BBC BLOGS - David Bond
« Previous | Main | Next »

How serious was Huang about buying Liverpool?

Post categories:

David Bond | 09:25 UK time, Saturday, 21 August 2010

Just three weeks after he emerged as the latest Liverpool saviour, Kenny Huang vanished from the scene on Friday night.

During that time we never heard from him in person, saw him at a game at Anfield or got any real sense of who might be backing him.

And yet ask any football follower who Huang is and they would probably be able to tell you - such is the publicity he has received.

Two weeks ago I went to Anfield to cover the story and was amazed to find a fan had already gone out and adapted his club shirt to reflect the possible arrival of Huang. The story had only broken two days earlier.

huang.jpgMany are questioning whether Huang actually had the money to buy Liverpool. Photo: Getty Images

That supporter was no doubt seeking publicity on television for his efforts, something we duly gave him. But there are plenty of people who are wondering whether Huang was any different, just chasing his moment in the spotlight or using the media to encourage people with money to get behind him and back his idea.

It wouldn't be the first time. The Premier League is now so high profile and a club like Liverpool so famous, that linking your name to a possible takeover is a sure-fire way of seeing it in headlines around the world.

Liverpool were initially put up for sale by their American owners George Gillett and Tom Hicks in April with debts of £351.4m.

Their largest creditor, the Royal Bank of Scotland, are thought to be owed in the region of £237m and will invoke a £60m penalty fee is it is not repaid, or renegotiated, by 6 October.

Now I am not saying Huang was not a credible bidder for Liverpool. Barclays Capital and Liverpool chairman Martin Broughton, who are handling the protracted sale of the club, said they were treating him as one.

He may have had the Chinese government's China Investment Corporation behind him, but we are all still waiting for confirmation one way or another and, in such a hazy environment of claim and counter-claim, it is virtually impossible to know the truth of that one.

He may have had the backing of a gentleman called Guang Yuang of United States finance house Franklin Templeton Investments, although a spokeswoman for Franklin Templeton was very quick to go on the record and dismiss the suggestion.

He may also have had the help of former Chelsea and Manchester United chief executive Peter Kenyon. It is certainly true Huang and Kenyon know each other but the idea that a man who ran Old Trafford was now involved with a bid to rescue Liverpool may not have gone down well among those fans on the Kop Huang was trying to woo.

There is, of course, the possibility that all this is just a scare tactic, and that when Huang says in his statement, "I am now considering my future options", he is fully expecting Broughton to come rushing to find him clutching a sale contract.

But if he was the only real bidder, why take that chance? Why not sit tight and complete the deal?

The first we all knew about the Roman Abramovich and Abu Dhabi takeovers of Chelsea and Manchester City was when the deals were done. Abramovich didn't threaten Ken Bates across the back pages before closing his deal to buy Stamford Bridge. It just happened and any bid which makes as much noise as Huang's without anything apparently behind it has to be treated with a serious measure of suspicion.

There are plenty of people who may now wonder whether all the talk of frustration at delays is a smoke screen to disguise the fact that he simply didn't have the money. His advisers claim otherwise, saying he had provided proof of funds and every piece of paper required by Barclays Capital.

The club don't deny this, but they insist that just because he may have submitted a bid, they still have a duty to explore all the other offers on the table and that if Huang can't bide his time, then so be it.

So what happens now?

Broughton and Barclays Capital will continue to talk to those bidders still in the auction. There were said to be five last Friday so one assumes there are now four. But there are question marks over how serious they are.

The Syrian-born Canadian businessman Yahya Kirdi, the Rhone Group from New York and the Al Kharafi family of Kuwait are all said to be interested but so far we have seen no evidence of any progress with their bids.

It is known Broughton wanted to choose a preferred bidder last Friday but Liverpool were only able to issue a holding statement saying they were continuing the process and that a sale would be completed soon.

Christian Purslow, the club's managing director, went on Sportsweek last Sunday to say a deal was not close and the briefing from the club's advisers is 'don't expect anything any time soon'. Does that mean that no one wants to buy the club or is the problem that the American owners won't budge unless they get a profit from their three years in charge?

However, the clock is ticking. Hicks and Gillett have six weeks to repay or refinance their hefty loan with RBS. They are incurring hefty penalties as each month passes and they fail to agree a sale.

RBS are desperate for them to find a buyer to take on or pay off the debt while Liverpool know they risk falling further behind if this uncertainty continues.

But Broughton and Barclays won't be rushed and have repeatedly insisted they not only want to find a buyer but the right owner too.

It could be some time until that fan at Anfield has a new name to put on his shirt.

Comments

  • Comment number 1.

    David,
    You need to check your sources.Huang was asked for evidence of his financials backers but could provide none.

  • Comment number 2.

    All hot air and bravado, no substance.

    Anyone who can drop their interest in purchasing a club like Liverpool on such a whim, does not deserve to own it in the first place.

    After the Hicks & Gillett shambles, we need solid owners with some staying power. Huang has fallen at the first hurdle.

  • Comment number 3.

    Worrying times for LFC, i only hope they find a suitable owner who can clear the clubs debt, finance the new ground and purchase some much needed talent in the squad. LFC are a great club and deserve to be at the top of the world game.

    My fear is there will not be a buyer and that LFC will start slipping, although i really hope this isn't the case! All true football fans want to see LFC come through the other side of this unfortunate circumstance smelling of roses!

    YNWA from Bristol City 1988

  • Comment number 4.

    I would favour the Kuwaitis or a returning interest from DIC. If it is to be east Asian, then an establish billionaire or a direct state investment by China is preferable.

    LFC is better not owned by a puppet or someone requiring outside financial support. To clear the club's £350m debts, build a £200m stadium and invest £50m in players will require someone with serious intent.

    Manchester City was a great opportunity as the stadium exists (rented) and the total outlay thus far is barely more than required to clear LFC's debt.

  • Comment number 5.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 6.

    Hicks & Gillett are the bugs in the ointment here

  • Comment number 7.

    How long before Liverpool turn into Leeds?

  • Comment number 8.

