks + Gillett probably took Parry's word for the stadium plan, and probably failed to get independent architects to look at the plans pre-sale.

    4. During the infamous press conference, Gillett makes his 'Spade in the ground comment'

    5. Architects consider the stadium design and decide that it is not suitable.

    6. The 60 day timeframe is immediately in the toilet.

    7. Architects are hired immediately to draw up new plans.

    8. The club re-applies for planning permission, and a transportation study is commissioned (see accounts).  This all takes quite a few months.

    9. Through all of this, the worldwide credit crunch is taking hold.

    10. The club spends money every year for the last 3 years on various phases of design, planning etc of the new stadium.

    Now - with all this in mind, is it not possible that:

    a) Gillett made his comment based on assurances from Rick Parry about the stadium plans?

    b) Gillett was genuinely enthused about the possibility of the new stadium that his optimism got the better of him

    c) Gillett made his comment without any machievellian scheming/deception going on?

    d) Development of the new stadium was severely hampered by wordwide financial turmoil.

    e) H=G are still ploughing money into the new stadium process because they genuinely want the best for Liverpool?

    Taking away all the poisonous fan antipathy towards the Owners, the above is entirely possible, and I would argue that there is more evidence pointing to Hicks' version of events (i.e. the email) than the opposite lyging, scheming scenario.

    I don't see any evidence or credible reasoning to prove or explain why H+G would lie about the stadium.  It's all well and good falling back on oft-used cliches like 'They lied about the debt!', but in this instance, if people set aside their personal dislike, I think a rational analysis of the situation reveals the truth.

    All counter arguments I've heard are just the same old anti-Owner rhetoric, i.e. baseless conjecture underpinned by personal dislike rather than objective analysis of the situation.

    ReplyDelete
  152. Tony Barret's Mate9:31 pm, June 07, 2010

    Interesting article.....
    The thing is Jamie... Most fans are concerned with what has happened on the pitch more than what is happening off the pitch.
    If liverpool were winning titles then hicks and gillett would have had more time and more slack from the fans...
    Unfortunatley that is not the case.... so if we are not doing well on the pitch then the least we want to see is that  we are progressing off the pitch... i.e if the owners had already started the stadium build then we would understand as fans if we did not have a massive ammount of money to spend on transfers for a few years ( short term pain long term gain).
    Can you honestly say that we have improved on the pitch since their arrival? Can you honestly say that we have improved off the pitch since their arrival?
    I think no to both questions personally, except that they have made us a more commercially viable club.
    If we could see any signs of future improvement then they would not be getting slated so much. fact is there are not many signs of improvement either on or off the pitch therefore they have failed the fans.
    Just my opinion

    ReplyDelete
  153. I agree completely on this one. It is obvious H+G bought LFC to make money in the short to medium term. They did not buy the club to destroy it, their aim was to make improvements all round, turn it into a more appealing investment and then sell it for a profit. The only place you can fault these &^%&heads is their lack of investment. Credit to them, Purslow and Rafa, they turned a "lethargically" run club into a competitive business. They were never in it to turn LFC into title winners, just successful enough to do well on the commercial side. We now need owners who will invest enough to bring success as well as, and more importantly, to turn LFC into a self sufficient club like Arsenal. i.e. new bigger better stadium and good youth development to save and make money.

    ReplyDelete
  154. Planning a stadium costs a lot of time and money.  That's the reality, whether you or I like it or not.

    ReplyDelete
  155. Do you have evidence that there would not have been a problem?

    ReplyDelete
  156. during hicks and gillettes period of due diligence before buying the club should they not have looked at the new stadium plan it would have been very unprofessional not to

    ReplyDelete
  157. But there are accusations they hired very expensive planners.  Is this true?

    ReplyDelete
  158. I dislike your use of certain words that suggest you are belittling people who do not agree with you.

    Surely if you sell players for 40+ million and you spend less than 40+ you have a profit?

    ReplyDelete
  159. 1. I don't know what the new manager's budget will be, but I know one thing: he will not be shackled like Benitez because he will have the trust of the Liverpool board.  After the last 2 years of shampbolic signings, Benitez was not trusted to spend the club's money anymore, which is why he was not given more money.

