LFCKEV71

John Henry Gets `Steal' as $476 Million in Liverpool May Double John W. Henry’s New England Sports Ventures may double its investment in Liverpool Football Club in five years, according to bankers who work with English Premier League teams. Henry, 61, purchased England’s most successful soccer team for 300 million pounds ($476 million), 81 million pounds more than Tom Hicks and George Gillett paid for it in February 2007. Hicks and Gillett were forced to sell to repay 200 million pounds of the club’s 351 million pounds of debt. Henry, who owns Major League Baseball’s Boston Red Sox, isn’t buying a broken business, said bankers who requested anonymity because they didn’t want to lose other teams in the league as clients. Hicks, 64, and Gillett, 72, raised revenue and operating profit at the 118-year-old club before being felled by debt and a credit crisis that made banks less willing to lend. “This is a steal,” said Marc Ganis, a Chicago-based consultant who was a principle in a Chinese group negotiating to buy the club. “There is a reason John Henry was so eager to close this deal -- he got himself the bargain of the century.” Two bankers who requested anonymity say that, under ordinary circumstances, the team would have been worth an additional 100 million to 150 million pounds. In five years, it may be worth twice as much, they said. Ganis agreed. Forbes Magazine estimated Liverpool’s value at 533 million pounds in its April 21 edition. Never Walk Alone Liverpool, which has fan clubs in cities from New York to Bangkok, dominated European soccer for two decades, winning 11 of its 18 English championships and four of its five European Cups between 1972 and 1990, with players such as Kenny Dalglish, Ian Rush and John Barnes. The team logo bears the words “You’ll Never Walk Alone,” and fans sing the Richard Rodgers and Oscar Hammerstein song before every home match. Fans protested Hicks and Gillett’s ownership because of the debt loaded onto the team, holding marches and burning the U.S. flag. In the Kop, a section of the stadium that holds some of the team’s most fervent fans, supporters held banners that said “Thanks, but no Yanks.” During the hearing that cleared the sale to Henry at the High Court in London, scores of red-clad Liverpool supporters cheered and sang when Hicks and Gillett were ordered to sell. Henry’s purchase came at one of the darkest times in Liverpool’s history: The club was off to its worst start in 57 seasons, and it has been two decades since it won an English championship. Red Sox Success Liverpool fans may take solace in Henry’s record with the Red Sox: The club has won two championships since his purchase in 2002; its most recent title before then was in 1918. The sale slashed Liverpool’s annual debt payment to between 2 million and 3 million pounds from between 25 million and 30 million pounds, Henry’s investment group said in a news release last month. It didn’t say how it financed the agreement, and Henry didn’t return messages left at his office. Hicks and Gillett increased sales 46 percent to 195.5 million pounds in three years through July 31 and raised operating profit -- which doesn’t include interest on debt or player acquisition costs -- more than threefold to 32 million pounds. Liverpool may surpass 200 million pounds in revenue for the first time at the end of the current season, though audited financial reports for fiscal 2010 won’t be available until April. Hicks declined to be interviewed, while Gillett wouldn’t comment on the potential value of the team under Henry’s group. Hicks, in a press release, called that sale to Henry’s group an “epic swindle” and tried to stop the sale in court. ‘Made Them Winners’ British Airways Plc Chairman Martin Broughton, who became Liverpool chairman in April at the request of creditor Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc, said the board favored Henry because of his success with the Red Sox. “They came in and made them winners,” he said in an interview last month. “That’s what we want to see.” Liverpool today announced it has hired recruitment company Spencer Stuart to find a replacement for a chief executive officer following Managing Director Christian Purslow’s exit last month. Henry’s business partner Tom Werner was named chairman last week. Broughton said the team’s problems were caused by a reliance on debt by Hicks and Gillett, not lack of operational acumen. “The commercial revenue was way higher than what it was before,” Broughton said. “They’ve done some pretty good things. Without the leverage they could have been successful.” Expansion Plans With revenue up and debt down, the new owners are in a position to invest in the club. Hicks and Gillett planned to spend 350 million pounds on a new 60,000-seat stadium, which would have added about 75 more hospitality suites and about 8,000 premium seats. Henry’s group hasn’t decided whether to adopt the plan or consider other possibilities, Liverpool spokesman Paul Tyrrell said. Anfield, the team’s 126-year-old home, has 45,000 seats and 25 hospitality suites that generated 42.5 million pounds in fiscal 2009. By comparison, game-day revenue at London team Arsenal more than doubled in a year to 93.9 million pounds after it moved to a new 60,000-seat stadium in July 2006, according to the team. Revenue Trails Liverpool’s match-day revenue ranks eighth in England and compares with 108.8 million pounds at Manchester United, 100.1 million pounds at Arsenal and 74.5 million pounds at Chelsea, Deloitte LLP said in its Football Money League report in March. However, Liverpool’s revenue from sponsorships and merchandise for fiscal 2009 was the second highest in the Premier League at 67.7 million pounds, trailing only Manchester United (70 million pounds), Deloitte said. As the business side stabilizes, the team is showing signs of recovery on the field. The Reds, who play at Wigan tonight, have lost once in five games since the takeover and they beat league leader and defending champion Chelsea 2-0 on Nov. 7. “We’ve won four games in a row,” said striker Fernando Torres, who scored both goals against Chelsea, his first two- goal game of the season. “This is what we have to be doing more regularly because this is what Liverpool is all about. We are now moving in the right direction.” http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-10/john-henry-gets-steal-as-476-million-in-liverpool-may-double.html