    Kenny Huang is the only credibale buyer. Yahya Kirdi was brought in by Hicks & Gillet to drive up prices so they can get a profit from the sale. Martin Broughton is a stooge of H&G who refuse to complete the sale with Kenny Huang because the latter refuses to hand H&G a profit. Claims of unable to declare the backer to Kenny's bid is a lie because he already confirm a Chinese sovereign fund ie CIC is backing the bid but would take only 20% ownership of the club, the rest funded by his HK base sport business. I also heard that a potential £1 billion investment in development for Liverpool city by another Chinese tycoon rest on the outcome of the successful LFC bid by Huang which now I fear will never happen. It is a sad day for Liverpool as a whole and not just for football.

  • Comment number 9.

    Kenny Huang? the modern day Michael Knighton (minus the ball juggling)

  • Comment number 10.

    I 100% agree with comments that a person or business that was really serious in acquiring LFC would not place caveats or unrealistic time constraints on an offer being accepted. When you acquire LFC you don't just buy a business you buy millions of peoples hope and dreams. Its too late now for a new buyer to influence the team in this transfer window,,, its better to take a few weeks more to find the right buyer instead of a buyer intent on using the media to force a quick. The 3 board members besides Gillete and Hicks should have the best interest of the clubs future in mind and out vote the other two on any potential sale. Let's hope for the right buyer in a sensible timescale,, of weeks instead of days.

  • Comment number 11.

    Why do you suppose he needs backing? Abramovitch didn't did he? Everything about your article is full of supposition and you deny you are saying what in fact you are saying. That he wasn't credible. I think the bigger story is he ran out of patience with Hicks and Gillette, it's no good getting a club after the transfer window has closed is it? You are hilarious, keep up the comedy journalism.

  • Comment number 12.

    7. At 11:36am on 21 Aug 2010, Brede_Butter_Pudding wrote:
    How long before Liverpool turn into Leeds?
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Goin that way with H&G owning, well should I say, administrating the club.
    Let it be serious warning to other clubs to be aware of americans with idol promisses.

  • Comment number 13.

    my grand slam was supposed to be with sausage

  • Comment number 14.

    @ hizento

    How on earth do you know Huang was the only credible buyer? Just because Huang and Kirdi were the only people to blow their trumpets in public that doesn't mean they are the only two who have declared and interest in the club.

    People obviously think Broughton is a bit of an amateur businessman. If the Huang bid was THAT good and THAT credible he would have had the club.

    I fully expect there to be other parties who have made a bid, who prefer not to run their mouths off in public (we've had enough of mouthy owners).

    I'm amazed that people think a sale of this nature can only be conducted through the media and "sources close to the deal"

  • Comment number 15.

    Ha Ha is all I can say. He was a chancer like all these wannabe tycoons interested in the club. I have a finance background, follow LFC from the far East and can tell you that this guy would have been a disaster for the club. As I have posted elsewhere, the first tell is that he was silly enough to be 'bidding' at this early stage in any case.

    The club is about to be available to a buyer at a dramatically lower price once the loan from RBS is foreclosed upon. We don't know how much lower, or whether a buyer might be able to swoop at a real fire-sale price, given that the RBS team might reckon that they can restructure things a bit, package and then sell at a better number. My thought is that this latter possibility is minimal: football isn't their game, they are already making handsome money on their actual game, lending and levying fines on late payment etc, and finally, I am very confident indeed that at this point in proceedings several buyers will emerge rapidly. In an acquisition timing is everything.

    Broughton is acting for RBS, not Hicks and Gillette, who are effectively out of the picture. The owners and bank have a common interest, however: this is to start a bidding war for the club. Acquisitions work like auctions - the price gets higher as the number of bidding parties gets larger, all things being equal. The owners can quietly encourage a bid in the hope of flushing another bid out or getting a better price. The bank wouldn't mind this either. However, ultimately RBS doesn't really care and they can sit back and take 60 mil for their time rather than encouraging a chancer to try and buy a club! No wonder that the chairman has not been in a rush to lose the chance to make this 'free' 60 mil for his employers.

    Unless a vanity purchaser comes forward and decides to flash the cash to his mates, we are in for a wait, but by the end of the year, there will be a buyer. From then on we are sweet because unlike Chelski, ManU and Arsenal, LFC can be transformed by the simple but pricey business of sorting the stadium out. LFC operates on a substantial cash-flow disadvantage relative to its peers. This matters hugely. The lower the asking price, the higher the available cash to a purchaser to do things with on stadium and squad, all things being equal.

    So, fingers crossed and just be glad that against the odds, we got a top manager who knows our league and can operate on a budget; that we kept our big names (Stevie and Torres are LEGENDS here in Asia. I mean MASSIVE MASSIVE names) and that those fools from over the pond have been banished. We may just escape intact as a club.....

  • Comment number 16.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 17.

    Putting aside the fact I am a Chelsea fan, now is not the time for partisan nonsense when one of the biggest clubs in the history of the game could be circling the drain on the whim of two owners who are a complete joke, much like the other clown of the game; Suliman Al Fahim.

    The argument that Mr Huang was not credible has been put here quite aptly, because Mr Bond does not know where the cash was coming from. Presumably Liverpool did.

    As for the "If he could walk away, he doesn't deserve Liverpool" argument, in business when entering negotiations, you should always be prepared to walk away, if key points cannot be agreed. One of the points he stated clearly was he wanted to get the deal done before the end of the transfer window, so that more players could be brought in - to hopefully garner success on the field, therefore start getting an a return on investment with the double whammy of Liverpool getting back to their usual high standards.

    The transfer window closes in a week or so, and Liverpool are still mulling over their options. Tricky one, do you go with the man who shouts from the roof tops that he will be the saviour? Or do you take the slow approach and try to predict all the possible outcomes for the club? Hicks and Gillett clearly want to profit from any deal, as is their want - whether they get one is another matter altogether, the board hopefully have the clubs interests at heart and are hopefully not trying to spark a bidding war, for which they could lose out.

    Don't hope for DIC to come in either, they are not the same as the Abu Dhabi royals, and as Dubai cannot pay its own bills at present, I wouldn't wish the situation at Portsmouth to happen to anyone. Abu Dhabi have the cash, court one of the other royals instead.

    Hope it works out for you Liverpool fans though.

  • Comment number 18.

    Forget the Chinese, Indians and the syrians. what has happened to the group of Liverpool supporters who were raising funds to take over the club?

  • Comment number 19.

    If he was serious he'd of stuck it out. Another joker not worth bothering with.

