Are We Right to Trust Broughton & Purslow or are They Taking us All for Fools?

This will be controversial

We have too many fans acting like naïve, gullible, witless fools... like headless chickens. Some people learn from their experiences in life it seems and a hell of lot more are doomed to repeat every mistake over and over again. They’ll blame it all on anything except their inability to learn from their mistakes.

F**k off Broughton you parasitic scum bag.

Not that long ago Broughton & Purslow were being accused, by most of us I suspect, of being prize scum bags. I have one question for those fools who are now spouting utter garbage about what saints and heroes Broughton and Purslime have suddenly become.

What has changed about their behaviour in the interval?

Nothing!

I’ll explain…

The directors of a company have a legally enforceable duty of care to the company they run. Specifically they have a legal duty to ensure that their company is managed and administered on a sound commercial basis, solvently with a view to generating a profit.

If directors fail in that duty they can face criminal prosecution under English law and could face fines, being barred from office (holding further directorships in the future) and in serious cases imprisonment. THIS IS IMPORTANT because it informs everything that is happening to our club.

Broughton was appointed with a specific brief to sell the club to suitable owners and his appointment was either instigated by or required the approval of RBS and other club creditors as a condition for extending finance.

He was appointed because Hicks & Gillett’s credibility is so poor that no prospective buyer was prepared to waste their time negotiating with sellers who valued the club at an absurdly high level and increasingly demonstrated their lack of a genuine commitment to a sale. Even Broughton says so!

H & G wanted to buy time so that the club could be sold for the absurd price they demanded whilst they milked it dry with specious loans from themselves via Kop Cayman etc.

I)   It is clear that RBS do not under any circumstances wish to take control of Liverpool Football Club for a myriad reasons which should be clear to everyone.
ii)   It is clear that neither Hicks nor Gillett can raise the funds to repay RBS when the term of the finance expires later this month.
iii)   It is therefore clear that unless there is a sale the club will go into administration because whilst commercial operations may be profitable the club as whole is not and what’s more the company auditors have qualified the company accounts two year in a row.

What does that mean? It means the club’s accountants have said that they doubt the company can continue to trade without becoming, in layman’s terms, bankrupt.

Get it? Don’t listen to that lying c**t Purslime take a look at the f**king accounts: the balance sheet is technically insolvent and the profit and loss account is generating ever more losses.

The only way that RBS could avoid this situation would be to extend the period of the finance to Hicks & Gillett until a buyer can be found and the sale proceeds would be used to pay off the club’s creditors.

This is something that RBS have already done on more than one occasion and which they are now very reluctant to do again. They have put immense pressure on Broughton to deal with this so that they aren’t embarrassed again.

RBS extended the period of the finance when Hicks & Gillett previously tried to raise money to meet the company’s debts and appointed Purslime for that specific purpose.

Purslime failed miserably because the Rhone Group offer of £100m for a 40% stake was frankly little more than a pathetic joke valuing the club at something over £250m (£100m x 100/40).  H & G then tried to sell the club but could not find a buyer either prepared to pay their absurd valuation of £800m or who could trust them.

The patience of RBS ran out because they thought H & G were not serious about selling and insisted upon the appointment Broughton to ensure a sale would be completed before the finance ran out. They made this a condition of the last re-financing.

They may or may not have insisted that Broughton be given extraordinary powers to ensure a sale even if the cancer opposed it by amending the company’s articles/constitution (rules). The extent and validity of those rules is currently subject to a legal dispute and neither I nor anyone else knows how that will be resolved or even how long it will take. I’ve seen legal opinion which suggests Broughton’s estimate is absurdly optimistic because the issue is disputed. That seems quite sensible.

For instance: is an agreement entered into by shareholders with a creditor legally binding if it is illegal? Did RBS force the cancer into an agreement which is against the Companies Act and therefore invalid? I don’t know and Broughton doesn’t know either … but the courts will decide. Broughton has been given advice about how a court will interpret the situation. Advice, or legal opinion from a QC, is not a binding guarantee as Broughton will have been told but it is the best he can get.

Underlying all of this is a complex ethical issue because of a conflict of interest. This is because the directors don’t just have a duty of care to the company but also to the shareholders (Hicks & Gillett) and the company creditors (the banks and others).

Why is this a conflict of interest? Because the shareholders interests are in conflict with those of the creditors and quite possibly (legally) with the club.

We know that the shareholders were quite prepared to overload the company with further debt by mortgaging Anfield and even Melwood seriously bringing into question it’s ability to trade. The shareholders wanted to do this to pay off RBS and some other creditors to keep control of the club but the risk to that was that ultimately further borrowing could impair the ability of creditors to be repaid and risk breaking up the company. It would drive the club (already insolvent) even further into debt which it would not be able to pay without the shareholders putting more money into the company (they have already put money in via the loans from Kop Cayman). Worse still creditors would be able to recover mortgaged assets in the event of a default and effectively end the ability of the club to trade.