    2. Every player has his price at any club, which is why Ronaldo was sold to Real Madrid; Ibrahimovic to Barca etc.  No player is beyond sale.  Having said that, the owners have no intention of selling the club's top players.  Several members of the club's hierarchy have said this publicly.  Why not just believe them>  What evidence is there to suggest the opposite?  The only top class player Liverpool have sold recently was Alonso, and as the player himself admitted, he left because of the gareth barry situation: it had nothing to do with the owners.

    3. The club has only officially been for sale for 2 months.  You cnanot expect a sale to go through in that time!  It will take 4-6 months to sound out potential buyers and listen to offers/conduct due diligence etc.  There are no guarantees.  The process takes times; and so it should.  Moores and Parry rushed the sale to H+G; do you want the same thing to happen again>

    4. I know that the club wants to appoint the new manager as soon as possible, preferably before the world-cup is over (to allow scouting for players during the tournament, and to have a manager and backroom staf in place prior to the return of the LFC's world-cup players).  I have no doubt we'll hear something about an appointment within a 7-10 days.  I don't know who it will be, but I can tell who it WON'T be.  None of the following are on LFC's short-list: Hughes, McLeish, Eriksson, McClaren, Curbishley and Bilic.

    The club will not bring in a poor manager.  Gerrard will not leave.  There is a chance Torres might leave, but that all depends on him, not the club.  if he has an amazing world cup, and someone comes in with a 70m + offer, you would surely have to look at it.

    ReplyDelete
  160. "3. Hicks + Gillett probably took Parry's word for the stadium plan, and probably failed to get independent architects to look at the plans pre-sale."

    I am scared if that is true, please don't tell me during a buying process (that involves millions of H+G/Liverpool money) that they took someones word for it. Surely if that is true then H+G's crimes against Liverpool far outweigh Rafa's bad buys. As we are talking about 400m (not sure if that was the fee, but i think it is quite close, either way Jaimie will set me straight).
    I would think when buying a club and commiting to building a stadium, which they were doing, that they might look over the plans first. The worring thing about this is not the is he or isn't he telling fibs, it is the fact that they don't have a clue. These are the people running our club!

    ReplyDelete
  161. Gillett took just three days on his due diligence:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/liverpool/6323037.stm

    It's entirely possible that he did a slapdash job, just like Moores.  That makes him guilt of not being thorough; it doesn't make him a liar.

    ReplyDelete
  162. I agree with what you are saying, inasmuch as H + G want to derive as much profit as possible from their sale of the club, and so want the best for LFC in terms of making the club more desirable to potential. However, I hope you are not naive enough to believe they want the best for the club in the same way as fans do, ie long term, it is purely a business deal for them.
    For what it's worth, I think Gillet made his comments as a platitude to the fans and because he got carried away with his ownership ego. I don't think he believed it, but it was just a good sound-bite and you're comparison with Rafa's guarantee of 4th place in the league is spot on (I didn't belive Rafa and I don't think he believed it either, but you have to always sound positive when you are in these positions, same with H + G)
    They are bad for the club because they are now almost universally despised by the fans, whether that is deserved or not is academic, as it is FACT (apologies to RG) So, from a business point of view their continued tenure will only drive the value of the club down

    ReplyDelete
  163. I agree with what you are saying, inasmuch as H + G want to derive as much profit as possible from their sale of the club, and so want the best for LFC in terms of making the club more desirable to potential. However, I hope you are not naive enough to believe they want the best for the club in the same way as fans do, ie long term, it is purely a business deal for them.
    For what it's worth, I think Gillet made his comments as a platitude to the fans and because he got carried away with his ownership ego. I don't think he believed it, but it was just a good sound-bite and you're comparison with Rafa's guarantee of 4th place in the league is spot on (I didn't belive Rafa and I don't think he believed it either, but you have to always sound positive when you are in these positions, same with H + G)
    They are bad for the club because they are now almost universally despised by the fans, whether that is deserved or not is academic, as it is FACT (apologies to RG) So, from a business point of view their continued tenure will only drive the value of the club down