Don't care if She's a gold digging she our lucky charm she's been to two game and we've won two:D

Deal Done

Tom Hicks thrown in the towel? This statement from Hicks (in full): LFC owners to pursue $1.6 billion from "epic swindle" Hicks and Gillett withdraw TRO blocking sale of Liverpool Football Club. Action prevents RBS from needlessly putting Club into administration. RBS rejected owners' pledge to pay off all debts by October 15. Attorneys say ludicrous, self-serving and illegal behavior from directors and outsiders to hinder Club for years. "It's an extraordinary swindle and it will result in exactly the wrong thing for the Club and the fans." Those were the words used by attorneys representing Liverpool Football Club owners this morning when they announced they would apply all of their legal energies toward securing at least $1.6 billion in damages they expect will result from the proposed illegal sale of the Liverpool Football Club. Attorneys also stated that protracted litigation concerning the Liverpool transaction will now cause even more uncertainty for the LFC. "This outcome not only devalues the Club but it also will result in long-term uncertainty for the fans, players and everyone who loves this sport because all legal recourses will be pursued," said Steve Stodghill, the Texas attorney representing the Liverpool owners. "Mr. Hicks and Mr. Gillett pledged to pay the debt to RBS so that the Club could avoid administration that was threatened by RBS. That offer was rejected. It is a tragic development that others will claim as a victory. This means it won't be resolved the way it should be resolved. My clients worked tirelessly to resolve these issues but RBS would not listen to any reasonable solution and the Directors acted selfishly and illegally." Stodghill said the owners have no choice but to pursue every legal avenue possible, and they will. "Mr. Hicks and Mr. Gillett wanted to position this club for the future, but others have a different agenda," said Stodghill. "In truth, there is nothing positive from these events for Liverpool Football. That is exactly the opposite of what my clients wanted to achieve. "

H+G have withdrawn action blocking sale - will pusue $1.6bn dollar claim for "epic swindle"

NESV purchase of LFC done. Hicks threatening to sue as he deems it to be illegal.

Hicks & Gillett have lifted the restraining order clearing the path for the sale of the club. To who though?

it would be funny if this happend http://forums.liverpoolfc.tv/showthread.php?t=206477&page=7 My name is Michael Flannery. I'm a class action lawyer in St. Louis, Missouri. Here is my website: http://www.careydanis.com. I am a life-long LFC supporter. Yes, I know who Shankly, Paisley and Dalglish are, and I can sing YNWA and I know that Smicer scored the second goal in Istanbul (and scored in the penalty shoot-out, as did Cisse). Contact me at 1-800-721-2519, if anyone wants to seriously discuss the possibility of bringing a class action lawsuit. I have been practicing in this area since 1994, and have litigated cases in state and federal court across the nation. Seriously, if you want to talk about it, call me and let's talk. YNWA and JFT96. Cheers. Michael J. Flannery, Esq. Carey, Danis & Lowe 8235 Forsyth Boulevard Suite 1100 St. Louis, MO 63105 Telephone: (314) 725-7700 Facsimile: (314) 721-0905 e-mail: mflannery@careydanis.com website: http://www.careydanis.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information in this e-mail (and any attachments) is CONFIDENTIAL and may be protected by one or more legal privileges. It is intended only for the recipient(s) listed above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, distribution, copying or use of the contents of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify Carey, Danis & Lowe immediately by returning the e-mail to the sender (and deleting it from your system) or contacting us at (314) 725-7700.

hicks and gillet file for injunction in arctic court 2 penguins and a polar bear

John W Henry now run down there & sign that paper quickly :-)

We won it two times, we won it two times, in the high court we won it two times

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Liverpool-Fans-Counter-Claim/161602740534076?ref=search&v=wall

Liverpool co-owner Tom Hicks remains in control of his share of the club and has not sold out to Mill Financial, Press Association Sport reports. Reports this morning suggested the hedge fund, a branch of Washington-based Springfield Financial, had acquired the Texan's 50% share having already taken ownership of his fellow co-owner George Gillett's half. However, a UK-based spokesman for Tom Hicks told Press Association Sport Mill Financial had not acquired Hicks' shares.

