Football
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
04 Aug 10
23:54
Joined:
Date Joined:
08 May 10
Huang set to give Hodgson £150m vote of confidence
Tony Barrett, Tony Evans
Updated 21 minutes ago
Roy Hodgson will keep his job as Liverpool manager and be handed £150 million to spend on new players if the Chinese Government’s bid to buy the club proves successful.
As revealed in The Times today, Kenny Huang, the Hong Kong-based businessman, is fronting the bid by China Investment Corporation (CIC), the overseas investment arm of the Chinese Government. A formal offer has still to be lodged, but although there is interest from other parties, Huang — backed by the wealth of one of the fastest-growing economies in the world — is believed to be the front-runner to complete a purchase.
CIC is prepared to back Hodgson by bankrolling a number of high-profile signings and has made a commitment to build a new stadium.
Liverpool are also attracting interest from the Rhône Group, the New York-based fund management firm, and the al-Kharafi family from Kuwait. Yahya Kirdi, a Canadian-based businessman from Syria, claimed yesterday that he is close to finalising a deal, but it is understood that he is negotiating only with George Gillett Jr, the club’s co-owner, and has not been involved with RBS, which holds Liverpool’s £237 million debt, or Barclays Capital, the investment bank overseeing the sale.
After his appointment as the successor to Rafael Benítez in July, Hodgson said that the possibility of a takeover had been a factor in discussions before he signed a three-year contract and revealed that clauses had been inserted in the deal affording him financial protection in the event of new owners deciding to replace him as manager.
The Chinese, though, have no desire to dispose of the 62-year-old, who insists that the situation has not prevented him from going about his job in the right manner.
“I knew when I came to the club that a takeover may or may not come about, that it may come about quickly or it may take a lot of time,” Hodgson said. “But I was given assurances that I would be allowed to do the job in the right way and that’s certainly been the case since I’ve been here.”
Asked would it be easier for the club to plan ahead under new owners, he said: “That’s for sure. But I don’t want to go down the ownership route because I don’t know enough about it, apart from knowing that, at the moment, unfortunately the owners we have are very unpopular with the fans. They know it and that is why they are prepared to sell the club.”
Hodgson takes charge of Liverpool at Anfield for the first time tonight when his team take a 2-0 lead into the second leg of the Europa League third qualifying round tie with Rabotnicki, of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. The manager is not willing to allow either himself or his players to hide behind the uncertainty surrounding the club, and insists that they must be masters of their own fortune.
Fernando Torres, who pledged his commitment to Liverpool yesterday, had recently called on the club to match his ambition by signing “four or five” top-class players, but Hodgson says that it is the responsibility of those already at the club to shape the future.
“As a player you have the chance to change things,” Hodgson said. “If you don’t think the team is doing as well as it should, as a player you can do something about it. If you are a big player, maybe you will. My attitude is that we want our big players because they are big players and they will help the team to win.
“Now if they are not playing well and not helping the team to win, I will be advising them to look into the mirror rather than look for excuses elsewhere and blame the owners for not having spent £500 million.
“I am just sceptical about comments where players are questioning the club’s ambition.”
Tony Barrett, Tony Evans
Updated 21 minutes ago
Roy Hodgson will keep his job as Liverpool manager and be handed £150 million to spend on new players if the Chinese Government’s bid to buy the club proves successful.
As revealed in The Times today, Kenny Huang, the Hong Kong-based businessman, is fronting the bid by China Investment Corporation (CIC), the overseas investment arm of the Chinese Government. A formal offer has still to be lodged, but although there is interest from other parties, Huang — backed by the wealth of one of the fastest-growing economies in the world — is believed to be the front-runner to complete a purchase.
CIC is prepared to back Hodgson by bankrolling a number of high-profile signings and has made a commitment to build a new stadium.
Liverpool are also attracting interest from the Rhône Group, the New York-based fund management firm, and the al-Kharafi family from Kuwait. Yahya Kirdi, a Canadian-based businessman from Syria, claimed yesterday that he is close to finalising a deal, but it is understood that he is negotiating only with George Gillett Jr, the club’s co-owner, and has not been involved with RBS, which holds Liverpool’s £237 million debt, or Barclays Capital, the investment bank overseeing the sale.
After his appointment as the successor to Rafael Benítez in July, Hodgson said that the possibility of a takeover had been a factor in discussions before he signed a three-year contract and revealed that clauses had been inserted in the deal affording him financial protection in the event of new owners deciding to replace him as manager.
The Chinese, though, have no desire to dispose of the 62-year-old, who insists that the situation has not prevented him from going about his job in the right manner.
“I knew when I came to the club that a takeover may or may not come about, that it may come about quickly or it may take a lot of time,” Hodgson said. “But I was given assurances that I would be allowed to do the job in the right way and that’s certainly been the case since I’ve been here.”
Asked would it be easier for the club to plan ahead under new owners, he said: “That’s for sure. But I don’t want to go down the ownership route because I don’t know enough about it, apart from knowing that, at the moment, unfortunately the owners we have are very unpopular with the fans. They know it and that is why they are prepared to sell the club.”
Hodgson takes charge of Liverpool at Anfield for the first time tonight when his team take a 2-0 lead into the second leg of the Europa League third qualifying round tie with Rabotnicki, of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. The manager is not willing to allow either himself or his players to hide behind the uncertainty surrounding the club, and insists that they must be masters of their own fortune.
Fernando Torres, who pledged his commitment to Liverpool yesterday, had recently called on the club to match his ambition by signing “four or five” top-class players, but Hodgson says that it is the responsibility of those already at the club to shape the future.
“As a player you have the chance to change things,” Hodgson said. “If you don’t think the team is doing as well as it should, as a player you can do something about it. If you are a big player, maybe you will. My attitude is that we want our big players because they are big players and they will help the team to win.
“Now if they are not playing well and not helping the team to win, I will be advising them to look into the mirror rather than look for excuses elsewhere and blame the owners for not having spent £500 million.
“I am just sceptical about comments where players are questioning the club’s ambition.”
Show More
Updated 1 minute ago
The Chinese Government is the mystery backer behind a bid for Liverpool Football Club, The Times can reveal.
China’s overseas investment arm China Investment Corporation (CIC), which already owns a stake in Canary Wharf, is funding the bid fronted by the sports tycoon Kenny Huang for one of Britain’s biggest sporting names.
The debt-laden club is expected to change hands this month and last night the Chinese appeared to be in pole position to win a three-way takeover battle. The other bidders are a wealthy Kuwaiti family and an American private equity group.