    ReplyDelete
  164. I agree with what you are saying, inasmuch as H + G want to derive as much profit as possible from their sale of the club, and so want the best for LFC in terms of making the club more desirable to potential. However, I hope you are not naive enough to believe they want the best for the club in the same way as fans do, ie long term, it is purely a business deal for them.
    For what it's worth, I think Gillet made his comments as a platitude to the fans and because he got carried away with his ownership ego. I don't think he believed it, but it was just a good sound-bite and you're comparison with Rafa's guarantee of 4th place in the league is spot on (I didn't belive Rafa and I don't think he believed it either, but you have to always sound positive when you are in these positions, same with H + G)
    They are bad for the club because they are now almost universally despised by the fans, whether that is deserved or not is academic, as it is FACT (apologies to RG) So, from a business point of view their continued tenure will only drive the value of the club down

    ReplyDelete
  165. I agree with what you are saying, inasmuch as H + G want to derive as much profit as possible from their sale of the club, and so want the best for LFC in terms of making the club more desirable to potential. However, I hope you are not naive enough to believe they want the best for the club in the same way as fans do, ie long term, it is purely a business deal for them.
    For what it's worth, I think Gillet made his comments as a platitude to the fans and because he got carried away with his ownership ego. I don't think he believed it, but it was just a good sound-bite and you're comparison with Rafa's guarantee of 4th place in the league is spot on (I didn't belive Rafa and I don't think he believed it either, but you have to always sound positive when you are in these positions, same with H + G)
    They are bad for the club because they are now almost universally despised by the fans, whether that is deserved or not is academic, as it is FACT (apologies to RG) So, from a business point of view their continued tenure will only drive the value of the club down

    ReplyDelete
  166. aaargh it's all gone a bit haywire!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  167. 'KANWAR' you are a 'PLONKER', goog bye! This has been the last time I for me to read your 'crap'.

    ReplyDelete
  168. talking through you arse again jamie that all i need to say to you lad

    ReplyDelete
  169. Mr Kanwar

    I read your supporting statments of Mr Hicks and Mr Gillett and I therefore try and consider their tenure objectively or as per the ordinary person on the 26 to Sheil Road bus.

    I just can't see what they have done to improve the club; Ok I agree that they have advanced us further then Mr Moores and Mr Parry. However, no matter what way you try to paint the picture, these following facts are still present:

    No Stadium
    More debt than what we had prior to their takeover
    No money to purchase players to push us on from 2nd to 1st
    Complete contempt for the badge and fans

    Liverpool are in trouble and they blame the credit crunch. However, every seat at Anfield is filled and merchandise purchased is at the highest, and the facts are they managed to squeeze more money out of the banks to refinance but couldn't for the production of  a new stadium?

    ReplyDelete
  170. *cough* so what have we got for our £50million so far?

    ReplyDelete
  171. You are quite deluded im afraid

    http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Liverpool-takeover-Tom-Hicks-scuppers-two-perfect-fit-offers-for-Anfield-club-article452141.html

    ReplyDelete
  172. No - you are deluded for falling hook line and sinker for blatant scaremongering.  This article is designed to rasie the anxiety level of liverpool fans once again.  Just look at the last lines:


    The RBS are increasingly frustrated at the process, and sources close to the deal are suggesting there is a chance they will offer the Americans an ultimatum of finding a buyer "within months", or they will pull the plug on the loans.

    What absolute crap.  Can you not see the agenda here?  Oh no!  RBS are going to pull the plug on loans if H+G don't sell and blah blah blah.

    Believe that and you'll believe anything.

    ReplyDelete
  173. OF COURSE YOU WORK FOR HICKS AND GILLETT.. YOU ARE DEDICATED TO PROMOTING THEIR AGENDA AND MISINFORMATION. WHY IS IT A JOKE ABOUT RBS AND HOW ARE YOU SO SURE ONE WAY OR ANOTHER ..  HOW ARROGANT YOU ARE THAT WE (EVERY TRUE LIVERPOOL FAN ) SHOULD BE BRANDED AS HYSTERICAL , IGNORANT ETC.. FOR VOICING OUR CONCERNS.
      WHO WERE YOUR OTHER CONTACTS YOU HAVE HAD OVER THE YEARS BEFORE THE YANKS CAME IN ? 