Legally the question is to where do the directors owe their primary duty of care in this situation? Broughton didn’t know. We know this because a few months ago he took ongoing legal advice to find out.

This was not because he wanted to get rid of Hicks and Gillett but because he wanted to save his own skin because the directors risked prosecution if they got it wrong.

The legal advice appears to have been that the directors must act in the interests of the company (to preserve its’ trading status and pay the creditors).

So now we know…

I)   Broughton and other directors were legally compelled to act as they have done. They have not acted out of a sense of honour or loyalty to anyone.
ii)   I don’t see any mention of the fans or the manager or the squad in any of the above. They just don’t matter.
iii)   The lying hasn’t stopped and in fact it has gone into overdrive.

I have some question and real concerns about this sales process.

The Huang bid and quite possibly other bids had every appearance of being genuine bids with substance that unlike the NESV bid was actually guaranteeing:

I)   A new stadium.
ii)   Funds for rebuilding the squad.
 
The NESV bid does neither of these things as far as I can see and this has to be a major concern.

I)   I am extremely concerned that Broughton has been bounced into a sale by RBS who want to avoid the embarrassment and controversy of taking control of the club and have pressured him into a rushed sale.
ii)   I am concerned that like those hapless idiots, Moores and Parry, Broughton has not carried out the detailed  preparatory work on the NESV bid because of the finance deadline set by RBS and the need to sell before that expires.
I)   I am very concerned that Broughton has already rejected better bids than the NESV bid (which valued the club higher) under the influence of Hicks & Gillett because they didn’t want to sell and he thought he had time to find more buyers before the deadline expired.

There are genuine questions about the competence of Broughton in conducting this sale process and allowing it to be delayed for so long that he has been forced into accepting an inferior bid not in the best interests of the club in order to prevent it falling into administration and save his own neck.

In neglecting to carry out this entire process in a more orderly and timely fashion he has dragged us to the very brink of administration (something which may still happen) and presented us with owners who don’t appear to have met his own criteria for acceptance particularly with regard to the new stadium. He has lied to us about earlier bids that appear to have been better suited to our needs as Reds, to the success of the club and to his own criteria.

We just don’t know that NESV are suitable owners despite the euphoria generated by the prospective departure of Hicks & Gillett which in some quarters appears to be just as great as it was when they arrived. I’m not saying that the NESV bid is not in our interests because they will be worse owners than Hicks and Gillett. I am saying we don’t know and I do know that Broughton has never acted in our interests. He has only ever acted in the interests of the shareholders of the club and its creditors.

That last part I can say with absolute certainty.

When Hicks & Gillett arrived there were a lot of arseholes dancing in the streets.

Where are they now?

Dancing in the streets again like headless chickens.

Sorry Martin you’re still a parasitic scumbag.

Wouldn't trust either as far as I could throw them in all honesty. They might of had a major input in getting rid of the yanks, which most Reds will have some sort of gratitude towards but it doesn't hide the fact that both have lied to us in the past.

Got to laugh looks like the language censor doesn't work with capitals.

A lot of this joy and headless chickenism is simply because the we've got the bas**rds out.  A lot of us are concerned & will do some research, but surely a certain cautious optimism is not beyond the pale.  As for Broughton, like any top business man, I'll bet my last penny that he's a ruthless, cold & calculating b***ard and while not covering himself in glory during his tenure, I can't hate him for doing his job  under difficult circumstances.  We ourselves have helped this become a pressure point (in a good way) our militant actions & trying to take/make a direct influence on something we all hold close to our hearts, sowhile I may not have a place inmy heart for Broughton, if the details of the sale work out and the new owners actually live to their promises and our (well at least our realistic) ambitions, hopes & dream, I will say a silent thank you.

The main thing thats changed is that they've agreed to sell the club for a fair price to seemingly very good buyers. Therefore the 2 scumbag owners make nothing.

The main thing thats changed is that they've agreed to sell the club for a fair price to seemingly very good buyers. Therefore the 2 scumbag owners make nothing.

Just like the Huang bid which was stopped dead by Broughton and the board only we don't get a committment to squad strengthening from NESV or a new stadium.

I'll say that again "no new stadium".

The Huang was higher but still wouldn't give the cancer a profit.

Are you sure that we have got the best bid?

I'm not saying that because I favoured the Huang bid. Only that we have more details of it because they were made public.

