Liverpool FC

Hope not mate.Roll on 2pm!

(14-10-2010 11:11 )woods1976 Wrote:  How can a redneck judge from texas grant a restraining order against a uk buisness & bank & how can it stand up in uk law??
I'm a little confused.

What UK business? If you mean Liverpool FC you've got it monumentally wrong. Liverpool FC is fully owned by its parent company Kop Holdings, which is a company registered and based in Texas.

The latest news in this ongoing saga is that Peter Lim has now withdrawn his bid and is no longer interested in buying Liverpool (I'm not sure if this makes much difference to be honest, although quite a number of Liverpool supporters were hoping he somehow succeeded in buying the club).

Lim pulling put means that the idea that there are loads of buyers waiting to pay more than NESV is weakened. In other news Mill Financials DO NOT own all the shares as was suggested by Robert Peston earlier today. So they are not players either. Nor is Kenny Haung or Pizza man. I read through the Restraining order last night and it looked less than compelling. I suspect the Texas judge will not be that impressed with what G&H are seeking once he does some research into the events at the London high courts

(14-10-2010 13:51 )cosmonaut Wrote:  

(14-10-2010 11:11 )woods1976 Wrote:  How can a redneck judge from texas grant a restraining order against a uk buisness & bank & how can it stand up in uk law??
I'm a little confused.

What UK business? If you mean Liverpool FC you've got it monumentally wrong. Liverpool FC is fully owned by its parent company Kop Holdings, which is a company registered and based in Texas.

rbs actually owns liverpool, if the texan rednecks were fully in charge there would be no court cases.

Interesting. Just listened to this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football...090471.stm

(14-10-2010 14:48 )woods1976 Wrote:  rbs actually owns liverpool, if the texan rednecks were fully in charge there would be no court cases.

I'm sorry, but you've got that monumentally wrong. RBS do not own Liverpool. If they did they would sell it immediately and there wouldn't have been any court cases or any legal wrangling at all.

The owner of Liverpool is Kop Holdings, which is in turn owned by another company, which is in turn owned by another company, which is in turn owned by Hicks and Gillett. RBS don't actually own Liverpool, as you said, nor do they have even 1 share in it.

You've got confused between ownership and control. Hicks and Gillett agreed to give up CONTROL of Liverpool to directors appointed by RBS. Hicks and Gillett have never agreed to give up OWNERSHIP of Liverpool, hence the current court actions to try and prevent it being sold against their wishes.

If Hicks and Gillett don't own Liverpool, which is what you claim, why are they trying to stop it being sold against their wishes? As I said above, you've got it monumentally wrong.

From latest reports, it looks like NESV are very close now to becoming the new owners of Liverpool. Hicks and Gillett want to carry on arguing about it and won't give up without continuing to fight, but realistically they can't stop the sale and will have to settle for claiming damages. Most llikely they'll sue everyone involved for damages but I can't see how they are going to get anywhere. I think they just want to go down fighting.

fuck the scouse twats!

I'm gonna report you and then say Old Big 'ead was a drunken toss pot!