    ReplyDelete
  174. @Jamie Kanwar: Your name suggets you are a Punjabi to an extent and so am I also one but you are an utter disgrace to the name you support adn to the community.

    Don't you get sick of licking Tom Hicks and George Gillette's ass all the time. For God's sake, man you have some capacity to lie and to churn out absloute tripe day in day out, its despicable at the least.

    It's a tragedy that people like you even have an Internet connection. A poor guy in Africa would do more with it and make his life better then the utter tripe that you dish out.

    I feel sorry for the people around you. How do they manage to look at you everyday and not feel like hell and still continue to work with you.

    ReplyDelete
  175. I was going to ask a very similar question Andy.

    Are you affiliated in any way with the Hicks organisation.

    It is quite plain that your purpose is to destroy the reputation of Rafa Benitez and anyone who is supportive of him, while at the same time do your utmost to praise Hicks.

    You present a consistently biased account and seem to have no concerns that this bickering ultimately is bad for the club.

    Football and the club play a very distant second fiddle to Hicks v Benitez. I think you seem to have lost focus on what's important.

    ReplyDelete
  176. This article promised "proof".

    Proof is defined as "The evidence or argument that compels the mind to accept an assertion as true."

    I see no proof in this article. There is, at best, an explanation from Hicks which may or may not be true.

    It therefore seems to me that Mr Kanwar is playing it fast and loose with the title of his article.

    Given that Mr Kanwar is quick to refer to the dictionary to answer his critics, it is unlikely that Mr Kanwar is unaware of the definition of the word "proof". Instead, it is more likely that he is aware of what it means but has chosen to misuse the word in order to make his article seem more interesting and to attract readers.

    While this not proof that Mr Kanwar is a liar, the fact that he has not been entirely honest in naming the article does suggest Mr Kanwar is not above distorting the truth when it suits him. Similarly, his conduct does allow one to draw an inference that Mr Kanwar's articles may not be as factually accurate and as fairly presented as he claims.

    With the above in mind, readers might wish to take his articles with a pinch of salt.

    ReplyDelete
  177. He hasnt got any contacts at the club. The United supporting little shit made up that email and is as big a wum as you'll find. If I ever meet you Kanwar, I swear I'll cut you.

    ReplyDelete
  178. <span>

    I don’t see the pressing relevance to drag this(spade in the ground) thing up again?
    The other matters affecting us are more of a priority.
    The upcoming summer transfer budget.
    The assurances required for continuity ie- vital works such as the local youth project with the Barcelona staff.
    Since u have I must say a few things do strike me with the stadium issues, first and most interestingly foremost how the hell did they ever intend to fund it from the start? THIS I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW. They had no money to buy us so where was it coming from more leverage/debt ?
    Also The stadium plans where already long in the tooth well before H&G studies,research planning etc.. Ample process had been in effect on it,any unlikely tweeking would not have taken long.
    Which brings me to the fact H&G came in feb 2007 plenty of time to get the stadium project underway before the credit crunch.
    Its important to remember the site in question is prime and ripe - its geographic position,type of land is basically a ideal construction canvas, no real ergonomic problems like Arsenal had. So again with someone ready with the funds of it goes - also even once the credit crunch was underway this would bring about opportunities for savvy men to turn the climate to their advantage - alas that ruled our lot out as yes we have no darn money in the first place.
    Another thing that strikes me is saying the design had to be redone as it was out of date! well whats the point in throwing more £ at it again when its not going to happen soon!?
    It adds upto disturbing statements from people entrusted with such important roles,
    These people just don’t inspire confidence in fact the total oposite since the first year of Investment.
    We all know Hicks saying to the Texas Rangers supporters...'there'll be plenty of dollars dropping out of Liverpool Football Club'. Tells a sorry story - perhaps he forgot he said that or was misinformed about our wealth!! Yeh sure.
    I recall also they didn’t tell the truth about one of the mayjor builders Laing O'Rourke being told to lay off the project 2 years ago.The builders had no reason to lie yet the owners said its still ongoing - more TOSH im afraid.
     
