Liverpool Rumours And General Discussion 2007/2008

Charlie

Stky10 wrote: »

I don't get Hicks though, he seems to be on a mission to make himself as unpopular as possible?. Is he completely stupid, or is there somehow a method to his madness?

Indeed.

Word on Sky Sports News is that he is dropping Carlsberg in favour of The Sun as Liverpool's shirt sponsors.*









This story is true................................................if by true you mean false

Charlie

walshki wrote: »

No method - just ego. He has somehow fluked his way to being incredibly wealthy and clearly believes he can now say and do what he likes

He reminds me of this guy.

mike65

Fivelive covering this, Hicks wants to fire Parry cos he (Parry) has not done enough to generate revenue off the pitch, sounds like a pretext to me.

Mike.

stick-dan

I don't hate parry, not the best of em but surely isn't the worst. I reckon parry should voice the fans opinion that HICK'S MUST GO ! lol:cool:

GBX

I wonder if Gillette will come out and support Parry now, just to P Hicks off and continue the tiff there having.

Stky10

mike65 wrote: »

Fivelive covering this, Hicks wants to fire Parry cos he (Parry) has not done enough to generate revenue off the pitch, sounds like a pretext to me.

I thought that thats what the Yanks were going to do with their supposed experience in running sports clubs. And surely the easiest way to generate extra revenue would be to build a new ground, which the Yanks were supposed to organise the finance for. Wasn't it supposed to be that they'd start building this new stadium within 30 days of taking over the club, and yet more than a year later they haven't done a thing on this other than spend 50 million on designs for multiple revisions of this stadium. Would this extra revenue that might have been raised be spent on new players, or would it have been used to pay the 20 million it cost to refinance the original loan they took out?

And just who does he think is going to come in with investment for a club thats been run like a sick joke.

Its easy to see what a good businessman Tom Hillbilly really is. No wonder his US teams are doing so well.

mike65

Five also noted that Hicks has been rebuffed by six banks so far, there are not too many others that would even be vaguely interested in the current climate.

DIC can sit and wait for the money to run out.

Mike.

zing

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Timing could be better..If Parry did go (which i dont expect him to just yet) i wonder who would take over the day to day running of the club.

Ian Ayre (clubs commercial director) seems to be the likely internal candidate - or at least a stop gap until someone else is head hunted. He's also someone Hicks put in place so is possibly a Hicks yes man.

Stky10 wrote: »

I don't get Hicks though, he seems to be on a mission to make himself as unpopular as possible?. Is he completely stupid, or is there somehow a method to his madness?

It could be seen as an attempt to remove an anti Hicks/pro Gillet/DIC vote from the board and presumably replace him with a Hicks yes man thus swinging the balance of power in the boardroom if the current ownership mess is unlikely to be resolved anytime soon. Or if he's moving in for complete control he's just trying to get rid of any potential stumbling blocks along the way. Then again - like the rest of us - he could just be p1ssed off with Parry's contribution to the club.

I've little or no sympathy for Parry but I believe he is playing a crucial role in trying to resolve the current mess and based on that I believe he needs to stay for just a bit longer.

PHB

I don't get Hicks though, he seems to be on a mission to make himself as unpopular as possible?. Is he completely stupid, or is there somehow a method to his madness?

He doesn't care what anyone thinks at all, he is running a business, all he cares about is money.

Stky10

mike65 wrote: »

Five also noted that Hicks has been rebuffed by six banks so far, there are not too many others that would even be vaguely interested in the current climate.

DIC can sit and wait for the money to run out.

To be honest, unless Hicks can get a controlling share in the club, I don't think its going to take too long before reality strikes, and he sells up. The only real way for the club to increase in value is for them to build the new ground. To do this, they need to get a loan of approx 300-400m, and in the current environment, the only way they'd get that is to put about 150-200m of their own assets up as security. This isn't going to happen as there's no way Gillette is going to put more money/assets into the club.

So it all depends on Gillette I suppose. Can he sell his shares to DIC or another party, and if not, is he willing to sit on them until reality strikes Tom Hillbilly?.

spockety

PHB wrote: »

He doesn't care what anyone thinks at all, he is running a business, all he cares about is money.

I don't think this particular decision is about money specifically.

I would not be at all surprised if after Gillette's revelations, and Parry's radio interview which basically said "sort things out soon for the good of the club", Hicks has been left looking like the bad man yet again with the fans. He must be pulling his hair out.. "jeez, I talk to Roffa all the time now and give him encouragement and the fans know this.. what else the heck do I have to do to get them dang scousers onside? Hmmm, lemme think.. hang on a darn second.. the fans hate Parry! That's it! Be seen to get rid of Parry, and the fans will love me!".