What has Martin Broughton really done to make him scum?
In fairness to the man, he could easily go along with the Yanks and not sell the club for the "undervalued" bid accepted but he hasnt.
I for one say thanks Martin

Just like the Huang bid which was stopped dead by Broughton and the board only we don't get a committment to squad strengthening from NESV or a new stadium.

I'll say that again "NO NEW STADIUM".

Your blowing that out of proportion about the stadium mate, they said they will see which is teh better option, building a new stadium or expanding Anfield.

Personally I'd prefer them to extend Anfield as it is our historical home.

Just like the Huang bid which was stopped dead by Broughton and the board only we don't get a committment to squad strengthening from NESV or a new stadium.

I'll say that again "NO NEW STADIUM".

The Huang was higher but still wouldn't give the cancer a profit.

Are you sure that we have got the best bid?

I'm not saying that because I favoured the Huang bid. Only that we have more details of it because they were made public.

Well as theres no details of the asian bid I cant comment on it. What I have answered is your question of whats changed in realtion to Broughton. And the big thing is he's accepted a bid that fooks Hicks over. There is no profit at all let alone a ridiculous one for the c**t.

You guys are forgetting it was late 2007 when we first realised a few things were fishy with our 'custodians'.  They put absolutely nothing into our club after the initial £40m investment for players and it took 3 years to gather the momentum behind us to oust them.  Keep in mind what H&G did was perfectly legal, they're not obliged to spend money on players and are well within their rights to loan Kop Holdings money from Kop Caymen with interest.  We are putting ourselves again at the peril of banksters.

We had close to the worst owners in sporting history and it still took 3 years to get sh*t happening and start to force them out.  With the increased profits and revenues it might not be possible this time.  I can't help but think that this "cautious optimism" mantra is being thrown around as if to say "job done this time, sure hope these next guys aren't sh*t, a few posts on a Red Sox forum, few good reviews from Red Sox fans, they seem alright".

Remember we didn't hope H&G left, we took action to save our club.  The stakes are higher this time, we simply cannot afford to get it wrong - the increased revenues, TV rights and merchandise sales will mean it will be MUCH harder to force this next lot out and could take longer.  How many people are still oblivious to what H&G did to us and they were the worst owners in the world, slightly better (not even good) owners who invest slightly more and siphon away slightly less who are better at PR with increased revenue streams backing them will take longer to oust and it will be harder.

This guy might be a baseball guy simply milking a cash cow in LFC to fund his baseball empire.  I honestly don't think that's even remotely close to the case, but I'm not taking any chances.  I'd like some safeguards in place and if they can't provide them, I'll be on the case from day one.

How long did it take people to get clued in about H&G?  One transfer window spending big when they arrived, a few press leaks blaming the manager and suddenly the owners are absolved of any wrong doing.  Not happening again in my books.

Your blowing that out of proportion about the stadium mate, they said they will see which is teh better option, building a new stadium or expanding Anfield.

Personally I'd prefer them to extend Anfield as it is our historical home.

 
 this  ^^^
  It will be great if our home ground will still be where it always has been

A lot of this joy and headless chickenism is simply because the we've got the bas**rds out.  A lot of us are concerned & will do some research, but surely a certain cautious optimism is not beyond the pale.  As for Broughton, like any top business man, I'll bet my last penny that he's a ruthless, cold & calculating b***ard and while not covering himself in glory during his tenure, I can't hate him for doing his job  under difficult circumstances.  We ourselves have helped this become a pressure point (in a good way) our militant actions & trying to take/make a direct influence on something we all hold close to our hearts, sowhile I may not have a place inmy heart for Broughton, if the details of the sale work out and the new owners actually live to their promises and our (well at least our realistic) ambitions, hopes & dream, I will say a silent thank you.

I can understand that you would be glad that the cancer might be gone but at least have the courtesy to give the credit for this where it's due... RBS.

RBS are behind this and have been pressuring Broughton into it.

In this respect Broughton was acting under orders and in accordance with his legal duties. Anyone appointed to the position would have been forced to do the same.

The orders cam from RBS so as I say you should say thanks to them.

My point is that few people are really getting this but they are shooting their mouths off because on any every other matter Broughton was formally appointed by and acted for the cancer.

I don't think you meant to say thanks for everything you did under the cancer's instructions even if it was against our interest too are you?

Your blowing that out of proportion about the stadium mate, they said they will see which is teh better option, building a new stadium or expanding Anfield.

Personally I'd prefer them to extend Anfield as it is our historical home.

What if he's not though?  Why is it so outrageous to have these guarantees legally bound.  If H&G bought LFC last year, they would have been able to operate exactly how they did and have gotten away with it forever, read about the increase of sponsorship and TV rights particularly those pertaining to the internet.