Liverpool’s lender, the Royal Bank of Scotland, forced the club’s unpopular American owners, Tom Hicks and George Gillett, to put it up for sale in April. A number of potential foreign buyers have been circling, but until now the role of the Communist Government was unknown.
The acquisition would be just a tiny piece of China’s vast global investment plan. CIC was created in 2007 to invest billions of dollars for the benefit of the State. The country has been able to stockpile nearly $2 trillion of foreign currency reserves because it exports many more billions of pounds of goods and services than it imports. CIC has $332 billion to spend abroad.
The fund already has stakes in natural resources and energy companies in Asia, the US and Africa as part of China’s long-term strategy of securing its energy supplies. Liverpool would be its first football club and a high-profile entry into British cultural life.
Neither CIC nor Mr Huang was available for comment last night, but insiders said that CIC would end up owning the majority of the club if the consortium’s planned bid — which values Liverpool at between £300 million and £350 million — is successful.
China is not the first foreign country to covet English Premier League teams. Arsenal, Aston Villa, Birmingham, Chelsea, Liverpool, Manchester United, Manchester City and Sunderland are all in foreign hands.
Manchester City, which is owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed al-Nahyan, a senior member of the Royal Family in Abu Dhabi, and Chelsea, owned by the Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich, were bought as trophy assets. The owners have poured in money without seeking a profit.
It is believed that the Chinese would expect to make money by building a bigger stadium in Merseyside and developing the club’s Asian fan base.
Liverpool already has a sponsorship deal with the bank Standard Chartered, which focuses on Asia. Presenting the bank’s half-year results yesterday, Peter Sands, its chief executive, said that its sponsorship of Liverpool was the most cost-effective way of getting Standard Chartered’s name on to television screens across Asia.
The sale is being run by Barcap, Barclays’ investment banking arm, and Martin Broughton, chairman of British Airways, who was brought in as temporary chairman of the club in April.
Insiders said that it was a three-way contest between the Chinese, Rhône Capital, a private equity group, and the billionare al-Kharafi family of Kuwait.
Any buyer must be cleared by the Premier League, which has held talks with the bidders. The main test is financial and it is unlikely that a bid would be blocked from the cash-rich Chinese.
Mr Huang reiterated his interest in Liverpool through his PR firm Hill & Knowlton yesterday but said that he had yet to make a formal binding bid.
The Chinese Government is the mystery backer behind a bid for Liverpool Football Club, The Times can reveal.
China’s overseas investment arm China Investment Corporation (CIC), which already owns a stake in Canary Wharf, is funding the bid fronted by the sports tycoon Kenny Huang for one of Britain’s biggest sporting names.
The debt-laden club is expected to change hands this month and last night the Chinese appeared to be in pole position to win a three-way takeover battle. The other bidders are a wealthy Kuwaiti family and an American private equity group.
Liverpool’s lender, the Royal Bank of Scotland, forced the club’s unpopular American owners, Tom Hicks and George Gillett, to put it up for sale in April. A number of potential foreign buyers have been circling, but until now the role of the Communist Government was unknown.
The acquisition would be just a tiny piece of China’s vast global investment plan. CIC was created in 2007 to invest billions of dollars for the benefit of the State. The country has been able to stockpile nearly $2 trillion of foreign currency reserves because it exports many more billions of pounds of goods and services than it imports. CIC has $332 billion to spend abroad.
The fund already has stakes in natural resources and energy companies in Asia, the US and Africa as part of China’s long-term strategy of securing its energy supplies. Liverpool would be its first football club and a high-profile entry into British cultural life.
Neither CIC nor Mr Huang was available for comment last night, but insiders said that CIC would end up owning the majority of the club if the consortium’s planned bid — which values Liverpool at between £300 million and £350 million — is successful.
China is not the first foreign country to covet English Premier League teams. Arsenal, Aston Villa, Birmingham, Chelsea, Liverpool, Manchester United, Manchester City and Sunderland are all in foreign hands.
Manchester City, which is owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed al-Nahyan, a senior member of the Royal Family in Abu Dhabi, and Chelsea, owned by the Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich, were bought as trophy assets. The owners have poured in money without seeking a profit.
It is believed that the Chinese would expect to make money by building a bigger stadium in Merseyside and developing the club’s Asian fan base.
Liverpool already has a sponsorship deal with the bank Standard Chartered, which focuses on Asia. Presenting the bank’s half-year results yesterday, Peter Sands, its chief executive, said that its sponsorship of Liverpool was the most cost-effective way of getting Standard Chartered’s name on to television screens across Asia.
The sale is being run by Barcap, Barclays’ investment banking arm, and Martin Broughton, chairman of British Airways, who was brought in as temporary chairman of the club in April.
Insiders said that it was a three-way contest between the Chinese, Rhône Capital, a private equity group, and the billionare al-Kharafi family of Kuwait.
Any buyer must be cleared by the Premier League, which has held talks with the bidders. The main test is financial and it is unlikely that a bid would be blocked from the cash-rich Chinese.
Mr Huang reiterated his interest in Liverpool through his PR firm Hill & Knowlton yesterday but said that he had yet to make a formal binding bid.
Liverpool are going to be richer tha Man City with China backing them.
Apparently Liverpool will overnight become the richest sports club in the world if this goes through !!
CHINA'S GOVERMENT HAVE 2.5 TRILLION IN US DOLLARS WORTH OF RESERVES ALONE.
KA CHINGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
KA CHINGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
Its all been worth it, 15 years of pain, now its time for the mighty Liverpool to rise from the ashes and dominate world football for decades to come!
THIS IS SO F ING SWEET!!!
THIS IS SO F ING SWEET!!!
Just remember the yanks were going to spend untold gazillions and build us a new stadium.
Though I am moving to Beijing next week so i will stand in Tianamen Sq and seethe appropriately for all of you if this turns out to be pie in the sky.....
Though I am moving to Beijing next week so i will stand in Tianamen Sq and seethe appropriately for all of you if this turns out to be pie in the sky.....
True, I actually hope this deal will fall through, I have strong issues with regards to the Chinese Governments human rights record.