    To those complaining that Hicks and Gillet are being greedy, they no longer have much of a say. RBS are running the show and if the bid is fine by them then the sale will go through.

  • Comment number 20.

    If he's pulling out now that obviously shows a lack of real commitment. Which is the last thing Liverpool FC need. So I wouldn't be too disappointed if I was a Liverpool fan (which I most definitely am NOT)

  • Comment number 21.

    Umm ... Hicks & Gillett bought Liverpool in the heady days before the global financial crisis and, quite simply, the club is no longer worth today what it was then (same as ManU and the Glazers). I'm no Oxford scholar but when you over-pay for something and then sell it shortly afterwards, you're going to make a loss and the H&G are smoking wacky tabacca if they think they'll exit with a profit.
    The Glazers have managed to refinance (and restructure) their outrageous debt in order that they can extract as much cash from United before they cut it loose (allowing it to go bankrupt and the bondholders to wear the losses), so they'll probably manage to get out without losing much (and quite possibly making a modest profit).
    The glory days are over for United and Liverpool unless they find sugar-daddy backers like Chelski's and City's. Fan of both United and Liverpool had better get used to it because that is the stark reality.

  • Comment number 22.

    Another space filling article from someone who knows as much as we do.

  • Comment number 23.

    What's today's 12h30 kickoff?

  • Comment number 24.

    Taiwanosaurus.... think you got it dead right.

    A situation like the sale of a great club is the staple fodder of tabloid journalism and we should expect the Huangs of this world to have their mugs splashed across the press, it sells papers etc...... most journalists now don't give a damn about truth, investigative evidence and facts it's all about emotive reaction and the profit and patronage it obviously generates. The only truth journalists seemed capable of producing these days is the simple reporting of it after it has already happened.... anything else is the speculative litter of the lazy!

  • Comment number 25.

    I disagree strongly with the assertion (by hizento) that Kenny Huang is the only credible buyer. His behaviour does not suggest credibility, particularly as he has failed to explain the premature withdrawal of his bid. If there are credible offers for the club they exist among the undisclosed bidders. Mr Huang has left the impression that he found others were prepared to outbid him and does not have the resources or inclination to compete with them.

  • Comment number 26.

    reply to Spamburger: Coventry v. Derby

  • Comment number 27.

    Remember the Newcastle sale saga from about 18 months back?
    This will be the same .... lots of reported interest and bids, but no actual buyers.
    Come the end of the season Gillet & Hicks will still be there p'ing off the Liverpool supporters.
    In fact, expect them to be around until such time as they have no option BUT to sell at a big loss.

  • Comment number 28.

    Reply to spamburger ~ Coventry v. Derby

  • Comment number 29.

    a Lot of hot air as usual. Without the loan repayments and debt LFC runs at a profit. It's debt matches it's extremely low market value. This is why RBS would gladly take control of the club leaving the current management team in place until a buyer is found. With H and G out the way the bank can sell to whoever they wish.

    PS. As we the raxpayer would then own the club, shouldn't we all be able to sit in the Directors Box?

  • Comment number 30.

    I cannot believe that people are actually giving credit to this nonsense that he was only interested in buying if he could get the deal done before the transfer window closed "so he could provide much needed funds to the manager for blah blah blah blah blah!
    One does not need to have studied at Harvard Business School to know that when potential sellers in the player transfer market are aware that potential buyers have just been given a shipping container full of cash to spend, then 100 million will buy you what 40 million would have if one had acted a little shrewder! Then again I certainly didn't attend Harvard Business School or any institution that remotely resembled it, so what would I know. Huang's exit speech did however sound very similar to DIC's exit speech just before the Texas Two-Guns were unveiled by Parry & Moores. Maybe an offer has been accepted?

  • Comment number 31.

    Its very good that the Chinese did not takeover the club, because we all know how clever the Chinese are.If they had takeover Liverpool, Liverpool will be like Manchester City spending loads of money and will be very successful

  • Comment number 32.

    #15
    Really good post.

    #18
    Was wondering that myself about what happend to this supporters initiative! The one from Rangers supporters to buy their club also featured prominently at the start of the summer but this seems to have died a death as well.

    #31

    Haven't Liverpool already spent a huge pot of money over the past decade (from Houllier to Rafa) and got precious little return from it?!

  • Comment number 33.

    David, I think you raise a very important, relevant and well timed question over the legitamacy of 'prospective' bidders and their real intentions regarding takeovers of our clubs.

    Following the Pompey debacle, I thought the Premier League had bought in new stricter rules on potential owners having to show them they are 'fit and proper' and have the finances in place to make bids before any takeover is made public - it should be black or white? It seems every man and his dog can claim they are about to make a purchase nowadays? I also thought the city have rules about this to prevent any insider trading or dodgy share dealing on the back of 'false' speculation rumours?

    Football finances seem to be entering into increasingly mirky waters and I hope your position of a supposedly unbiased BBC's Sports Editor means you can expose any corruption to a wider audience before a few of our cherished clubs really go under? It's an incredibly important subject which needs addressing daily.

    One question, I don't get the seemingly daily announcements from the publicly owned RBS Bank commenting about when or if they would call in Liverpool's loans..same at Man.U with their debts? Why is this information available and surely it has a major effect on the timing of anyone making a decent bid?

  • Comment number 34.

    Broughton couldn't emphasise enough when it was announced the club was up for sale that the Board's approach was a 'leak free media strategy'. the fact that huang went to the press before even lodging a bid and stupid promises to buy players including lionel messi proves he was a chancer from the off. Keith Harris has confirmed he is representing someone and as someone who knows this business he has kept his mouth shut and acted properly and in accordance with the board's wishes and so presumably the terms of the sale. Broughton is no mug and wouldn't destroy his reputation on getting something as high profile as this wrong, they must be thrilled to see the back of him and his efforts to play this out in the press.

  • Comment number 35.

    If RBS do take control of Liverpool due to the debts, does this in effect constitute administration and/or incur a points deduction. That would be frightening and if so would surely tempt a lower sale price to avoid the consequences.

  • Comment number 36.

    There was general amazement in the city when Liverpool was sold to Hicks/Gilette. The Dubai offer was rock solid. What, we wonders, did H&G do to smooth the path? How much did securing the deal cost them?

    And who benefitted..............?

  • Comment number 37.