BBC LIVE5 understands that Mill Financial now own both Tom Hicks and George Gillett's shares in Liverpool

Royal Bank of Scotland heading back to the High Court this afternoon. Hearing starts at 2pm.

Liverpool takeover: Martin Broughton begins fightback against Tom Hicks after injunction Liverpool chairman Martin Broughton and his legal advisers will this morning begin considering how to overturn the temporary restraining order filed by Tom Hicks that last night halted the sale of the club. Broughton and John W Henry, owner of New England Sports Ventures, were close to sealing a ?300 million deal before Hicks' dramatic 11th-hour intervention (read the full Dallas injunction here) Discussions will now take place at the London offices of the club's solicitors, Slaughter & May, this morning with a full board meeting expected to follow once a legal strategy has been agreed. One option being considered is to seek an order from a UK court ruling that the Texan writ has no jurisdiction. An alternative will be to seek to have the temporary restraining order overturned by a higher court in Texas. This, though, could take longer and there is already an expectation that the case will take a couple of days to resolve leaving Liverpool's future uncertain until next week. The timetable for resolving this issue may depend on whether Henry remains in the UK and sticks with the arranged plan to attend the Merseyside derby on Sunday. Hicks’ suit, filed against Royal Bank of Scotland, club chairman Broughton, directors Christian Purslow and Ian Ayre, NESV and Liverpool finance director Philip Nash, claims damages totalling approximately $1.6 billion (over ?1 billion). The suit claims that RBS, the board and NESV conspired in an “epic swindle” to sell the club for less than its value. Hicks accuses Broughton, Purslow and Ayre of acting “as pawns of RBS” for ignoring offers he says were higher than the ?300m offered by NESV.

Liverpool FC statement Following the successful conclusion of High Court proceedings today, the Boards of Directors of Kop Football and Kop Holdings met tonight and resolved to complete the sale of Liverpool FC to New England Sports Ventures. Regretably, Thomas Hicks and George Gillett have tonight obtained a Temporary Restraining Order from a Texas District Court against the independent directors, Royal Bank of Scotland PLC and NESV to prevent the transaction being completed. The independent directors consider the restraining order to be unwarranted and damaging and will move as swiftly as possible to seek to have it removed. A further statement will be made in due course.

The owners of Liverpool Football Club today reported that a Texas State District Court has granted a temporary restraining order (TRO) enjoining the Board of Liverpool Football Club (LFC) from executing a sale of the Club to New England Sports Ventures (NESV). The court set a hearing date of October 25, 2010. The TRO request, signed by Judge Jim Jordan of the 160th District Court in Dallas, was part of a lawsuit filed today by the owners of LFC against Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), Martin Broughton, Christian Purslow, Ian Ayre, NESV and Philip Nash. The lawsuit also seeks temporary and permanent injunctions, and damages totaling approximately $1.6 billion (over ?1 billion). The suit lays out the defendants' "epic swindle" in which they conspired to devise and execute a scheme to sell LFC to NESV at a price they know to be hundreds of millions of dollars below true market value (and well below Forbes magazine's recent independent $822 million valuation of the club) - and below multiple expressions of interest and offers to buy either the club in its entirety or make minority investments (including Meriton and Mill Financial). It describes how the defendants excluded the owners from meetings, discussions and communications regarding the potential sale to NESV and interfered with efforts by the owners to obtain financing for Liverpool FC. The Club's owners are represented by attorneys from the international law firm of Fish & Richardson. The following are some of the key points in the complaint, which details the roles of RBS and the other defendants, and also describes previously undisclosed offers to purchase LFC: "The Director Defendants were acting merely as pawns of RBS, wholly abdicating the fiduciary responsibilities that they owed in the sale." "RBS has been complicit in this scheme with the Director Defendants. For example, in letters from RBS to potential investors obtained just within the past few days, RBS has informed investors that it will approve of a deal only if there is "no economic return to equity" for Messrs. Hicks and Gillett. In furtherance of this grand conspiracy, on information and belief, RBS has improperly used its influence as the club's creditor and as a worldwide banking leader to prevent any transaction that would permit Messrs. Hicks and Gillett to recover any of their initial investment in the club, much less share in the substantial appreciation in the value of Liverpool FC that their investments have created." "On or about October 4, 2010, Mr. Hicks received a letter of interest from a third potential purchaser represented by FBR Capital Markets ("FBR"), offering to purchase Liverpool FC for ?375 to ?400 million ($595 to $635 million). The letter informed Mr. Hicks that the potential purchaser would not need financing, possessed the funds to close the transaction, and intended to build a new stadium for Liverpool FC." "Additionally, the Plaintiffs learned just days ago about another potential investor that made a similar offer in the ?350 to ?400 million range that was communicated to Defendant Broughton and another unnamed co-conspirator in late August. According to this investor, Mr. Broughton never responded to the offer. Moreover, when the purported sale to NESV was announced, this investor again contacted Mr. Broughton and informed him that the offer, which significantly exceeded the NESV offer, was still on the table. Again, Mr. Broughton brushed this offer aside without further discussion."