Not wanting to pi$$ on any chips but as a Liverpool fan myself I would take anything on this takeover with apinch of salt. The only fact that is certain is that the real facts are not in the public domain yet. All of this paper talk is just that and pure speculation. It may come to fruition, it may not but I would also suggest that Mr Huang and his backers might not necessarily be the best people to buy the club. Remember that Hicks and Gillett were supposed to be the saviours and look what happened there. Huangs offer by all accounts is also to only buy out the debt of the club and not the club outright. This means the power struggle to oust the Americans would not be immediate and could become a long drawn out affair. Finally, these people are investors and will not throw good money after bad. They will expect returns on their investments. We may well have more money than city or chelsea but I very much doubt whether our transfer policy would be anything like Man Citys where they are throwing money round like confetti. Just sit back and wait until something concrete comes out of the club, and then discuss it.
i heard they are appointing "hoo flung dung" as the supporters liason officer
To be honest even if they do take over, I don't want them spending more than £50 million a season, even if we do have the backing 2500 x 1 Billion dollars.
I don't want to do a Citeh or Chelsea and blow money on overated players.
China like Dubai needs to diversify it's money and put it into western assets, Dubai have been doing it for a while now.
I don't want to do a Citeh or Chelsea and blow money on overated players.
China like Dubai needs to diversify it's money and put it into western assets, Dubai have been doing it for a while now.
Jibber,
Huang is just brokering the deal for the Chinese Government by all accounts, he went to RBS first because the Yanks messed him about a year back, by offering RBS their money back, he has quite cleverly short circuIted the stranglehold the Yanks have on our club.
I'm usually not one for hyperbole but this is MASSIVE!!!
Huang is just brokering the deal for the Chinese Government by all accounts, he went to RBS first because the Yanks messed him about a year back, by offering RBS their money back, he has quite cleverly short circuIted the stranglehold the Yanks have on our club.
I'm usually not one for hyperbole but this is MASSIVE!!!
Tbh though UK we were prob the biggest spenders British football had known from the mid 70's to the late 80's.
Difference was we had Peter Johnson who made sure everything was done with class and humility.
I will be glad to come out of this big mess with a club to support, let alone have some Champ manager fantasy scenario being played out.
Also lets be frank, there are very few decent players out there to sign at the moment anyway. Just look at the Milner situation ffs
Difference was we had Peter Johnson who made sure everything was done with class and humility.
I will be glad to come out of this big mess with a club to support, let alone have some Champ manager fantasy scenario being played out.
Also lets be frank, there are very few decent players out there to sign at the moment anyway. Just look at the Milner situation ffs
Justin, He could have just approached the board in the normal way as there are five people involved in the decision process, Hicks, Gillet, Ayre, Purslow and Broughton. If they convince the other three then there is nothing the yanks can do about it
Difference between us and City/Chelsea is that we already have history and prestige, we won't need to pay over the top, 200k a week, Yaya Toure money to attract players.
Exactly SM, Im not a fan of what Man City have done in over paying for in all honesty what I would say are AVERAGE players. I hope we cap spending at £50 million, I would just like not to be in the situation we are now with the Americans, that would be great.
JustinDaffodil Joined: 08 May 10
Replies: 258 05 Aug 10 00:40
Difference between us and City/Chelsea is that we already have history and prestige, we won't need to pay over the top, 200k a week, Yaya Toure money to attract players.
its garbage like this which is why everyone hates liverpool suporters
get over yourselves ffs
Replies: 258 05 Aug 10 00:40
Difference between us and City/Chelsea is that we already have history and prestige, we won't need to pay over the top, 200k a week, Yaya Toure money to attract players.
its garbage like this which is why everyone hates liverpool suporters
get over yourselves ffs
i remember when english clubs used to be english lol.why do these people want to buy english clubs?they could probably buy inter or or the likes for a fraction of this cash imo.chinese,russians,americans etc. one of those really long drawn out public enquiries needed.
Rumours that the Indians Mbani and Roy are also at the table again. Theyve been interested before (I know that for certain) so there is probably some credence to that story.
JustinDaffodil Joined: 08 May 10
Replies: 258 05 Aug 10 00:40
Difference between us and City/Chelsea is that we already have history and prestige, we won't need to pay over the top, 200k a week, Yaya Toure money to attract players.
Honestly mate, not sure players give a f*ck about history or prestige. They all follow the cash. A bunch of mercenaries apart from the very few. If Galway Utd were taken over by the Chinese government then the players would follow.
Replies: 258 05 Aug 10 00:40
Difference between us and City/Chelsea is that we already have history and prestige, we won't need to pay over the top, 200k a week, Yaya Toure money to attract players.
Honestly mate, not sure players give a f*ck about history or prestige. They all follow the cash. A bunch of mercenaries apart from the very few. If Galway Utd were taken over by the Chinese government then the players would follow.
this is the funniest thread of the year!
liverpool fans would celebrate if there was a rumour adolf hitler was taking over ffs!
liverpool fans would celebrate if there was a rumour adolf hitler was taking over ffs!
timmy2988 05 Aug 10 00:54
JustinDaffodil Joined: 08 May 10
Replies: 258 05 Aug 10 00:40
Difference between us and City/Chelsea is that we already have history and prestige, we won't need to pay over the top, 200k a week, Yaya Toure money to attract players.
Honestly mate, not sure players give a f*ck about history or prestige. They all follow the cash. A bunch of mercenaries apart from the very few. If Galway Utd were taken over by the Chinese government then the players would follow.
Kaka, Villa, Ibra, Maicon etc
The very best players do care, ask Gary Cook.
JustinDaffodil Joined: 08 May 10
Replies: 258 05 Aug 10 00:40
Difference between us and City/Chelsea is that we already have history and prestige, we won't need to pay over the top, 200k a week, Yaya Toure money to attract players.
Honestly mate, not sure players give a f*ck about history or prestige. They all follow the cash. A bunch of mercenaries apart from the very few. If Galway Utd were taken over by the Chinese government then the players would follow.
Kaka, Villa, Ibra, Maicon etc
The very best players do care, ask Gary Cook.
Where did they get the £150m figure from? They seem to have plucked it from thin air to get people excited.
Just because the Chinese govt has a lot of money doesn't mean they are going to do an Abramovich/Mansour, does it? I can just imagine the investment guy going back to the President and telling him he just bought an English football club and plans to run it at a £100m p/a loss...
Just because the Chinese govt has a lot of money doesn't mean they are going to do an Abramovich/Mansour, does it? I can just imagine the investment guy going back to the President and telling him he just bought an English football club and plans to run it at a £100m p/a loss...