Back. Fire.

Edit: Hah, ffs it might not be that wide of the mark reading this..!

"The American Civil war that is ripping Liverpool apart reached a new low on Thursday when owner Tom Hicks' son started texting fans' groups the contents of his father's letter demanding the resignation of chief executive Rick Parry.

Disgracefully, the messages were sent by Tom jnr before Parry, who was in London on Liverpool business with the Javier Mascherano appeal, had even seen the letter sent to his Anfield office."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/columnists/columnists.html?in_article_id=558775&in_page_id=1951&ito=newsnow


"Hey guys look what my daddy's doin for ya!".

PHB

Yeh, because millionaires are that stupid.

Stky10

Can't have been a long letter if they can send it via text message. They should have saved themselves the cost of postage so, and just texted it to Parry as well.

That Ayres guy is supposed to be a complete numpty. I can't remember what club he was involved with before (think it was Huddersfield), but apparently he brought them to the edge of bankruptcy.

Guy:Incognito

Speaking of the ground, has the whole thing ground (pardon the pun) to a halt or what?Are they hopeing everyone will forget a new ground was ever mentioned if they dotn talk about it?

Dont be at yourself

Hopefully this Parry business will bring things to a head. By asking him to resign, one assumes that Hicks doesnt have the power to oust him. If Parry refuses, and Gillet backs him, then something is going to have to give.

It's a disgrace though. Liverpool never aired their dirty laundry in public, but now every other week there's some huge scandal. I wish Hicks would **** off.

IrishMike

PHB wrote: »

He doesn't care what anyone thinks at all, he is running a business, all he cares about is money.

I knew it, he is a wimmin!

Malice

I wonder is it all just a smokescreen for something else?

zAbbo

malice_ wrote: »

I wonder is it all just a smokescreen for something else?

Unveiling Henry possibly

Mr Alan

wat could it be a smokescreen for!?

zing

malice_ wrote: »

I wonder is it all just a smokescreen for something else?

Don't know about smokescreen but some are suggesting that this was retaliation for Gillet giving Ian Ayre a b0llicking when he met with him on Tuesday. Some even suggest that b0llicking was because Ayre accompanied Hicks around several banks in London last week as they tried to borrow the money to buy out Gillet. If so it's incredibly petty and we can only expect the whole thing to get even messier before it gets better. If it's true that Ayre accompanied Hicks then Gillet & Parry could possibly have grounds to sack him. Parry can only be removed by the board which is why Hicks couldn't sack him but Ayre is just another employee.

zing

zAbbo wrote: »

Unveiling Henry possibly

Is that Snoogy Doogy's first name then ?

Mr Alan

i just wanna crawl under a rock until all this ****e is over.

I hope there is truth to this...

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11095_3409618,00.html

i especially liked this bit

"I don't wish to discuss possible transfers, but if Liverpool really want me, then this is fantastic and I am truly honoured," he told Vecernji list.


"I watched the Champions League quarter-finals and the way they crushed Arsenal. Only the greatest and the best can play such a match against strong Arsenal"

stick-dan

who is this modric fellow, pardon my ignorance if i should know him, but is he really up to liverpool quality and is there a need for another midfielder at the club.

spockety

PHB wrote: »

Yeh, because millionaires are that stupid.

I don't see where anyone said that stupidity had any part to play whatsoever.

The man is a paper billionaire, and obviously a business world genius. He bought Liverpool last year, did f**k all except load them with debt and kick off a soap opera like saga, and yet a year later his investment has at least doubled in value. The guy obviously has the touch.

But he's still a ****

(there are plenty of words that fit there, put your own in)

Malice

I just threw the smokescreen comment in there. I've no idea what it could be for. I do think the the "commercial under-achievement" comment is appropriate for Parry but there's little to be gained for sacking him now as far as I can see. We've commercially under-achieved for years which makes our extended Champions League runs even more important. Given that Man Utd, Arsenal and Chelsea take in millions more every single home game the stadium fiasco is beyond embarrassing at this stage.

Mr Alan wrote: »

I hope there is truth to this...

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11095_3409618,00.html

I haven't seen anything of Modric at club level but he looks quite assured at international level.

Cyrus

lads has everyone seens this (sorry if a repost)

John Aldridge = Legend!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXIdQlLYjMM

eZe^

stick-dan wrote: »

who is this modric fellow, pardon my ignorance if i should know him, but is he really up to liverpool quality and is there a need for another midfielder at the club.