    It is a shame that Liverpool can't find 300 million pounds when the people are willing to pay more than $350 million to own a new team in the Indian Premier League. 120 years of history, glory and fans, i guess don't count for much in the eyes of potential buyers.

  • Comment number 38.

    Entrepreneurial Profiteers like to make a profit, investing £400 million in a club with players on gargantuan salaries and competing in a field where making the top four is not a healthy gamble is not the stuff of investors unless they're daft. If they do buy the club the fan's want them to spend £50 million while they want to cash in on the sale of an ageing Gerrard and raise another £70 million by off loading Torres. Then there's the new stadium ? £70 million for Torres is a lot of money for any potential investor ! But they'd get lynched by the Kop ! Will Torres be at Anfield come January ?

  • Comment number 39.

    What a joke. It was the BBC, and sepcifically David Bond who made the most noise about Huangs bid, with almost nothing coming from the man himself. Now this very same David Bond is writing about whether Hunag was simply seeking the limelight!!!
    He got it from you David. This whole story is a poor excuse for journalism.

  • Comment number 40.

    David
    not singling you out particularly but there is a great deal of media hypocrisy in this.
    People were complaining that Liverpool should keep things in house and not pass comment until a deal was done. [as per Chelsea and Man City in your blog]
    One of your colleagues on last nights Radio5 phone in was complaining that the silence from Liverpool was deafening and that the fans demanded to know what was going on.
    Damned by one section of the press if you make a comment damned by another section if you don't.
    On a second point Chelsea and Man City had one bidder Liverpool have five we are lead to believe. The fans are concerned that the mistake with the Americans is not repeated and are understandably curious as to whom the potential owners may be.
    On a final point I work in the area of Mergers and Acquisitions for a major multi-national, the quickest a deal has been completed was 2 months the longest took 15 months.
    Liverpool asked for the bids to be placed by last Friday for due diligence to commence
    I would expect all bidders to have been given the most basic of information to date. Equally the bidders would have to give evidence of their financial standing.
    One or two preferred purchasers would then be chosen to progress to the next stage.
    A more detailed examination of Liverpool's books and asset base would now take place.
    For Kenny Huang to expect this all to take place in a week or two is naive, he doesn't strike me as same. So he was either expecting to be the only bidder and trying to get the club on the cheap or he was indeed a stalking horse.
    Regards

  • Comment number 41.

    Huang never seemed all that legitimate to me in the first place. It's not out of the question that he was simply acting as a scapegoat for another potential buyer though.

    There definitely are more people on the bidding list, it's probably just the price that's currently being disagreed about.

  • Comment number 42.

    YaYa Kurdi?

    Might as well be YaYa Toure. Kurdi is just a H/G front runner to up the bidding.

    Problem is in that in this climate potential bidders will run a mile if they think they're being bent over the pool table. H/G are about as subtle as Frank Bruno.

  • Comment number 43.

    What do you mean he "vanished?" He was clear from the start that his offer would last for 2 weeks and then he was off. This is a non-story.

  • Comment number 44.

    On the one hand, David Bond said:

    "The first we all knew about the Roman Abramovich and Abu Dhabi takeovers of Chelsea and Manchester City was when the deals were done. Abramovich didn't threaten Ken Bates across the back pages before closing his deal to buy Stamford Bridge. It just happened ..."

    On the other hand, David Bond also said:

    "The Syrian-born Canadian businessman Yahya Kirdi, the Rhone Group from New York and the Al Kharafi family of Kuwait are all said to be interested but so far we have seen no evidence of any progress with their bids."

    If any of these guys is the real deal, the sale will be concluded before David Bond - or anyone else - hears about it. So what was the point of David Bond posting any of this on his blog?

  • Comment number 45.

    I think all Liverpool fans should relax a bit. Just because someone comes out in the press and states that they'd like to buy the club, doesn't mean that they've got the means to do so. Huang and Kirdi are the only two names to make public there interest, and it's no suprise to me that neither are likely to fulfill their stated ambition. They've done the classic old business men with no real assets trick. Go public and hope that investors follow.
    Both mens interest should have been taken with a pinch of salt, particually by the press who frankly should know better. But as usual they put two and two together and came up with nine point six. Not in any reports on the Huang bid (or so called bid) were there any real facts, just rumours and speculation. CIC were said to be the main backers, but it was always almost inconceivable to me that the Chinese Government would choose to invest in a foriegn football club. They simply don't invest in that kind of speculative venture. Once you take them out of the equation, Huang had no real backers for his venture.
    So lets face facts. Only the board of LFC, Barclays Capital and any serious bidders know who has bid, (if any). From day one the chairman Mr Broughton said that there would be little or no comments from the board regarding the sales process, and that the successful bidders identity would not be revealed until the day they gained control. Serious bidders keep quiet, and do their negotiations behind closed doors. Opportunists and publicity seekers do there busines through the press.
    Rightly or wrongly I trust messers Broughton, Purslow and Ayre to do their job. They will find an owner with the long term interest of the club at heart. And it wouldn't suprise me in the slightest if the new owner/owners turns out to be someone has hasn't been mentioned in the press to date.
    The future of LFC is not the doom and gloom that some might think. Commercially we are doing better than we have ever done before. Our new shirt sponsership deal earns £13m a year more than the previous deal, our new home kit was the fastest selling kit in history, Torres and Gerrard are the most popular premiership names on replica shirts sold worldwide, and new sponsers in Wolfskin and Lucazade have recently be added. So don't listen to the doom mongers the future of LFC is bright.

  • Comment number 46.

    Who is David Bond? There is considerable confusion about his backers .... Who on earth encouraged him to pursue journalism? .... some time ago in early August Mr Bond appeared as authorative as James "007" Bond about the Chinese Bid ... but now sadly it transpires that he is simply a man who has finally arrived at the same destination as most Liverpool Fans .... CONFUSION .... it has taken him nearly three weeks to reach the point where he can definitively state that he doesn't know anything ... jolly good form Bond .... leave the football to the real fans please ... you don't add anything but negativity and confusion !!!

  • Comment number 47.

    #2 All hot air and bravado, no substance.
    -------------------------------------------

    A bit like the BBC football Blogs!

    Heres a theory - BBC sports journo with nothing to do says, I know, lets scout a few dodgy football websites, until I find a breaking story then big it up on my Blog.
    Then when nothing comes of said story, I can write abother Blog about how it was all a load of rubbish!