3 out of the 4 players you mentioned went to barca or madrid and the other plays for the european champions.....
we dont have to agree Justin
Just think the history aspect of the cluv is not as relevant for players anymore
we dont have to agree Justin
Just think the history aspect of the cluv is not as relevant for players anymore
DaSizzler Joined: 09 Jul 03
Replies: 1971 05 Aug 10 00:46
JustinDaffodil Joined: 08 May 10
Replies: 258 05 Aug 10 00:40
Difference between us and City/Chelsea is that we already have history and prestige, we won't need to pay over the top, 200k a week, Yaya Toure money to attract players.
its garbage like this which is why everyone hates liverpool suporters
get over yourselves ffs
I presume you also think that immigrants are taking all our jobs?
Replies: 1971 05 Aug 10 00:46
JustinDaffodil Joined: 08 May 10
Replies: 258 05 Aug 10 00:40
Difference between us and City/Chelsea is that we already have history and prestige, we won't need to pay over the top, 200k a week, Yaya Toure money to attract players.
its garbage like this which is why everyone hates liverpool suporters
get over yourselves ffs
I presume you also think that immigrants are taking all our jobs?
DaSizzler 05 Aug 10 00:46
JustinDaffodil Joined: 08 May 10
Replies: 258 05 Aug 10 00:40
Difference between us and City/Chelsea is that we already have history and prestige, we won't need to pay over the top, 200k a week, Yaya Toure money to attract players.
its garbage like this which is why everyone hates liverpool suporters
get over yourselves ffs
Listen you bitter kunt,
Torres took a pay cut to join us from Atletico FACT.
Would he have done the same for Chelsea or City or QPR?
JustinDaffodil Joined: 08 May 10
Replies: 258 05 Aug 10 00:40
Difference between us and City/Chelsea is that we already have history and prestige, we won't need to pay over the top, 200k a week, Yaya Toure money to attract players.
its garbage like this which is why everyone hates liverpool suporters
get over yourselves ffs
Listen you bitter kunt,
Torres took a pay cut to join us from Atletico FACT.
Would he have done the same for Chelsea or City or QPR?
I am hopeful we can broker a deal away from the Chinese government. 30 pieces of silver for a country with an appalling human rights record. No thanks, some things are beyond money.
Torres took a pay cut ,right.What a f00kin buffoon.
Plastic scousers dropping their trousers for anyone that might come along.sickening i tell ya!!
Plastic scousers dropping their trousers for anyone that might come along.sickening i tell ya!!
charwell talking some sense, it would be like being owned by bin laden or george bush!
brngtwt 05 Aug 10 01:11
Torres took a pay cut ,right.What a f00kin buffoon.
Plastic scousers dropping their trousers for anyone that might come along.sickening i tell ya!!
Seeeeething
Torres took a pay cut ,right.What a f00kin buffoon.
Plastic scousers dropping their trousers for anyone that might come along.sickening i tell ya!!
Seeeeething
JustinDaffodil Joined: 08 May 10
Replies: 260 05 Aug 10 01:05
DaSizzler 05 Aug 10 00:46
JustinDaffodil Joined: 08 May 10
Replies: 258 05 Aug 10 00:40
Difference between us and City/Chelsea is that we already have history and prestige, we won't need to pay over the top, 200k a week, Yaya Toure money to attract players.
its garbage like this which is why everyone hates liverpool suporters
get over yourselves ffs
Listen you bitter kunt,
Torres took a pay cut to join us from Atletico FACT.
Would he have done the same for Chelsea or City or QPR?
its all this history and prestige crAp youse come off with like your some sort of superior race which gets peoples backs up
in the past you may have been a huge draw but not no more and the sooner youse learn that the better you bunch of fookin delusional mugz
Replies: 260 05 Aug 10 01:05
DaSizzler 05 Aug 10 00:46
JustinDaffodil Joined: 08 May 10
Replies: 258 05 Aug 10 00:40
Difference between us and City/Chelsea is that we already have history and prestige, we won't need to pay over the top, 200k a week, Yaya Toure money to attract players.
its garbage like this which is why everyone hates liverpool suporters
get over yourselves ffs
Listen you bitter kunt,
Torres took a pay cut to join us from Atletico FACT.
Would he have done the same for Chelsea or City or QPR?
its all this history and prestige crAp youse come off with like your some sort of superior race which gets peoples backs up
in the past you may have been a huge draw but not no more and the sooner youse learn that the better you bunch of fookin delusional mugz
Truth hurts, deal with it. Were LFC, the greatest and most successful club in Britain.
Justin forgetting the past tense for his plastic scouse drivel.
its ok ive been finding it really tough dealing with liverpools sucess lately
DaSizzler 05 Aug 10 01:18
its ok ive been finding it really tough dealing with liverpools sucess lately
Epic fail, you cretin.
its ok ive been finding it really tough dealing with liverpools sucess lately
Epic fail, you cretin.
Anyone getting on their high horses about China after reading the Daily Mail really needs to look into our own past, and present, and see if we have any right to pass judgement.
Scored less goals away from home than Wolves last season.
JustinDaffodil Joined: 08 May 10
Replies: 265 05 Aug 10 01:19
DaSizzler 05 Aug 10 01:18
its ok ive been finding it really tough dealing with liverpools sucess lately
Epic fail, you cretin.
you know youve got them when they started picking on your spelling/typo mistakes
Replies: 265 05 Aug 10 01:19
DaSizzler 05 Aug 10 01:18
its ok ive been finding it really tough dealing with liverpools sucess lately
Epic fail, you cretin.
you know youve got them when they started picking on your spelling/typo mistakes
You're the one so seething with rage, you mashed the keyboard and mistyped.
I've beaten you.
I've beaten you.
calm down pal your steaming!!
just like the sh1t your supporters like to throw
just like the sh1t your supporters like to throw
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/08/29/article-0-0257658F000004B0-950_468x335.jpg
which one are you justin?
ill guess the one on the extreme left in the trendy blue coat
which one are you justin?
ill guess the one on the extreme left in the trendy blue coat
Financial muscle makes Chinese bid favourite with Liverpool board
Hicks and Gillett are failing to persuade Broughton to pick Syrian offer as details of Huang's backing emerge
By Ian Herbert
Liverpool's American owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett appeared to be losing their fight to walk away from the club with a profit last night as Gillett's preferred Syrian buy-out bid was widely dismissed as lacking credibility and the rival Chinese move for the club was revealed to be backed by the state-owned Chinese Investment Corporation (CIC) which has $332bn (£209bn) of assets under management.