My mate is from Zagreb, watches him every week, says he's going to be the next big midfield talent in Europe. He has proved it at international level to an extent. He'll be joining a big club this summer for sure.

spockety

zing wrote: »

Don't know about smokescreen but some are suggesting that this was retaliation for Gillet giving Ian Ayre a b0llicking when he met with him on Tuesday. Some even suggest that b0llicking was because Ayre accompanied Hicks around several banks in London last week as they tried to borrow the money to buy out Gillet. If so it's incredibly petty and we can only expect the whole thing to get even messier before it gets better. If it's true that Ayre accompanied Hicks then Gillet & Parry could possibly have grounds to sack him. Parry can only be removed by the board which is why Hicks couldn't sack him but Ayre is just another employee.

Parry was lambasted for years because from what the fans could see on the ground, Liverpool were not letting them spend their cash on the club due to stock problems in the club shop and on the web site. People wanted to spend money, but couldn't, cos they couldn't buy what they wanted. Ian Ayre was brought in last year as Commercial Director, responsible for all of this kind of thing, and STILL you cannot get an M, L size shirt in the club shop most days.. it's grand if you're an S or an XXXL, but most people aren't

IrishMike

Modric

At his team Dinamo Zagreb he usually plays as playmaker, on the left side of the field. His natural position is that of central midfielder and he plays as playmaker solely due to his capabilities to cover that role as well and to leave room for designated defensive midfielders in Dinamo's 4-2-3-1 formation.

He uses both feet to play, and his biggest strength is his swift offensive positioning without the ball. He's also one of few playmakers able to contribute on the defensive end as well. His lack of physical power contradicts his shooting, which has a surprising amount of power that make his shots on goal mostly effective. However, he has plenty of stamina and is very aggressive in one-on-one battles. His timing is perfect, and his passes are accurate.

87 appearances and 25 goals
Not a bad return but you have to question the quality of the league he is playing in.
Also £18m, insane price.
Some goals by him
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZtYsLvRO1c

eZe^

He's a deco style player (when he was at porto). He'd do well at Liverpool.

shotamoose

PHB wrote: »

He doesn't care what anyone thinks at all, he is running a business, all he cares about is money.

The fact is he hasn't got complete discretion to do whatever he wants (hence having to 'ask' Rick Parry to quit) so he would benefit from being able to persuade people, but he doesn't see that so he keeps failing to get what he wants by blundering around setting up conflicts. It's a bit like the US thinking that just because they've got the strongest army in the world nothing bad could possibly come of invading Iraq. Remind me, how did that turn out?

You can get people to do what you want some of the time with hard power (money or guns) but you'll get more people to do more of what you want with if you also use soft power (hearts and minds). Football club ownership is about politics as well as money.

stick-dan

Maybe if parry is indeed hated by the fans, although thats to be proven, could Hicks be doing this to get himself some praise among the fans for eliminating a lesser evil?Just a thought

~Rebel~

Parry calling in the lawyers now anyway..

All-out war has been declared in the Liverpool boardroom after chief executive Rick Parry rejected the demand of co-owner Tom Hicks that he resign and instead took legal advice over the behaviour of the Texan.

http://www.football365.com/story/0,17033,8652_3409645,00.html

mike65

stick-dan wrote: »

Maybe if parry is indeed hated by the fans, although thats to be proven, could Hicks be doing this to get himself some praise among the fans for eliminating a lesser evil?Just a thought

Mad thought! If Hicks actually belives himself to be less hated (not more popular!) than Parry he is delusional.

He can't even force the resignation anyway.

Mike.

stick-dan

mike65 wrote: »

Mad thought! If Hicks actually belives himself to be less hated (not more popular!) than Parry he is delusional.

He can't even force the resignation anyway.

Mike.

Yeah suppose

Least parry is hitting back with legal action now!

redspider

This Hicks v Rick Parry thing is most disconcerting. At this stage, the shenanigans though are NOT affecting the players, which is a good thing, who are hearing stories each week and who no doubt on a daily basis are hearing a lot more than comes out in the public. I would say nothing will surprise them or phase them.

There is clearly a rift between Hicks and Gillet which is nearly breaking out into open warfare. Its clearly not going to do the club/business any favours until it is resolved, and if perceptions are correct, if Hicks wins the battle for ownership, which I think he is now trying to arrange, it could mean long-term problems for the club with levels of investment less than what the club actually needs or would get under different ownership. Moores is partally culpable though for selling to the wrong people and not for passing the club into a safe pair of hands. The 'Liverpool fans share' movement or whatever its called has no chance of getting ownership in this environment if you ask me.

> If Parry refuses, and Gillet backs him, then something is going to have to give. It's a disgrace though. Liverpool never aired their dirty laundry in public, but now every other week there's some huge scandal.