    One of our owners Hicks has screwed up so bad Texas Rangers has filled for bankruptcy a & the Dallas Stars is also in a percarurious position, is this how you measure their success ?
    They ignore industry advisors, experts predicted they should cut losses in many areas they ignored it and made a worse situation.
    We should be very concerned - a another recent observation from a respected financial organisation in the States quipped-
    ‘I still can't believe how much he leveraged the Liverpool franchise. It's one thing to leverage a company and then sell it off piece by piece, but to do that to a sports franchise is lunacy....just what are you going to sell off???
    </span><span><span></span></span><span></span>
    <span></span>

    ReplyDelete
  179. How can you be sure that they really intended to build the stadium? Are you aware that they have been giving false promises before to other clubs they have owned? Hicks has been voted for the worst  sport club owner in USA. Or do you think that it's just a coincidence? Hicks promised new players, construction of new stadium etc. when he owned Corinthias in Brasil. Nothing happenned. So I must say that you have no proves whatsoever about the sincere and honest statement of intent. Everything they have done here and before proves otherwise. This article is bullshit. Forgive me my language.

    ReplyDelete
  180. More critical realism from today's online press??






    <p>"Liverpool co-owner Tom Hicks has decided to put personal gain above the club’s future again by rejecting two ‘perfect’ offers from investors to buy the Anfield giants despite George Gillett’s willingness to agree to a sale.
    </p><p> 
    </p><p>Texan Hicks has decided to risk the wrath of Liverpool fans as it was revealed that the American will not budge from his own valuation of the club at £800 million, despite the current global economic climate making it almost impossible for anyone to want to buy at that price. With Liverpool also not in the Champions League next season and struggling to build a team capable of challenging in the Premier League, the club’s value will continue to drop every day until fresh investment can be had.
    </p><p> 
    </p><p>With his own personal finances also suffering a blow after announcing that his Major League Baseball franchise the Texas Rangers filed for bankruptcy two weeks ago, Hicks is unlikely to care much about the feelings on the Kop as he hopes to receive a big payoff from Liverpool’s sale.
    </p><p> 
    </p><p>The American’s refusal to cooperate has led to much annoyance from Barclays Capital who were tasked to find new investors for Liverpool. The financial institution stated that there have been two “perfect fit” offers from investors – one from the Middle East and the other from America – that could have been advanced had Hicks agreed to a more realistic price.
    </p><p> 
    </p><p>It is now rumoured that the Royal Bank of Scotland – Liverpool’s creditors – will now threaten to foreclose on the club’s loan of £237 million unless they find new owners within a few months. The bank had agreed to an extension of the loan for a further 12 months only months ago on the agreement that the club would make good on a deal to acquire fresh investment by replacing the two American co-owners."
    </p><p>Anyone who believes anything Tom Hicks says is a naive gullible fool - just like David Moores.</p>

    ReplyDelete
  181. <p>Never mind whether Hicks is a liar or not, look at his record. Here's the latest entirely predictable news.
    </p><p> 
    </p><p>"Liverpool co-owner Tom Hicks has decided to put personal gain above the club’s future again by rejecting two ‘perfect’ offers from investors to buy the Anfield giants despite George Gillett’s willingness to agree to a sale.
    </p><p> 
    </p><p>Texan Hicks has decided to risk the wrath of Liverpool fans as it was revealed that the American will not budge from his own valuation of the club at £800 million, despite the current global economic climate making it almost impossible for anyone to want to buy at that price. With Liverpool also not in the Champions League next season and struggling to build a team capable of challenging in the Premier League, the club’s value will continue to drop every day until fresh investment can be had.
    </p><p> 
    </p><p>With his own personal finances also suffering a blow after announcing that his Major League Baseball franchise the Texas Rangers filed for bankruptcy two weeks ago, Hicks is unlikely to care much about the feelings on the Kop as he hopes to receive a big payoff from Liverpool’s sale.
    </p><p> 
    </p><p>The American’s refusal to cooperate has led to much annoyance from Barclays Capital who were tasked to find new investors for Liverpool. The financial institution stated that there have been two “perfect fit” offers from investors – one from the Middle East and the other from America – that could have been advanced had Hicks agreed to a more realistic price.
    </p><p> 
    <span>It is now rumoured that the Royal Bank of </span><span>Scotland</span><span> – </span><span>Liverpool</span><span>’s creditors – will now threaten to foreclose on the club’s loan of £237 million unless they find new owners within a few months. The bank had agreed to an extension of the loan for a further 12 months only months ago on the agreement that the club would make good on a deal to acquire fresh investment by replacing the two American co-owners."</span>
    </p>

    ReplyDelete
  182. Ja'mie,

    Thanks for the article. I have to agree there is quite clearly considerable "anti-H/G" feeling (rightly or wrongly, make your own mind up) both within and without the media.