In a day of dramatic scrambling for the ownership of Liverpool, which coincided with manager Roy Hodgson confirming he is ready to make an £8m bid to bring Juventus' defensive midfielder Christian Poulsen to Anfield as a likely replacement for Javier Mascherano, representatives of Yahya Kirdi, a former Syria international now fronting one bid, insisted that a price has been agreed and a formal purchase agreement "is in the final stage of negotiation".
But the Kirdi camp could not explain to The Independent last night where their money comes from, and this newspaper also understands that CIC is behind the rival Chinese move for the club, led by businessman Kenny Huang, which appears to remove one of the key uncertainties. None of the prospective owners have presented proof of their claimed backing, but provision of such details is due to begin next week, at which point the CIC involvement may be crucial.
CIC, formed in 2007 as a way of investing Chinese currency reserves, ploughed €800m (£665m) into one of the funds operated by the Apax Partners private equity company earlier this year, though a move for Liverpool would be something completely different to its previous activities.
Though questions remain about Huang – claims that he bid for a stake in the Cleveland Cavaliers basketball team in the United States have been denied by the National Basketball Association – the precise source of the sovereign wealth which his representatives assert is behind him has not been divulged until now.
Gillett is desperate to fend off Huang's bid as the money would be used to buy the club's £237m debt from the banks and to invest in the club. None of the funds would go to Gillett or his co-owner Hicks, leaving them with nothing from their initial personal investment of £130m. The suspicion remains that Gillett is touting Kirdi as a stalling device to prevent a Chinese takeover at the end of the month.
Liverpool's non-executive chairman, Martin Broughton, of Barclays Capital (BarCap), was recruited by Hicks and Gillett to find a buyer for the club but is aware that if he arranges a sale to buyers who make a mess of the club's future his reputation will be damaged. Broughton has suggested that there are several bids to weigh up before preferred bidder status is granted, preferably before the transfer window closes, though as of last night the Huang bid and that of the New York based Rhône Group – who have re-entered the picture, four months after their £100m bid for a share of the club proved fruitless – were the only the main contenders.
Despite reports to the contrary, a source close to the process said a bid from the Kuwaiti Al-Kharafi family looks unlikely to succeed despite them having re-entered the picture recently.
Having made his part in the scramble for the club clear – perhaps to make sure that Hicks and Gillett can not manoeuvre him out of the picture behind the scenes as they did Rhône Group back in March – Huang has decided, or been asked, to move back into the shadows as his offer to buy out the club's £237m debt from the Royal Bank of Scotland is now considered. To that end, Huang has clarified that his negotiation is ongoing and stipulated that only his PR agents, the Hong Kong office of Hill and Knowlton, are authorised to speak for him. But the public job of pressing Liverpool to accept his bid by his deadline of tomorrow week, apparently in time for Hodgson to get his hands on Chinese funds to spend on transfers, has been well and truly done.
Though Broughton and BarCap have given Gillett clearance to pursue discussions with Kirdi, claims from the Syrian's representatives yesterday that an agreement on purchase price has been reached, which would pay off the club's debt and build the new stadium critical to their financial future, were met with bemusement by those close to the investment process.
Two sources in the financial community have suggested that the size of Kirdi's offer far outweighs Haung's, though with the source of his funds so unclear the fear is that he, like Gillett and Hicks, may be planning to borrow for leveraged buy-out which would leave the club's future as uncertain as ever.
Of the uncertain financial future, Hodgson would say only that it is better that the Americans be gone soon. "I don't want to go down the ownership route because I don't know enough about it," he said. "Unfortunately the owners we have are very unpopular with the fans. They know it. That is why they are prepared to sell the club."
The Chinese investment fund behind Huang's bid
* Established in Beijing in September 2007, the China Investment Corporation (CIC) is a $300bn (£190bn) sovereign wealth fund.
* Modelled on a similar fund in Singapore, It was originally established to utilise China's foreign exchange reserves for the benefit of the state and to mitigate risks in the country's huge foreign exchange reserves.
* The fund comprises of two halves: an operation which makes global investments, and China Huijin Investment Ltd, which invests in domestic state-owned financial institutions on the government's behalf. Reserves are mainly held in low-risk, low-yielding instruments such as US Treasury bonds, but the global recession has led CIC to attempt to diversify to improve returns.
* CIC recorded an 11.7 per cent return on their £37bn overseas investments last year, reversing a decline from the previous 12 months when investments fell 2.1 per cent as an indirect result of the global financial situation. Net profit totalled $41.66bn (£26.2bn) last year, almost doubling the $23.1bn (£14.6bn) from 2008. Nearly 44 per cent of the fund's equity investments were in North America, with 28.4 per cent in the Asia-Pacific region and 20.5 per cent in Europe.
* At the end of last year, the fund held shares in dozens of US-listed companies, including Coca-Cola, Morgan Stanley, Citigroup and private equity giant Blackstone, while also having equity holdings in US-listed firms included shares in Motorola among others.
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/financial-muscle-...
Hicks and Gillett are failing to persuade Broughton to pick Syrian offer as details of Huang's backing emerge
By Ian Herbert
Liverpool's American owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett appeared to be losing their fight to walk away from the club with a profit last night as Gillett's preferred Syrian buy-out bid was widely dismissed as lacking credibility and the rival Chinese move for the club was revealed to be backed by the state-owned Chinese Investment Corporation (CIC) which has $332bn (£209bn) of assets under management.
In a day of dramatic scrambling for the ownership of Liverpool, which coincided with manager Roy Hodgson confirming he is ready to make an £8m bid to bring Juventus' defensive midfielder Christian Poulsen to Anfield as a likely replacement for Javier Mascherano, representatives of Yahya Kirdi, a former Syria international now fronting one bid, insisted that a price has been agreed and a formal purchase agreement "is in the final stage of negotiation".
But the Kirdi camp could not explain to The Independent last night where their money comes from, and this newspaper also understands that CIC is behind the rival Chinese move for the club, led by businessman Kenny Huang, which appears to remove one of the key uncertainties. None of the prospective owners have presented proof of their claimed backing, but provision of such details is due to begin next week, at which point the CIC involvement may be crucial.
CIC, formed in 2007 as a way of investing Chinese currency reserves, ploughed €800m (£665m) into one of the funds operated by the Apax Partners private equity company earlier this year, though a move for Liverpool would be something completely different to its previous activities.
Though questions remain about Huang – claims that he bid for a stake in the Cleveland Cavaliers basketball team in the United States have been denied by the National Basketball Association – the precise source of the sovereign wealth which his representatives assert is behind him has not been divulged until now.