Or maybe nothing will give. If a majority on the board is needed and if the board votes 50-50, then nothing changes. Parry can continue in his job. But it cant be a happy environment.

Liverpool never aired their dirty laundry in public before because they didnt have much to air. Its not the fact that these issues are being leaked or fought out in the public domain, its the fact that they are happening at all.

In terms of Liverpool's commercial performance, yes, there are problems. I did think it strange that last Xmas it was impossible to get Liverpool shirts from Liverpool itself. If they are running out of shirts, then it is crazy! That is basic management. Perhaps there were supplier problems. But there can obly be excuses. With a proper commercial environment in place, Liverpool should have enough merchandies at all times to satisfy the demand.

Whilst this ownership thing rumbles on, it can only hold the club back.

Redspider

zing

Parry this morning - he'd not even seen the letter at that stage.

Well I have not seen the letter. You guys seem to know a lot more about the letter than I do, which says something

My family saw it on Sky Sports, so they were delighted.

This week I shouldn't be the story, the story should be the team. It is offensive to the manager, players and fans in a week when we had another great European triumph there is more dirty linen being washed.

No individual, certainly not me, is bigger than the club. The club will be fine but once again it shows there is a little bit of a lack of unity at the top.

I am just getting on with the job, there is work to do.

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11095_3410072,00.html

spockety

Daily Post article on it... DIC have not gone away you know..

AS LIVERPOOL FC chief executive Rick Parry last night defiantly refused to resign after a request to stand down from co-owner Tom Hicks, the Daily Post can reveal the reasons for the sensational demand.

In a statement, not dissimilar to quotes given by manager Rafael Benitez at the height of a fall-out with the club’s American owners last year, Parry said: “It is my intention to remain focused on the job of serving Liverpool Football Club to the best of my abil- ities at this very important time of our season.”

The unprecedented stand-off comes on the same day it is learned a deal between Dubai International Capital and LFC’s owners is reportedly just a phone call away.

Comments made by Sameer Al Ansari, CEO of Dubai International Capital, to a Middle East business magazine about with-drawing DIC’s offer for LFC were said to be a plea for Hicks to sort his affairs and agree to sell.

Al Ansari has said he “would love to own the club”, but wanted to have control over Liverpool’s destiny before investing.

It is understood that the letter sent, but not yet received by Parry, called on him to “voluntarily resign” because of “commercial under-performance” and “frustrations” at the way he had handled player transfers.

One insider said: “This is just not the Liverpool way, especially after the success of the team on the pitch this week.”

The three-page letter was sent to Parry as Hicks’ 50% share in the club would not allow him to unilaterally dismiss Parry.

It has been circulated to mem-bers of the board, and he is expec-ted to refuse the request after con-sulting lawyers over his position.

A source said: “The basic con-tents of the letter are the commer-cial performance of the club since Rick Parry has been on the board.

“In particular how the club has fallen behind to the big players – [Manchester] United, Arsenal, and Chelsea. He also cites frustration in terms of how some of the player transfers have been handled.”

A report by Deloitte accoun-tants is thought to be the source of Hicks’s belief that Liverpool are failing to capitalise fully on commercial opportunities.

Deloitte's Football Money League, based on revenues gener-ated during 2006/7, places Liver-pool eighth in the list of richest clubs, with revenues of £133.9m.

Real Madrid topped the list with revenues of £236.2m, Manchester United were in second position with £212.1m, Chelsea were fourth with £190.5m, and Arsenal came in fifth by generating £177.6m.

The sensational outbreak of warfare in the Anfield boardroom follows the snubbing of Parry and former owner David Moores in the original allocation of tickets for Liverpool’s first Champions League Quarter Final with Arsenal at the Emirates Stadium.

They originally were told they did not have tickets for the match because Hicks and co-owner George Gillett had taken the allocation. Parry and Moores were later found tickets after behind-the-scenes turmoil.

Last night, claims emerged that Hicks’s son Tom Jnr has been sending texts to fans’ groups over the issue of Parry’s continued involvement at the club.

It is believed Parry’s legal team will also be investigating these allegations.

Contrary to a report in Arabian Business magazine that DIC were pulling out of bidding for the club, Sheikh Mohammed and Al Ansari were last night said to still be keen on completing a deal.

Their £500m offer for the club is understood to remain on the table. That would pay off the club’s £350m debt and leave both Hicks and Gillett with £40m apiece.

A deal could apparently be struck as soon as Hicks’s lawyers call DIC’s London-based chief negotiator, Amanda Staveley.