    You have however, missed a rather pertinent point here. Do you know why H&G were so keen to declare the existing plans obsolete (it seemed to be a perfectly viable and attractive blueprint for a stadium)? Do you know why a whopping £50m (ish, I dont have exact figures) has been spent thus far on plans/designs etc?

    Please ask yourself these questions; Who prepared the original pre-H&G stadium plans? Who prepared the new stadium plans? What (if anything) did H&G have to gain by engaging with the new architects?

    I am not trying to put forward any point of view here. I am merely asking you/the readers to consider, what I believe to be a rather important question. I am not an avid reader of this site, but do respect your willingness to put forward a completely balanced view. However, without taking into account the questions I have posed, I dont believe this can be completely balanced.

    To kick you off Stadium plans for the "New Anfield" began in 2002, planning permission was granted in 2003,, city council approve design in 2006 and, 2006 £9m grant provided to Liverpool by EU. H&G take over in 2007 and engage HKS as the "new" architects to design the stadium in 2008. I think it would be helpful for all if you could explain WHO HKS are, WHERE they are based, WHAT projects they have executed previously, AND is there any link between HKS and our owners??

    As previously stated, the purpose of this post is to highlight an aspect of this stadium argument which you seem to have either missed, or ignored. I have my own views as to the importance of this, and they are, and will stay, my views. However, I'm very interested to hear your take on this Ja'mie/fellow readers

    ReplyDelete
  183. Stop writing the TRUTH in you article postings and perhaps a few more people will read this as truth, and not Heat magazine-style INCREASED FONT SIZES and reiteration of buzz words using bold formatting

    Its like reading a 12 year olds diary

    ReplyDelete
  184. Good article as always Jamie. Balanced and objective.

    ReplyDelete
  185. Good article as always Jamie. Balanced and objective.

    ReplyDelete
  186. Thanks for your comments.  You raise some good points.  I'll be posting something soon tracing the stadium development, examining how it has progressed, and following the money over the last 10 years.

    ReplyDelete
  187. i my post has been deleted ....
    so its showed urself cant accept any input by the others
    u r juz have ur own agenda

    ReplyDelete
  188. a few things do strike me with the stadium issues,
    hopefully this astute ost will not get deleted

     first and most interestingly foremost how the hell did they ever intend to fund it from the start? THIS I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW. They had no money to buy us so where was it coming from more leverage/debt ?
    Also The stadium plans where already long in the tooth well before H&G studies,research planning etc.. Ample process had been in effect on it,any unlikely tweeking would not have taken long.
    Which brings me to the fact H&G came in feb 2007 plenty of time to get the stadium project underway before the credit crunch.
    Its important to remember the site in question is prime and ripe - its geographic position,type of land is basically a ideal construction canvas, no real ergonomic problems like Arsenal had. So again with someone ready with the funds of it goes - also even once the credit crunch was underway this would bring about opportunities for savvy men to turn the climate to their advantage - alas that ruled our lot out as yes we have no darn money in the first place.
    Another thing that strikes me is saying the design had to be redone as it was out of date! well whats the point in throwing more £ at it again when its not going to happen soon!?

    It adds upto disturbing statements from people entrusted with such important roles,
    These people just don’t inspire confidence in fact the total oposite since the first year of Investment.
    We all know Hicks saying to the Texas Rangers supporters...'there'll be plenty of dollars dropping out of Liverpool Football Club'. Tells a sorry story - perhaps he forgot he said that or was misinformed about our wealth!! Yeh sure.
    I recall also they didn’t tell the truth about one of the mayjor builders Laing O'Rourke being told to lay off the project 2 years ago.The builders had no reason to lie yet the owners said its still ongoing - more TOSH im afraid.