Gillett is desperate to fend off Huang's bid as the money would be used to buy the club's £237m debt from the banks and to invest in the club. None of the funds would go to Gillett or his co-owner Hicks, leaving them with nothing from their initial personal investment of £130m. The suspicion remains that Gillett is touting Kirdi as a stalling device to prevent a Chinese takeover at the end of the month.
Liverpool's non-executive chairman, Martin Broughton, of Barclays Capital (BarCap), was recruited by Hicks and Gillett to find a buyer for the club but is aware that if he arranges a sale to buyers who make a mess of the club's future his reputation will be damaged. Broughton has suggested that there are several bids to weigh up before preferred bidder status is granted, preferably before the transfer window closes, though as of last night the Huang bid and that of the New York based Rhône Group – who have re-entered the picture, four months after their £100m bid for a share of the club proved fruitless – were the only the main contenders.
Despite reports to the contrary, a source close to the process said a bid from the Kuwaiti Al-Kharafi family looks unlikely to succeed despite them having re-entered the picture recently.
Having made his part in the scramble for the club clear – perhaps to make sure that Hicks and Gillett can not manoeuvre him out of the picture behind the scenes as they did Rhône Group back in March – Huang has decided, or been asked, to move back into the shadows as his offer to buy out the club's £237m debt from the Royal Bank of Scotland is now considered. To that end, Huang has clarified that his negotiation is ongoing and stipulated that only his PR agents, the Hong Kong office of Hill and Knowlton, are authorised to speak for him. But the public job of pressing Liverpool to accept his bid by his deadline of tomorrow week, apparently in time for Hodgson to get his hands on Chinese funds to spend on transfers, has been well and truly done.
Though Broughton and BarCap have given Gillett clearance to pursue discussions with Kirdi, claims from the Syrian's representatives yesterday that an agreement on purchase price has been reached, which would pay off the club's debt and build the new stadium critical to their financial future, were met with bemusement by those close to the investment process.
Two sources in the financial community have suggested that the size of Kirdi's offer far outweighs Haung's, though with the source of his funds so unclear the fear is that he, like Gillett and Hicks, may be planning to borrow for leveraged buy-out which would leave the club's future as uncertain as ever.
Of the uncertain financial future, Hodgson would say only that it is better that the Americans be gone soon. "I don't want to go down the ownership route because I don't know enough about it," he said. "Unfortunately the owners we have are very unpopular with the fans. They know it. That is why they are prepared to sell the club."
The Chinese investment fund behind Huang's bid
* Established in Beijing in September 2007, the China Investment Corporation (CIC) is a $300bn (£190bn) sovereign wealth fund.
* Modelled on a similar fund in Singapore, It was originally established to utilise China's foreign exchange reserves for the benefit of the state and to mitigate risks in the country's huge foreign exchange reserves.
* The fund comprises of two halves: an operation which makes global investments, and China Huijin Investment Ltd, which invests in domestic state-owned financial institutions on the government's behalf. Reserves are mainly held in low-risk, low-yielding instruments such as US Treasury bonds, but the global recession has led CIC to attempt to diversify to improve returns.
* CIC recorded an 11.7 per cent return on their £37bn overseas investments last year, reversing a decline from the previous 12 months when investments fell 2.1 per cent as an indirect result of the global financial situation. Net profit totalled $41.66bn (£26.2bn) last year, almost doubling the $23.1bn (£14.6bn) from 2008. Nearly 44 per cent of the fund's equity investments were in North America, with 28.4 per cent in the Asia-Pacific region and 20.5 per cent in Europe.
* At the end of last year, the fund held shares in dozens of US-listed companies, including Coca-Cola, Morgan Stanley, Citigroup and private equity giant Blackstone, while also having equity holdings in US-listed firms included shares in Motorola among others.
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/financial-muscle-...
justin people like you are why liverpool fans have a bad name,full of shyte and banging on about 'history',every club has history mate,get over yourself
Sizzler,dont like to get personal usually,but you sound like a right pr&t.
Why dont you go away and find a thread where you can contribute positively,rather than just try and ruin a decent thread??
Why dont you go away and find a thread where you can contribute positively,rather than just try and ruin a decent thread??
bornisthekingofSB 05 Aug 10 07:44
justin people like you are why liverpool fans have a bad name,full of shyte and banging on about 'history',every club has history mate,get over yourself
I refuse to enter a debate with seething, bitter cretins.
I will try and continue to deal in facts, and supply relevant latest news on the story.
justin people like you are why liverpool fans have a bad name,full of shyte and banging on about 'history',every club has history mate,get over yourself
I refuse to enter a debate with seething, bitter cretins.
I will try and continue to deal in facts, and supply relevant latest news on the story.
'No Frontrunner' Among Bidders For Liverpool
.3:13pm UK, Thursday August 05, 2010
Tom Bonnett and Katrina Bishop, Sky News Online
There are at least three bids to buy Liverpool FC and the one that was believed to be funded by the Chinese Government may not be the front runner, Sky's City Editor has said.
One of the bids, by Chinese businessman Kenny Huang, was thought to be financed by the communist state's overseas investment arm China Investment Corporation (CIC). But CIC has since denied any knowledge of the bid, according to the Financial Times.
Sky's Mark Kleinman said this bid was just one of a number of takeover attempts and should not be considered the favourite.
"There are three serious contenders at the moment - the Chinese bid, there's a bid on the table potentially from Rhone Capital, an American private equity firm and a wealthy Kuwaiti businessman [Nasser al Kharafi] who is also very interested," he said.
"This is changing very quickly. It may well be that by the time Liverpool names a preferred bidder for the club it is somebody else altogether."
Mr Huang's bid values Liverpool FC at between £300m and £350m, and if successful, he would become the majority owner, the Times newspaper said. However, the sports tycoon has denied a formal offer has been made although he admitted he had expressed his interest.
Kleinman said that if CIC, which already has stakes in Canary Wharf, was confirmed as the backer of the bid, "it would be reasonably well received on Merseyside".
"The most important thing as far as Liverpool supporters are concerned is that the new owners of the club have the resources to fund player acquisitions, to compete for the Premier League title, and as well, of course, financing the new stadium.
"So I think they're less concerned about the identity of the new owners than they are about the fact that the club finally has the resources to compete."
Liverpool FC's American owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett put the club up for sale in April because of pressure to pay back debts of around £237m to the Royal Bank of Scotland.