What has Martin Broughton really done to make him scum?
In fairness to the man, he could easily go along with the Yanks and not sell the club for the "undervalued" bid accepted but he hasnt.
I for one say thanks Martin

He couldn't because the club would have gone into administration and he has a legal duty to stop that from happening.

Didn't you read the original post?

If you want to thank anyone thank RBS for not refinancing and forcing Broughton's hand.

Broughton doesn't deserve your thanks.

Remember we didn't hope H&G left, we took action to save our club.  The stakes are higher this time, we simply cannot afford to get it wrong - the increased revenues, TV rights and merchandise sales will mean it will be MUCH harder to force this next lot out and could take longer.  How many people are still oblivious to what H&G did to us and they were the worst owners in the world, slightly better (not even good) owners who invest slightly more and siphon away slightly less who are better at PR with increased revenue streams backing them will take longer to oust and it will be harder.

This guy might be a baseball guy simply milking a cash cow in LFC to fund his baseball empire.  I honestly don't think that's even remotely close to the case, but I'm not taking any chances.  I'd like some safeguards in place and if they can't provide them, I'll be on the case from day one.

How long did it take people to get clued in about H&G?  One transfer window spending big when they arrived, a few press leaks blaming the manager and suddenly the owners are absolved of any wrong doing.  Not happening again in my books.

Spot on.

Thank you Martin.

Really mate, I got a couple of lines in and the rest turned to verbal diarahorea.

Broughton. Hes done his job. ...and this time next week I am sure with top legal advice our new owners will be in place.

With that, I have to, as a Liverpool supporter, give the new ownership the benefit of the doubt until they prove me wrong.
A lot of other people would be minded to do the same.
They know how raw we are and how powerful we are and I can tell you that they ain't wanting to upset us in a hurry.
They have a point to prove.

They are putting 300 million of THEIR money into our club.
Their OWN money...unlike Hicks and Gillett.




So.  With respect . Give everyone a F***ing break mate ...shut the F**k up ... and at least I have the subtlety NOT to put that in capitals.

This thread is wrong in every sense, and I completely agree with eurored.

Martin has done his job, the Yanks have virtually no way of making money from this sale.

 I have concerns, the main one is these guys just see LFC as a way to make a quick buck, I also stated as soon as they start building a new stadium I happy to admit my concerns were wrong.
 I have read somewhere the boss of RBS and the boss of NESV are close friends if true this worries me, I hope I am wrong but this seems quite similar to when H/G turned up
 

He's not arguing Broughton hasn't done his job, the complete opposite in fact.  If you want to "hope for the best" and "give them the benefit of the doubt" by all means do so, but remember if this comes back to bite us on the ass - THERE IS NO HOPE OF US GETTING THE CLUB BACK THIS TIME, there is so much riding on this it's not funny.  I'm spending the next 10 days doing all I can so I can enjoy the many happy years carefree.

You don't seem to understand, they can keep us happy for a year or two and by that stage it will be nigh impossible to oust them from their position of power.  It took owners who were horrible in pretty much every sense of the world 3 years to get enough people informed, enough people sending e-mails/protesting/boycotting to do something about it.  Sure we might mobilise quicker this time around, but the lucrative new contracts from TV, internet rights and sponsorship will mean that boycotting won't be nearly as successful 2nd time around as clubs are becoming less and less dependent on match day revenue.

I'll post some figures first thing in the morning.

Really mate, I got a couple of lines in and the rest turned to verbal diarahorea.

Broughton. Hes done his job. ...and this time next week I am sure with top legal advice our new owners will be in place.

With that, I have to, as a Liverpool supporter, give the new ownership the benefit of the doubt until they prove me wrong.
A lot of other people would be minded to do the same.
They know how raw we are and how powerful we are and I can tell you that they ain't wanting to upset us in a hurry.
They have a point to prove.

They are putting 300 million of THEIR money into our club.
Their OWN money...unlike Hicks and Gillett.

So.  With respect . Give everyone a f**king break mate ...shut the f**k up ... and at least I have the subtlety NOT to put that in capitals.

Then let me spell it out for you since you clearly didn't understand what was said.

Broughton is trying to force a sale to save his own skin from the legal consequences of not doing so.

He has previously rejected what appear to be better offers in order to appease the cancer.

Broughton is only selling now because he has been bounced into it by RBS.

Now why don't you go and summon up all of your powers of concentration and try and read what I posted before your next knee jerk reaction?

Have to say, I agree with Reslivo and Eurored. I don't think there is anything wrong with 'cautious optimism'. I also understand what vitez is saying. But it's about time we started looking forward, rather than towards doom and gloom. I for one have had enough of it! For the moment, all we can do is hope that the potential new owners will help us to return to the force we should rightfully be!

Oooooooooooooo.