    Why doesn't the english press just leave Liverpool FC alone, to sort out their club, instead of continual rumour mongering to grab a few headlines....

  • Comment number 48.

    im a leeds fan so i know all to well about big debts and what they can do to a football club. looking at the situation the americans have got you into i feel quite sorry for you because our debt was only a third of what you reportedly owe. we sold players like rio ferdinand for £30 mill and it didnt make a dent so in some respects your lucky enough to have a bigger more expensive squad. your also lucky enough to be having trouble in a time when its the trend for ultra rich business men to swoop in and buy up the big clubs. i think that fact mixed with the americans dropping their pursuit of profit would probably save your club. good luck. its not nice to fall from grace.

  • Comment number 49.

    As a Liverpool fan i'm both pleased and disappointed,

    First of all pleased, because clearly something wasn't right about this guy's "bid". People who are genuinly interested in buying one of the world's greatest clubs and investing in it's long term development and future don't put deadline's down. If it took another 3 or 4 weeks so what? I don't buy the story of a need to spend before the transfer window closes. Liverpool still have an excellent squad with only the need to add in a couple of positions. It's easily strong enough to perform well until the January window.

    The fact he's walked away now that his deadline wasn't expected shows he really wasn't serious about it. Liverpool's board have a duty to thoroughly investigate his and any other bids before accepting a deal.......after all we don't want to end up with anyone like the Americans do we?!

    I just get the feeling we've probably dodged a bullet with him, and as the story suggests, it seems he was only in it for the publicity. Good luck to him, now stop wasting Liverpool's time!

    Obviously the flip side is the disappointment that we now don't know where we are going forward. Are there serious bidders? Is a deal close? Do they have money or are they too backed by finance? Liverpool have stated they won't be making further comment, but it really would be nice if they could offer the fans something vaguely reassuring!

  • Comment number 50.

    You all should relax and stop beating up on Bond. I know, a lot of fluff, but what other websites do a better job, really? Most others just report on rumor after rumor (how many new goalies did caughtoffside claim Arsenal has got?). In the end, there's so much pressure from fans to read stories that are no better than celebrity gossip pages, that even the BBC has trouble keeping up the quality. If we didn't want fluff, we should stop coming to the website so often - and any other website around.

  • Comment number 51.

    Correct answer:
    Mr. Haung went directly to RBS to negotiate. Its a Eastern thing, trying to chummy up with they think is the big cat!
    He of course brought in Chinese government and presumably got their banking. "LOOK at me I amd dealing with big bank and got biog government behind me."
    No matter how much Yanks owe to RBS, Yanks OWN THE CLUB! SO they started to flirt with Syrian guy, just to let Mr. Huang know Oriental ways don't work here. MR. Haung is now pretending that he is backing odd on his own accord. NO! he messed up!

    And why do Pool fans persist that there are some serious bidders out there. You think businessman are infatuated with Pool, like fans of the games. They (businessman ) tend to be cold hearted and are not swayed so easily. A club in huge debt and a price too high!

    A clever businessman will just wait for the process to go on, the 9 point deduction, administration, fire sale, and bargain basement price. "Yanks" (neither are Yankees, one is a hillbilly from Texas and other a conuck from Canada)
    and RBS in game of who flinches first; and I guarantee Yank wont'. They are almost daring RBS to give them a take over deadline. RBS on then other hand keeps fining them to force them to sell. The moment Yanks receive a take over notice, they will sell players to recuperate; as much as they can. AN of course "Greedy" yanks put a Huang price on the club, not because they are greedy, it will mean that if bank takes over they debt owned to RBS will be covered by the take over, and yanks leave with profit.

    RNS is playing dangerous game of waiting and fining; if they don't take over soon, team could go on administration, yanks sell key players and bail out, and RBS get left with crumbs.

    Those Yanks may seem to looks like clowns, but they have just made big bad MR. Huang cry and go home, and RBS (well they have already find out-0 those nuts have got them and got them good). Liverpool and their fans; you burned your bridged with nutters and backed Rafa all the way; and no amount of past glory will get you out of this one.

    9 point deduction followed by administration is price you pay for crossing the yanks.


  • Comment number 52.

    51- Two things, first you are talking a lot of rubbish about the best process for a bidder. Utter nonsense.
    Second Gillett is neither a "canock", I can only assume you mean a Canuck? He is from Wisconsin, USA. Nor is a person hailing from Texas, a Hillbilly (you should not confuse the Texas Tea reference from that famous comedy show, with Texans) You might be okay disparaging Hicks by calling him a Cowboy.

    Your 0 for 2 my friend.

  • Comment number 53.

    ^^^^ What on earth are you going on about??

    Some people should not be allowed to use a computer

  • Comment number 54.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 55.

    Interesting comments, especially #15 and #33.

    My thoughts were also upon RBS. I would imagine they would prefer not to get the credit for being the bank that "called-time" on Liverpool's debts, even if they don't take a haircut on them.

    Also, administration and a 9 point deduction makes it even more likely that Liverpool will not be in the Champions league next year, which means less revenue, which means.....

    The Kenny Huang story reminds me of the Al Fayed buying Harrods saga. People often assume that banks are too cautious or too clever to be taken in by someone claiming to be very wealthy or having wealthy backers.

  • Comment number 56.

    It might have escaped notice what the chinese are doing around the world, especially in Africa, to probably work out that a china investment is more long term, certainly in bricks and motor about 70 years. How many column inches were given over to the fact he owns a 14 percent stake in an NBA franchise as detailed in state media in China over the last six months, or, he is responsible for some large deals in the states, or, that even if his bid was backed by money from the Chinese government as put so crudely in the feature, is responsible for moving the country into second spot on the worlds biggest economy list. Or the fact that much of the money raised is probably something to do with 1.4 billion people saving their money in banks... Perhaps the media scrutiney, interest and drivvle printed caused a Chinese/american to lose whats known as face in his homeland?!?!?!? Certainly when chasing the story - a call to the advisors is worth a punt, the three I made revealed that there was a bid, no comment, and that he had pulled out of the deal. The suposition that litters most online features, has most likely come from the UK, the current owners looking to improve the money from other possible interested candidates, current club players, and of course, speculation from the city who it is probably fair to say are responsible for pushing up prices on pretty much every commodity worth taking a gamble on in a volitile market. I actually fear for Liverpool now as the scope for money making in China through commercial venture is simply staggering. Did he or did he not have the cash, we might never know and this ramble is as poor as the one i just read. :-)

  • Comment number 57.