Hicks statement: Texas court has isssued restraining order halting sale of club Hicks lawsuit seeks $1.6 billion in damages against directors of (RBS), Martin Broughton, Christian Purslow, Ian Ayre, NESV and Philip Nash

judgement expected at 10.30am UK TIME make that 10.00am

follow the court case here http://twitter.com/#!/danroan

blank blank

Liverpool to receive new bid from Singapore billionaire http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11518079 The bidding contest for Liverpool FC may not be over, the BBC can reveal. The runner-up in the contest, Peter Lim, a Singapore billionaire, is to approach Liverpool's board with a view to making a higher offer for the club. According to sources close to Mr Lim, he was the club's preferred bidder in the closing stages of the auction. He had talks with Liverpool's chairman about how to announce his takeover, such was the apparent confidence that he would win the contest. 'No loans' Mr Lim learned he was not the victor only a few hours before the club's chairman, Martin Broughton, announced on 6 October that Liverpool would be sold to John Henry's New England Sport Ventures for ?300m. Continue reading the main story “ Start Quote He never had a chance to negotiate directly with Royal Bank [of Scotland] He was expecting to do so, after agreeing the takeover with the board” End Quote Source close to Peter Lim Mr Lim, who is being advised by the British firm of lawyers Macfarlanes and by the Wong Partnership of Singapore, still does not know why Mr Broughton went with New England Sports Ventures, owners of the Boston Red Sox. He believes that in purely monetary terms, his offer was at least as attractive as Mr Henry's. Mr Lim, too, was offering to repay all of Royal Bank of Scotland's and Wachovia's ?200m of long-term debt, to take on ?60m of other debt and to inject ?40m of working capital. What's more - and Mr Lim regards this as crucial - all the money being provided by him would come from his own cash resources. He is not planning to borrow any of it. I understand he is also offering to provide tens of millions of pounds to Liverpool's manager, Roy Hodgson, to allow him to buy players when the transfer window opens in January. According to executives close to Mr Lim, he was told by Mr Broughton that his ability to fund the takeover for cash, and the size of his cash resources, meant he was a more attractive owner than New England Sports Ventures. Mr Lim was told that Liverpool's board was concerned that New England Sports Ventures would have to borrow to finance the takeover - raising questions about whether Liverpool really would break free from the financial shackles perceived to have been imposed by the current owners, George Gillett and Tom Hicks. In the event, New England Sports Ventures have insisted it will not load up Liverpool FC with debt. But there are no guarantees that there will not be significant debt further up the corporate ownership structure of New England Sports Ventures - which could limit how much money Mr Henry and his colleagues can inject into Liverpool in the future. Mr Lim is keeping a close eye on the court case, which starts on Tuesday. The case is supposed to rule on whether Mr Broughton can sell Liverpool to New England Sports Ventures against the wishes of Mr Hicks and Mr Gillett. The Singapore billionaire believes the judgement in that case may give him an opportunity to bid again, whatever Mr Broughton may wish. Business empire Mr Lim is also prepared to buy Liverpool, should it ultimately collapse into administration under UK insolvency procedures. According to sources close to him, he feels that he may have been shut out because New England made an offer to Royal Bank of Scotland to pay some of the ?40m penalty fees the banks have demanded. If that is the case, he believes Royal Bank may have done a poor deal, because he would be prepared to pay RBS and Wachovia more than the ?10m or so which New England Sports Ventures is said to have put on the table. "He never had a chance to negotiate directly with Royal Bank [of Scotland]," said a source. "He was expecting to do so, after agreeing the takeover with the board." Mr Lim has an estimated net worth of $1.6bn (?1bn), according to Forbes Magazine. He made his fortune in fashion, logistics and agri-business. His interest in English football stems from his ownership of several Manchester United themed bars in Asia - which have persuaded him that there is huge global potential for making money from top-flight English football.