    One of our owners Hicks has screwed up so bad Texas Rangers has filled for bankruptcy a & the Dallas Stars is also in a percarurious position, is this how you measure their success ?
    They ignore industry advisors, experts predicted they should cut losses in many areas they ignored it and made a worse situation.
    We should be very concerned - a another recent observation from a respected financial organisation in the States quipped-
    ‘I still can't believe how much he leveraged the Liverpool franchise. It's one thing to leverage a company and then sell it off piece by piece, but to do that to a sports franchise is lunacy....just what are you going to sell off???

    ReplyDelete
  189. Many thanks for the response Jamie. I look forward to reading your piece on the stadium development.

    To quickly answer my own questions:

    HKS is a  Dallas-based arcitectural firm
    HKS were involved in the building of the Dallas Cowboy's stadium.
    HKS has indirect (one could potentilly argue direct) links to our co-owner Tom Hicks

    Again, to restate my intentions, the above statements are fact and are not open to debate. I am only highlighting these points to gives this debate a more "rounded" view

    ReplyDelete
  190. i normally ignore this plebsite but the capitalised PROOF was just too tempting

    i can honestly say you've actually made me laugh out loud

    love the tom hicks email ....... ridiculously bad ...... you are, without doubt, the funniest and most deranged individual on the web, great stuff

    ReplyDelete
  191. At the end of the day what is more important? talk or action.... Lets just get the messers hicks and gillett out of our club.
    We all know they are taught peter mandleson how to spin the odd tale or 2 - how to turn lies into almost believable truths and think that the average fan is about as thick as a texan steer. they are deluded as you are mr kenwar, please - if you are on there payroll (which no doubt you would deny) just join some other clubs fanbase and write about them because it seems you have no loyalty here.

    ReplyDelete
  192. I THOUGHT HICKS SON HAD BEEN REMOVED FROM THE CLUB. THAT IS THE ONLY PERSON WHO WOULD THINK ABOUT DEFENDING ITCHY AND SCRATCHY.

    THEY LIED FACT. SPADE IN THE GROUND IN 60 DAYS NO MENTION OF THE PLANS NEEDING CHECKING. AND U WOULD THINK THAT IF YOU ARE BUYING A CLUB WITH BUILDING PERMISSION YOU WOULD CHECK THE FINE PRINT PRIOR TO BUYING. WOULD YOU BUY A HOUSE WITH PLANNING PERMISSION FOR AN EXTENSION AND NOT WANT TO SEE PLANS BEFORE BUYING.

    SO MR HICKS SON...............................YOU CAN FOOL SOME PEOPLE SOME TIME BUT YOU CANT FOOL ALL THE PEOPLE ALL THE TIME!!

    ReplyDelete
  193. I always wondered why u were so staunchly pro the american owners and now i see its that u were won over by one of them sending u an e mail. Oh my jamie, u are easily bought. Can u not even see in the e mail that tom junior  (who is no longer involved with the club) sent u that the wheels of their propoganda machine are well and truly in motion.
    First they start of by praising your good self as being rational. Anyone who reads anything on this site realises thats the right way to rub u up so they did their homework there. 2nd - They immediately shift the blame to rick parry, sure why not? everybody else is blaming him, even though not to long ago all these guys - parry/hicks/gillette were all great mates. Then they blame the credit crunch, nothing new there then by finally signing off by telling you how great u are again.. One short email and your bought by dark side.
    What i found amusing is the security software question that u may not know the send er of the email so u can 'mark as safe' or 'mark as junk'. Any sane minded individual would mark an email from any of those cowboys as junk for sure.
    Jamie what u dont seem to realise is that these guyys havent spent 1 penny of their own money on liverpool, they havent spent one penny of their own money travelling to liverpool to watch a game or to talk about spades in the ground or how well we're progressing, cough cough. It all comes out of the clubs coffers.
    they bought the club using the club as colateral plunged us into debt and now all they have to do is pay off the interest every year until they can get the price they are looking for to sell the club. it's as simple as that. If u think we can progress working like that u are sorely mistaken.
    Anywho, you should already be aware of everything i have written above. but i just dropped by today to hear your reaction to the fact that season ticket prices have risen again this season/ I'm sure hicks or gillettte could send a fancy email to explain this one but it'll just be bullshit, they are absolute jokers and are hitting the real fans in their pockets again.
    Another story doing the rounds this week is that your friends dad, mr tom hicks has turned down to perfectly reasonable offers as he holds out for somewhere between 600 to 800 million!!!
    Oh but aren't u forgetting we're in a credit crunch???? hmmmm
    something stinks here kanwarr

    ReplyDelete
  194. torres . gerrard?