The winning bid would have to be approved by the Premier League, which is believed to have been in discussions with bidders.
The CIC was founded in 2007 to invest billions of dollars for the benefit of the state. It has almost £209bn to play with.
Unlike Manchester City and Chelsea football clubs, which have seen owners pour in money without seeking a profit, China would want to see a return on its investment.
.3:13pm UK, Thursday August 05, 2010
Tom Bonnett and Katrina Bishop, Sky News Online
There are at least three bids to buy Liverpool FC and the one that was believed to be funded by the Chinese Government may not be the front runner, Sky's City Editor has said.
One of the bids, by Chinese businessman Kenny Huang, was thought to be financed by the communist state's overseas investment arm China Investment Corporation (CIC). But CIC has since denied any knowledge of the bid, according to the Financial Times.
Sky's Mark Kleinman said this bid was just one of a number of takeover attempts and should not be considered the favourite.
"There are three serious contenders at the moment - the Chinese bid, there's a bid on the table potentially from Rhone Capital, an American private equity firm and a wealthy Kuwaiti businessman [Nasser al Kharafi] who is also very interested," he said.
"This is changing very quickly. It may well be that by the time Liverpool names a preferred bidder for the club it is somebody else altogether."
Mr Huang's bid values Liverpool FC at between £300m and £350m, and if successful, he would become the majority owner, the Times newspaper said. However, the sports tycoon has denied a formal offer has been made although he admitted he had expressed his interest.
Kleinman said that if CIC, which already has stakes in Canary Wharf, was confirmed as the backer of the bid, "it would be reasonably well received on Merseyside".
"The most important thing as far as Liverpool supporters are concerned is that the new owners of the club have the resources to fund player acquisitions, to compete for the Premier League title, and as well, of course, financing the new stadium.
"So I think they're less concerned about the identity of the new owners than they are about the fact that the club finally has the resources to compete."
Liverpool FC's American owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett put the club up for sale in April because of pressure to pay back debts of around £237m to the Royal Bank of Scotland.
The winning bid would have to be approved by the Premier League, which is believed to have been in discussions with bidders.
The CIC was founded in 2007 to invest billions of dollars for the benefit of the state. It has almost £209bn to play with.
Unlike Manchester City and Chelsea football clubs, which have seen owners pour in money without seeking a profit, China would want to see a return on its investment.
The Wall Street Journal
China RealTime Report
• August 5, 2010, 10:34 PM HKT
Does CIC Really Want to Own Liverpool?
China’s sovereign wealth fund has more than $300 billion in assets, has been investing overseas aggressively in recent years, and almost never comments on prospective purchases it is rumored to be considering. So it’s no surprise that China Investment Corp.’s name is frequently trotted out by anonymous individuals as a purported bidder in high-profile deals.
In the latest case, British media are reporting that CIC is backing a bid for Liverpool Football Club by Kenny Huang, a sports entrepreneur who runs a youth baseball league in China and is starting the country’s second basketball league.
Anything’s possible, it should be acknowledged. Perhaps Communist Party chief Hu Jintao likes wearing the ad-emblazoned jersey of the Reds, or maybe Premier Wen Jiabao is secretly a devotee of Fernando Torres, or—who knows—CIC Chairman Lou Jiwei could secretly covet a seat in the Anfeild Kop.
Or possibly CIC analysts have decided that Liverpool could improve its finances by better exploiting marketing opportunities in China. English soccer teams, while getting better known in China, haven’t made huge strides in selling merchandise, as the NBA has done in China and as British soccer has done in places like Thailand or Singapore. CIC officials couldn’t be reached for comment Thursday.
On the other hand, skeptics can find abundant reason for doubt.
For starters, some of what’s been reported in the breathless coverage of the possible deal is simply off the mark. One article posits that CIC has been raising money for its Liverpool purchase by selling part of its stake in Morgan Stanley. “In a series of trades since 19 July, CIC has sold $558m of shares in Morgan Stanley, equating to £351.4m,” the article says. “That sum is equivalent to Liverpool’s debt to the nearest decimal place, and is exactly the number insiders say has been quoted to interested parties as the sale price.” The equivalence of those sums is “hugely significant,” the article adds.
In fact, CIC has sold $612.4 million of its Morgan Stanley shares as of Wednesday. Also, CIC had $18.6 billion in cash at the end of last year, plus another $20.7 billion in “cash management products,” and much of its offshore equity portfolio is held in liquid investments like index funds and ETFs. So it probably has plenty of cash on hand to fund a relatively small deal like the Liverpool one–and if it needed cash, it could certainly raise it in a less high-profile way than selling down its single most prominent holding. (A more plausible explanation for the Morgan Stanley sales is that CIC wants to keep its stake in the bank under 10% for U.S. regulatory reasons; an upcoming conversion of notes it owns would push it above that level).
More broadly, CIC is acutely averse to controversy and negative publicity—and controversy and negative publicity are not things that foreign buyers of English Premier League teams can expect to avoid. Just ask American Malcolm Glazer, who owns Manchester United (whose fans have organized a campaign to oust him), or, indeed, outgoing Liverpool owners George Gillett and Tom Hicks, also of the U.S., who have been widely criticized. (Already, the Daily Telegraph’s football correspondent, Henry Winter, Tweeted Thursday: “Amid confusion over #LFC [Liverpool], one thing must be clear: a great sporting institution cannot be owned by the Chinese Government. By any government.”) It’s far from clear why CIC would want to involve itself in such a potentially dicey endeavor so it can deploy a measly $558 million.
Partly because of its desire to avoid such hullabaloo, CIC has shunned majority stakes in its previous deals, emphasizing repeatedly–as it said in its annual report released last month — that“CIC is a financial investor. As such, it does not seek to control any company.” That would seem to rather starkly contradict assertions that it is seeking to acquire control of Liverpool.
And Premier League soccer hasn’t been an ideal place for financial investors. Only six of its 20 teams made any pretax profit in 2008-2009 season, according to Alex Byars, a senior consultant in the sports business group at Deloitte in London. Liverpool had an operating profit of £32 million ($50.9 million), third highest in the league. But that was before interest costs and depreciation on player contracts. After accounting for those, Liverpool lost £55 million, before taxes. That could spell opportunity for a risk-hungry investor, but it’s unclear why CIC would want to roll the dice.