Liverpool takeover: court case between RBS and Tom Hicks to begin on Tuesday http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/8056160/Liverpool-takeover-court-case-between-RBS-and-Tom-Hicks-to-begin-on-Tuesday.html The battle for the ownership of Liverpool will begin in the High Court on Tuesday, with Royal Bank of Scotland seeking to enforce contractual agreements made by Tom Hicks and George Gillett that the bank believes have been breached By Paul Kelso, Chief Sports Reporter RBS revealed this afternoon that it was granted an interim injunction against the American co-owners on Friday, preventing them from making any changes to the board of the football club or its holding companies. The bank’s move comes after Hicks and Gillett tried to block the sale of the club to New England Sports Ventures by removing managing director Christian Purslow and commercial director Ian Ayre from the board. Purslow, Ayre and chairman Martin Broughton had agreed to accept a ?300m offer from NESV against the wishes of Hicks and Gillett, who believe the price undervalues the club. The RBS action, which will be heard at 10.30am by Mr Justice Floyd at the Royal Courts of Justice on The Strand, is separate from a “declaratory judgment” being sought by Broughton to approve the sale. Broughton said last week that the co-owners are in breach of under-takings that allowed him to appoint the board, and required them not to block any “reasonable” sale. As these undertakings were made to RBS rather than the club however the bank will test them legally first before Broughton begins his action. In a statement RBS made it clear that its legal action is not an attempt to call in ?237m of loans that become due on Friday, or to appoint an administrator. The statement said: “RBS in its capacity as lender to the Kop group of companies received the benefit of various contractual undertakings from Mr Hicks and Mr Gillett in relation to the corporate governance arrangements that Mr Hicks and Mr Gillett agreed would apply to the Kop group of companies with effect from April 2010. Those undertakings provided for the appointment of Mr Broughton as chairman of the board and the appointment of the chief executive and commercial director of LFC to the Kop boards. “As is well known, Mr Hicks and Mr Gillett purported to make changes to those corporate governance arrangements on 4 October. This was in breach of those contractual undertakings. In light of that purported breach of contract RBS sought and obtained on Friday 8 October 2010 an interim injunction against Mr Hicks and Mr Gillett until a further hearing scheduled for tomorrow. Among other things, that interim injunction prevents Mr Hicks or Mr Gillett taking any steps to remove or replace Mr Broughton from his position as chairman of the board of the Kop companies or from taking any other steps to appoint or remove any directors from the board of the Kop companies. The proceedings tomorrow represent the continuation of Friday's proceedings and relates to breach of contract only. These proceedings do not represent steps by RBS to enforce its security or to appoint an administrator. We are unable to provide any visibility on timing for resolution of these proceedings at this stage.” The RBS action is the start of what could be a protracted legal process which may test the patience of NESV. The suggestion that administration with a nine-point deduction may be the only mechanism for the club to change control has caused concern in John W Henry’s group. They have suggested they will walk away from the deal if the club is docked nine points, and have secured a clause in the deal signed with Broughton in the early hours of Wednesday allowing it to renegotiate the price in the event of administration. NESV’s change in position comes after the Premier League told the club board that a nine-point deduction was a “significant risk” even if the administration occurred at Liverpool’s holding company Kop Football (Holdings) Ltd.

Court Date Set - Tomorrow 12th of October COURT 16 Before MR JUSTICE FLOYD Tuesday, 12 October 2010 At half past 10 Skeleton arguments and bundles for any listed application must be delivered by 10 a.m. on the day before the hearing of the application: see paragraph 7.22 of the Chancery Guide (December 2009). The Chancery Listing Office will accept them if delivered to Room WG4 in time. The papers for any urgent unlisted application (and any skeleton argument or bundle sought to be delivered out of time) must be delivered directly to the Judge's Clerk. Further directions and information about interim applications, and the skeleton arguments and bundles to be prepared for them, will be found in chapters 5 and 7 of the Chancery Guide. Attention is drawn in particular to paragraphs 7.31 and 32 of the Chancery Guide, which warn of the consequences, including costs sanctions, which may follow from the failure to lodge skeleton arguments and bundles on time. APPLICATIONS Exception VAR Ltd v Goff Drummond v Drummond Superyachts.com Ltd v Bodington Wilkinson v North Lloyds TSB v Williams Gee Yeung Law Slutsker v Haron Investments Royal Bank of Scotland PLC v Hicks & ors