    ReplyDelete
  195. Hello

    the AFL design stadium complied with a through brief and the operational demands of a modern state of the art stadium. The fact AFL were asked to redesign the stadium because of HKS's inability to produce a design within budget is testament to the calibre of the srchitectural practice. In fact AFL still work closely with the club. The FACTS are that one Mr Gillette and Mr Hicks took over they wanted a 76,000 seater stadium. They wanted HKS to design the stadium. What happened was witha £280m pound budget HKS presented a scheme that laing O'rourke priced at £500m. Mr Hicks and Mr Gillette loved the vision of the stadium but could not afford it. HKS struggles to value engineer the stadium which is when AFL were asked to re-bid for the job via a competition.
    If HKS told Mr Gillette and Mr Hicks that the AFL Stadium was obsolete, it was with the sole intention of taking the job via misinformation. The stadium design side of HKS rests in their Dallas office and they have no experience of european football stadium, Which is why they got into a position whereby Mr Hicks wanted them and Mr Gillette wanted AFL back.
    It is also the principal reason why the two owners fell out.
    Thanks
    Abdel

    ReplyDelete
  196. This page must be made up? Liverpool fan? - I think not! Just read a couple of articles and its utter nonsense - a radical view on every piece of bad news on the owners and any piece of good news on the manager.

    Hilarious if it wasn´t so illinformed. I´ve heard a couple of rumours going about about people setting up webpages, hiring web users to get their messages through. Well G&H I´ve got you message - and your still not welcome!

    By the way - check the number of United fans in your facebook grupo mr. Kanwar.

    ReplyDelete
  197. Why did u take the following email down? it doesnt break the rules of your comment policy. please do not silence me.
    I always wondered why u were so staunchly pro the american owners and now i see its that u were won over by one of them sending u an e mail. Oh my jamie, u are easily bought. Can u not even see in the e mail that tom junior  (who is no longer involved with the club) sent u that the wheels of their propoganda machine are well and truly in motion.
    First they start of by praising your good self as being rational. Anyone who reads anything on this site realises thats the right way to rub u up so they did their homework there. 2nd - They immediately shift the blame to rick parry, sure why not? everybody else is blaming him, even though not to long ago all these guys - parry/hicks/gillette were all great mates. Then they blame the credit crunch, nothing new there then by finally signing off by telling you how great u are again.. One short email and your bought by dark side.
    What i found amusing is the security software question that u may not know the send er of the email so u can 'mark as safe' or 'mark as junk'. Any sane minded individual would mark an email from any of those cowboys as junk for sure.
    Jamie what u dont seem to realise is that these guyys havent spent 1 penny of their own money on liverpool, they havent spent one penny of their own money travelling to liverpool to watch a game or to talk about spades in the ground or how well we're progressing, cough cough. It all comes out of the clubs coffers.
    they bought the club using the club as colateral plunged us into debt and now all they have to do is pay off the interest every year until they can get the price they are looking for to sell the club. it's as simple as that. If u think we can progress working like that u are sorely mistaken.
    Anywho, you should already be aware of everything i have written above. but i just dropped by today to hear your reaction to the fact that season ticket prices have risen again this season/ I'm sure hicks or gillettte could send a fancy email to explain this one but it'll just be bullshit, they are absolute jokers and are hitting the real fans in their pockets again.
    Another story doing the rounds this week is that your friends dad, mr tom hicks has turned down to perfectly reasonable offers as he holds out for somewhere between 600 to 800 million!!!
    Oh but aren't u forgetting we're in a credit crunch???? hmmmm
    something stinks here kanwarr

    ReplyDelete