    One more thought I just had after reading post #51

    ...Presumably, once the transfer deadline has passed, then Torres and Gerrard (or any other player) cannot be immediately sold on to another club for a good price. So the administrator would reap the benefits of the sale, not Hicks and Gillette.

  • Comment number 58.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 59.

    Huang has had his own style of negotiating - I wonder if this is another way of getting things moving?

  • Comment number 60.

    The latest news coming out is that Huang felt that Liverpool and Broughton particularly were dragging their feet and would not set any sort of time frame for completion. In his statement he did sound a bit agrieved that this deal couldn't go through. The more we hear it sounds as if Hicks and Gillett intend to hang on for as much as they can get without worrying about the club....

  • Comment number 61.

    Sky Sports News(is that swearing?)reported Friday that Huang had refused to sign a 'confidentiality clause' in the ongoing negotiations. Now it seems to these cynical eyes that any serious bidder would welcome such a clause, if only to keep prying eyes out of his wallet until the appropriate moment. Methinks the final, 'serious' bidder/owner will only reveal themselves/himself when the deal is done and dusted...

    Too bad, if the Chinese government had been involved we could've turned Goodison into a 're-education' camp. Oh well...

  • Comment number 62.

    I think the bigger story is he ran out of patience with Hicks and Gillette, it's no good getting a club after the transfer window has closed is it?

    ------------------------------------------------------

    Collie21: If Huang was indeed a genuine bidder for the club, he had accepted the fact that if he were to gain control of the club at this stage yet he was still bidding for the club as we speak then surely that proves that he's not interested in providing an endless transfer kitty.

    A potentially new owner who has the best interests of the club at heart will not pull out because there is only a week left until the window shuts. If Huang was still bidding come August 31st, then his credibility would not necessarily be out of the question, but it would be better than it is now.

  • Comment number 63.

    36 - Rick Parry

  • Comment number 64.

    You have to be worried about all these blokes who are going to come in and spent £100m or more at Liverpool or Blackburn. Look back last season or two at Portsmouth where they were all going to shove money in but as soon as their feet were under the table....zilch. I Don't want to see two more British clubs ending up like shuttlecocks to foreign owners who have neither the resources they claim nor the sympathetic approach to run a premier league club.

  • Comment number 65.

    #15 Taiwanosaurus makes excellent points.

    But behind those points remains the underlying question: why would any businessman want to spend serious money to buy a football club in the first place?

    It can't be for the profit stream and dividend stream. I am not aware of any major football club that provides a good, regular income stream for its owners. Profits are always reinvested in one way or another. Or is there a businessman who thinks: it will be different this time, it will be different for us? What am I missing here?

    If not for income, that means the only business reason for a purchase is for potential capital growth - i.e. sell the club on for a profit in 5 - 10 years time. But who would be the buyer for such a sale and what would be their purpose in buying? To sell the club on in turn themselves?

    I suppose a purchase could conceivably be for personal reasons - to bring personal prestige to an individual owner, or as a rich man's toy. Sadly, the number of such potential owners with serious money is very limited.

    If this bubble ever collapses - or, perhaps, I might say when this bubble collapses - a major Premier League Club is going to go the route of Portsmouth and Crystal Palace into administration. And once the first has gone ...

    There must be better businesses to buy (outside the football industry) for similar money. (And where top employees don't expect to be paid £3m - £6m pa.)

  • Comment number 66.

    Unless they found some oil tycoon seeking for a new toy they are pretty much screwed up. No serious bussinesman looking for profit will lay a finger on a football club.

  • Comment number 67.

    Just a slightly off topic comment, I see that people are still confusing private debt of owners with the official accounts of football clubs. Mainly because of the way that the media reports these details, and attempts to whip up dramatic headlines.

    Hicks & Gillett broke promises to the Liverpool fans, it's true. They promised a new stadium, and the Liverpool fans didn't get one. But there is a lot of anti-American hysteria with regard to the criticism of Hicks & Gillett and the Glazers. When a company or an individual buys another company, they often buy it with leveraged loans. Despite all the speculation and hysteria about the owners of Liverpool and Man Utd, its standard business practice.

    Liverpool ended up in the situation they did last season not because of Hicks and Gillett, but because Rafa Benitez wasted money on utter rubbish. They spent £17m on a full back and £20m on a player who was never fit and is going to be shipped back to Italy on loan this season. They bought poorly, Rafa coached poorly, Torres and Gerrard (their best players) had injuries, and their rivals surpassed them.

    It's the same with Man Utd and the Red Knights. The Utd supporter groups whipped up a lot of hysteria about the Glazers last season with the Green & Gold campaign. But what exactly do the Red Knights offer? They spoke to the media, but where was their capital to buy the club? They didn't have the money. Why were they a better option to run Man Utd than the Glazers? The Red Knights were even more skint than the Americans are, they just had better PR.

    Everyone says: what if Man Utd and Liverpool did a Leeds?

    Well, Leeds were not bought by Americans. Leeds were not bought with leveraged loans. Leeds were run by a chairman who said he was a Leeds fan and wanted to 'chase the dream'. He bought players using bank loans and spending money on transfer fees that Leeds didn't have. When it went pear-shaped they had to sell those players they bought with loaned money. Thats why Leeds went downhill. Run a club properly, and the club won't do a Leeds.

    You see all these fans of clubs like Utd and Liverpool saying, "spend £200m, buy Ozil, Kaka, Messi, Ribery, Benzema etc" but you're all Peter Ridsdales. You're all chasing the dream and wanting your club to spend ridiculous money on players who aren't worth it, and money that your clubs shouldn't really spend in the current financial climate.

    There's something worse than a club being run by a businessman. It could be run by a fan.

  • Comment number 68.

    all the best to liverpool - one of the great world football clubs. another sorry chapter, but the fans patience must be wearing thin, now!

  • Comment number 69.

    More interested in what happens tomorrow night at Eastlands.

    Why does the media believe that a deal of this magnitude would be played out under the spotlight anyway - nonsense. A deal will be announced when it is completed, without the prior knowledge of the media and everyone else. Then we can all mull it over and pronounce wether it is good or bad.