Although relations with Hicks broke down more than a month ago, Staveley is said to be on good terms with Gillett and in “constant discourse” with him.

The only sticking point on a deal, insiders say, is Hicks.

He has recently been in London with American investment bank Merrill Lynch seeking credit with which to buy out Gillett.

It is thought a “first refusal” agreement between the Americans, in which one must offer their slice of the club to the other before selling to a third party, comes to an end in about six weeks’ time.

After the pre-emption rights expire, Gillett would be free to sell his share to DIC.

Although DIC would likely make an offer, sources close to the Dubai consortium say they will not rest until they have secured 100% of the club.

Both Sheikh Mohammed and Al Ansari are fervent supporters of the club. Al Ansari will almost certainly attend the Moscow final of the UEFA Champions League if the team fend off Chelsea in the semi-final.

Al Ansari was quoted in Arabian Business saying: “We will continue to be interested and would love to own the club but we are not going to put ourselves in a difficult situation where we make the investment but we have no control over the destiny of the club and we cannot influence the success of the club.

“Unfortunately, the terms that have been put on the table do not allow us to do that.”

http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-news/regional-news/2008/04/11/revealed-why-tom-hicks-told-rick-parry-to-resign-from-liverpool-fc-64375-20749846/

RE*AC*TOR

Luka Modric???

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11095_3409618,00.html

*didn't see previous posts*

zing

Gillet gives Parry his backing.
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-fc/liverpool-fc-news/2008/04/11/george-gillett-tom-hicks-can-t-sack-rick-parry-100252-20752074/

PHB

This is gona get interesting.

It really is hilarious that Hicks is so hated that he can rally troops to defend Parry.
I'd say Gilette is positioning himself so that either A. he'll be allowed pick his successor as part of a compromise deal or B. trying to make Hicks re-think the whole thing and sell up.

dobsdave

I just don't get where Hicks is coming from on this.
Even he really just wanted Parry gone on his performance alone,
he knows Gillet doesn't like him and wouldn't sanction the dismissal.
In fact more likely to go the opposite (as he has done) and give Parry his full support.
The Hicks family are outnumbered 4-2 on the board, and it would take a vote of the board to also sanction Parrys removal.:D

Is Hicks just stirring it before he goes, or is there some devious and cunning plan afoot?

dc69

I just saw parry there on Sky sports.That really is terrible for Hicks to embarass the man on national television.Many fans dont like parry but I have a feeling there will be banners showing support for parry at the next match.Really is a cheap shot from Hicks

spockety

If there are actual banners in support of Parry at the next match it will show how truly astounding this development has been.

dc69

spockety wrote: »

If there are actual banners in support of Parry at the next match it will show how truly astounding this development has been.

Do you not think?Thats Hicks cheapest shot to date in my book,a very low point in LFC history.

No one deserves to be treated like that.

spockety

dc69 wrote: »

Do you not think?Thats Hicks cheapest shot to date in my book,a very low point in LFC history.

No one deserves to be treated like that.

Well I could never in a million years picture a banner at Anfield supporting Parry.. that's why I say if it actually does come to pass it will show just how bad things have gone.

tonc76

redspider wrote: »

Or maybe nothing will give. If a majority on the board is needed and if the board votes 50-50, then nothing changes. Parry can continue in his job. But it cant be a happy environment.

Who is the chairman at Liverpool? Am I right in saying that the chairman has the casting vote when a vote is tied?

spockety

Hicks and Gillett are co-chairmen.

Tusky

What an absolute mess the club is. Could it actually get any worse ?

1) We have two owners not on speaking terms

2) Owners having meetings with possible replacements for Rafa behind his back

3) Constant negotiations about the sale of the club

4) Heaps of debt on the club

5) One of the owners attempting to fire the CEO

What a joke.

spockety

Tusky wrote: »

What an absolute mess the club is. Could it actually get any worse ?

Yes, it absolutely could.

Hicks could end up buying out Gillett and gaining 100% control of the club.

or Rafa could get caught up in this (Hicks trying to drag him in by referring to him in
the letter to Parry) and end up leaving the club in the Summer. Remember, Hicks & Gillett last time came up with Jurgen Klinsmann as a suitable replacement for Benitez. I still think that is one of the most frightening revelations to have come out since they took over. Losing Rafa and having them find his replacement does not bear thinking about. That's assuming the club is actually in a state of function that allows it. If the owners aren't on speaking terms, and Hicks rejects everything Parry says, then it means that none of them could go out and find a new manager. We'd be FUBAR'd.

Of course, that also assumes they could find a top class manager who would want to come into the club under the circumstances we find ourselves in.

Oh god.