And then there’s Huang, an avid self-promoter who may or may not have previously purchased a stake in the Cleveland Cavaliers basketball team. Chinese analysts have frequently mooted the idea that CIC should back Chinese state-owned investors in overseas deals—although in practice it has generally invested on its own—but it’s hard to see what would motivate it to tie its fortunes, and its reputation, to a private entrepreneur.
Huang on Wednesday denied, through his public relations firm, that he made any formal bid for Liverpool, though the firm said in a statement that he “has registered interest in investing” in the team. “There has been much speculation and commentary from a wide array of people, many of whom have little knowledge of the facts. Unless there is a statement that specifically comes from Mr. Huang or his authorized representatives, which presently is solely Hill & Knowlton Hong Kong office, we would suggest such comments should be given little credence,” the statement said.
Asked about the CIC reports Thursday, a Huang spokeswoman said: “We will not confirm or deny any matter associated with the Liverpool Football Club unless and until we and the representatives of Liverpool FC have chosen to do so jointly.”
Clearly the CIC reports have thrown some in China for a loop. The state-run Xinhua news agency appeared momentarily unable to remember what country Liverpool FC is in. It ran an English-language report Thursday that began: “A Chinese overseas investment company has been funding a bid to buy Australia’s Liverpool Football Club.” (As of publication time, the report had yet to be corrected.)
China RealTime Report
• August 5, 2010, 10:34 PM HKT
Does CIC Really Want to Own Liverpool?
China’s sovereign wealth fund has more than $300 billion in assets, has been investing overseas aggressively in recent years, and almost never comments on prospective purchases it is rumored to be considering. So it’s no surprise that China Investment Corp.’s name is frequently trotted out by anonymous individuals as a purported bidder in high-profile deals.
In the latest case, British media are reporting that CIC is backing a bid for Liverpool Football Club by Kenny Huang, a sports entrepreneur who runs a youth baseball league in China and is starting the country’s second basketball league.
Anything’s possible, it should be acknowledged. Perhaps Communist Party chief Hu Jintao likes wearing the ad-emblazoned jersey of the Reds, or maybe Premier Wen Jiabao is secretly a devotee of Fernando Torres, or—who knows—CIC Chairman Lou Jiwei could secretly covet a seat in the Anfeild Kop.
Or possibly CIC analysts have decided that Liverpool could improve its finances by better exploiting marketing opportunities in China. English soccer teams, while getting better known in China, haven’t made huge strides in selling merchandise, as the NBA has done in China and as British soccer has done in places like Thailand or Singapore. CIC officials couldn’t be reached for comment Thursday.
On the other hand, skeptics can find abundant reason for doubt.
For starters, some of what’s been reported in the breathless coverage of the possible deal is simply off the mark. One article posits that CIC has been raising money for its Liverpool purchase by selling part of its stake in Morgan Stanley. “In a series of trades since 19 July, CIC has sold $558m of shares in Morgan Stanley, equating to £351.4m,” the article says. “That sum is equivalent to Liverpool’s debt to the nearest decimal place, and is exactly the number insiders say has been quoted to interested parties as the sale price.” The equivalence of those sums is “hugely significant,” the article adds.
In fact, CIC has sold $612.4 million of its Morgan Stanley shares as of Wednesday. Also, CIC had $18.6 billion in cash at the end of last year, plus another $20.7 billion in “cash management products,” and much of its offshore equity portfolio is held in liquid investments like index funds and ETFs. So it probably has plenty of cash on hand to fund a relatively small deal like the Liverpool one–and if it needed cash, it could certainly raise it in a less high-profile way than selling down its single most prominent holding. (A more plausible explanation for the Morgan Stanley sales is that CIC wants to keep its stake in the bank under 10% for U.S. regulatory reasons; an upcoming conversion of notes it owns would push it above that level).
More broadly, CIC is acutely averse to controversy and negative publicity—and controversy and negative publicity are not things that foreign buyers of English Premier League teams can expect to avoid. Just ask American Malcolm Glazer, who owns Manchester United (whose fans have organized a campaign to oust him), or, indeed, outgoing Liverpool owners George Gillett and Tom Hicks, also of the U.S., who have been widely criticized. (Already, the Daily Telegraph’s football correspondent, Henry Winter, Tweeted Thursday: “Amid confusion over #LFC [Liverpool], one thing must be clear: a great sporting institution cannot be owned by the Chinese Government. By any government.”) It’s far from clear why CIC would want to involve itself in such a potentially dicey endeavor so it can deploy a measly $558 million.
Partly because of its desire to avoid such hullabaloo, CIC has shunned majority stakes in its previous deals, emphasizing repeatedly–as it said in its annual report released last month — that“CIC is a financial investor. As such, it does not seek to control any company.” That would seem to rather starkly contradict assertions that it is seeking to acquire control of Liverpool.
And Premier League soccer hasn’t been an ideal place for financial investors. Only six of its 20 teams made any pretax profit in 2008-2009 season, according to Alex Byars, a senior consultant in the sports business group at Deloitte in London. Liverpool had an operating profit of £32 million ($50.9 million), third highest in the league. But that was before interest costs and depreciation on player contracts. After accounting for those, Liverpool lost £55 million, before taxes. That could spell opportunity for a risk-hungry investor, but it’s unclear why CIC would want to roll the dice.
And then there’s Huang, an avid self-promoter who may or may not have previously purchased a stake in the Cleveland Cavaliers basketball team. Chinese analysts have frequently mooted the idea that CIC should back Chinese state-owned investors in overseas deals—although in practice it has generally invested on its own—but it’s hard to see what would motivate it to tie its fortunes, and its reputation, to a private entrepreneur.
Huang on Wednesday denied, through his public relations firm, that he made any formal bid for Liverpool, though the firm said in a statement that he “has registered interest in investing” in the team. “There has been much speculation and commentary from a wide array of people, many of whom have little knowledge of the facts. Unless there is a statement that specifically comes from Mr. Huang or his authorized representatives, which presently is solely Hill & Knowlton Hong Kong office, we would suggest such comments should be given little credence,” the statement said.
Asked about the CIC reports Thursday, a Huang spokeswoman said: “We will not confirm or deny any matter associated with the Liverpool Football Club unless and until we and the representatives of Liverpool FC have chosen to do so jointly.”
Clearly the CIC reports have thrown some in China for a loop. The state-run Xinhua news agency appeared momentarily unable to remember what country Liverpool FC is in. It ran an English-language report Thursday that began: “A Chinese overseas investment company has been funding a bid to buy Australia’s Liverpool Football Club.” (As of publication time, the report had yet to be corrected.)
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539