  • Comment number 70.

    #17 The argument that Mr Huang was not credible has been put here quite aptly, because Mr Bond does not know where the cash was coming from. Presumably Liverpool did.

    #39 What a joke. It was the BBC, and sepcifically David Bond who made the most noise about Huangs bid, with almost nothing coming from the man himself. Now this very same David Bond is writing about whether Hunag was simply seeking the limelight!!!
    He got it from you David. This whole story is a poor excuse for journalism.

    #44 On the one hand, David Bond said:

    "The first we all knew about the Roman Abramovich and Abu Dhabi takeovers of Chelsea and Manchester City was when the deals were done. Abramovich didn't threaten Ken Bates across the back pages before closing his deal to buy Stamford Bridge. It just happened ..."

    On the other hand, David Bond also said:

    "The Syrian-born Canadian businessman Yahya Kirdi, the Rhone Group from New York and the Al Kharafi family of Kuwait are all said to be interested but so far we have seen no evidence of any progress with their bids."

    If any of these guys is the real deal, the sale will be concluded before David Bond - or anyone else - hears about it. So what was the point of David Bond posting any of this on his blog?

    #46 Who is David Bond? There is considerable confusion about his backers .... Who on earth encouraged him to pursue journalism? .... some time ago in early August Mr Bond appeared as authorative as James "007" Bond about the Chinese Bid ... but now sadly it transpires that he is simply a man who has finally arrived at the same destination as most Liverpool Fans .... CONFUSION .... it has taken him nearly three weeks to reach the point where he can definitively state that he doesn't know anything ... jolly good form Bond .... leave the football to the real fans please ... you don't add anything but negativity and confusion !!!

    =========================

    Another poor piece of editorial work by this inept hack.

  • Comment number 71.

    Wouldn't it be better to just say: 'The widely repeated expression of interest of XXXX' rather than 'bid'?

  • Comment number 72.

    There is something unsettling about the 'Red Herring' Title of this article, you are not a closet racist or anti Chinese by any stretch of the imagination are you? Perhaps resentful that they have become the economnic power house while you are stuck with dodgy journalism..

  • Comment number 73.

    I just don't understand why anyone would like to buy a club like Liverpool for economic reasons. First you have to shell out 400mill to purchase, then spend 100mill net on transfers and another 300 mill on stadium. After all this you are still not allowed to take cash out of the business or fans will crucify you. Eg selling Torres for 60mn+ makes too much sense but can't be done. Even clubs with turnover much higher than Liverpool hardly ever seem to raise cash to pay owners (except maybe ManU). The market and fans expectations have been so subverted by the likes of Abromavich/Abu Dhabi that its near impossible to turn a profit and run a championship team.

    The only owners fans like are sugar daddies and everyone else is villified.Only Question is can they find a sugar daddy


  • Comment number 74.

    So...Mr Bond...you expect Huang to talk? No! You expect him to buy!

  • Comment number 75.

    David,

    Your blog states:

    "The first we all knew about the Roman Abramovich and Abu Dhabi takeovers of Chelsea and Manchester City was when the deals were done."

    So why does the media persist in trying to be the first people to claim to know about what is going on with Liverpool takeover. No one knows but the board of Liverpool and any potential bidders.

    I am a Liverpool fan and am sick of the constant media build up of an imminent takeover and nothing materialising so please do us all a favour and blog about something that matters - the fact that Huang is no longer in the frame means no one cares if his bid was serious or not - who cares he isn't involved in the process anymore end of.

  • Comment number 76.

    Good NEWS! I'm just about to buy Liverpool FC. I can pay off Hicks and Gillet and give them a tidy profit as well. Plus build a brand new stadium where Goodison Park used to be, all I'm waiting on is for my lottery ticket for next Saturday's EuroMillions draw to come in. Plus I'm a genuine Reds Fan.

    If that all sounds a bit rubish then witness the Huang bid.

    Happy days fellow Scousers!

  • Comment number 77.

    To the comment about why one would buy a club like Liverpool, I would heartily agree that generally speaking, football clubs are not good investments. However, as I mentioned in post no.15, LFC is highly unusual in its combination of a triple A brand name and marketing potential and weak infrastructure. Put money in for a stadium and transform the earning potential of the club - simple. You do this and you change the cash flow and consequently the valuation upside.

    More generally, you sort out the branding and marketing side. Man U and Real are streets ahead of other teams in this aspect: you don't necessarily need stores in the far east and so on, but there are so many things that could be done at LFC that currently are not being done. Do a simple comparison with Man U and it is pretty obvious.

    At the moment, with the club out of the Champions League, weak in the Prem and still this well followed world wide, the place looks like a bargain for a sports focused investor with a 5-10 year time line and cash to spend. The irony is that Hicks and Gillette also had this cash: they just played last weeks game in this weeks financial environment: leveraged buyouts will cost you an arm and a leg when borrowing costs spike like they did. That'll learn 'em.

  • Comment number 78.

    Peeps, lets get back to basics. Unless I'm mistaken isn't it about the footbal. Our Yankee Doodles messed us up, but to quote, 'This is Anfield' the shirt is bigger than any owner, yes we deserve better, but we got to move on. I say give Roy a chance, if we qualify for the Champions league this time then we will get a decent proposal.

    Just a thought.

    P.

  • Comment number 79.

    I amcurious to know why with more than 350 million pounds of debt, that Liverpool are not being put in the hands of a receiver - is administration only for the smaller clubs. It seems a little unfair that clubs such as Liverpool can amass such debts and continue to spend and be backed by large banks - obviously using 'our' money. liverpool football club should be made accountable.

  • Comment number 80.

    @sportsfan52 - It's not the size of debt that people have issue with, it's your ability to make the payments. If you stop making your agreed debt payments you end up in real trouble and then administration would follow.

    Liverpool, Man Utd...etc...etc...all have big debt but also can pay off what they're supposed to. It is all a risk but it's the same as if you were to take a loan or a credit card. You may owe more than you can afford to pay off but if you make minimum payments on time, no-one bothers you.

    The situation at Liverpool may not be dire if they can get the buyers and investment they need to see them through this rocky patch. RBS don't want Liverpool to turn in to a Portsmouth scenario because if Liverpool should go in to administration then they would only pay off fractions of their debt, including what RBS is owed.

    From a business perspective administration is worst thing that can happen to the club. I do not believe this will happen. If they manage a strong season on the pitch then even with a 9 point deduction they can avoid relegation. Palace went in to administration last year, stayed in the Championship and are out of administration once more.

    As bad and gloomy as people want to make this, I think Liverpool are strong enough to weather the storm.

  • Comment number 81.

    Whilst, like every other supporter,I am eager for news of a takeover (and please God let it be the right takeover) I'd like the news to be breaking news. When it's announced it should be a done deal. Why should it be played out in public, we kbow that sort of thing only causes more problems.

  • Comment number 82.

    I'd rather wait as a Liverpool fan before putting my trust in any would-be buyer. Gillette and Hicks have already messed this great institution and caused us to keep lagging behind, annually, in comparison with our rivals. Our recovery from their shackles will no doubt take time.

    While not discounting Huang's credibility because I don't know him much, I will still pose that question of why a serious businessman with Huang's so-called credentials would conduct his affairs so publicly. Most shun the limelight from past observation, and neither do they reveal their cards as early as this man did.

    To return Liverpool to the top will take the old stability. A case in point is Hodgson's appointment as only the 19th manager in LFC's history - since 1892! If that's not a picture of stability I fail to know what is. Another one would be our long running partnership with Carlsberg, who remain sponsors after expriry of their shirt deal. Our owners must mimic such.

    What encourages me in all these shenanigans, the precise reason why financial charlatans seek the publicity only we can give, is we remain one of the world's most iconic sporting brands, one of the most supported clubs; a club with arguably the most diehard fans, and retain the ability to attract sponsorship deals like the one with Standard Chartered Bank.

    I would much prefer to suffer a bit more but end with ONLY the right owners. It's the only way Liverpool FC will regain the ability to reach out to the top once more, to me the only place the Kop Nation belongs.

  • Comment number 83.

    #34 - "Keith Harris has confirmed he is representing someone.." and frankly Orville couldn't do a worse job of running the club than the current two clowns.

  • Comment number 84.

    It is amazing that through all of this most Liverpool supporters would rather come on here and insult the author of the article than talk about the issue. Not trying to make a point, rather just an observation that amuses me.

  • Comment number 85.

    Take over proposal was submitted several weeks ago with the intention of owning the club before the end of transfer window. Under premier league rules clubs must give minimum 10 days notice in which detailed checks can be made on potential owners.
    Martin Broughton did nothing to show any signs that Liverpool was interested in huang's bid.
    Obviously the offer price needs to be accepted on both parties before further negotiations can proceed.
    Then exactly 10 days before transfer window closes the offer was withdrawn.

  • Comment number 86.

    Those talking about a 9 point administration penalty are wide of the mark.

    As a 9 point penalty would seriously affect the club's value and finances (the Standard Chartered deal is results-linked for one) then demanding repayment from the club, when it clearly couldn't pay, would be idiotic.

    RBS can simply repossess the club and sell it off themselves. No administrator is needed - aside from the owners' debts, the club's accounts are pretty healthy.

    And we all know bankers never make mist- oh.

  • Comment number 87.

    We need wage caps in England of around 300,000 pounds a week. If we did this all sorts of teams could win the EPL.
    Not just Man U, Chelsea, Man C. This way teams could buy the EPL. They would have to build a team.
    1. Yes I understand we would do badly in Europem but it might take a few years but we would build great teams that could challenge again.
    2. All sorts of teams could win the league
    3. No more big debts
    4. More English players.
    5. More money for youth facilities.
    6. Higher attendances
    PEOPLE WANT A COMPETITIVE LEAGUE NOT A BORING LEAGUE.

  • Comment number 88.

    David, this really is very simple. I refer you to question 15 of Martin Broughton's interview on the LFC website, when he took over as chairman, in a piece entitled, '22 Questions for the Chairman':
    http://www.lfc.tv/news/latest-news/22-questions-for-the-chairman

    ---------
    15. Every week there seems to be a new potential "investor" announcing his plans via the media to buy the club, building fans hopes up, then after a few days there is a denial that they were ever interested. Can we assume that any future owner(s) of the club will deal in private with you and not do business through the media so that we can ignore all this ridiculous speculation?

    "I absolutely agree - ignore all ridiculous speculation. Any serious owner would surely want to do it privately, which is how we want to do it. We anticipated a lot of interest, it's a great club. There's bound to be a lot of interest and there will continue to be lots of conjecture. Every media person wants to be the one who can go back and say, 'I told you back on such and such date that these people were interested'. Expect to see all sorts of names in there - ignore the whole lot."
    ---------

    Ignore. The. Whole. Lot. Got that, David? Now go tell all our media mates.

  • Comment number 89.

    Someone quoted Martin Broughton as 'a bit of an amateur businessman, Barclays one of the world's largest banks are proud he is amateuring for them.
    Stewart Hester of RBS was quoted in the Liverpool Echo as saying that
    " Liverpool FC had borrowed too much".
    Really, Stewart? And who was the fool who lent the Yankee buffoons that money?

  • Comment number 90.

    Llanwrstman states that (and I quote) "We in England need wage caps"
    I hate to be pedantic, but isn't Llanwrst in north Wales?

  • Comment number 91.

    No.15 Taiwanosaurus gives the answer in a nutshell. This is business folks. Forget the emotion. People don't get rich making decisions based on emotions, just cold, hard, business facts. The bidding war normally starts in these cases when the (RBS) loan forecloses. That's when brown objects strike the rotating blade. It's best if the club is bought for a song, leaving the new owners plenty of funds for a new stadium and players. This also means that the club's two 'weakest links' Mr Gillett and Mr Hicks, 'leave with nothing'.... now that's what I call a result.

  • Comment number 92.

    the 2 cowboys will want a profit end of

  • Comment number 93.

    Dunno what all the fuss is about with Huang? he stated he wanted things done by Friday 20th August to enable the manager to have funds to get players in before the transfer window shuts, it wasn't so he pulled out!

    Besides I have it on very good authority that Sheikh Mohammed is back in to buy Liverpool however it will be October when the next payment of the loan is due.

    We'll have more money behind us then than Citeh! and Mohammed is a genuine Liverpool fan :)

  • Comment number 94.

    £300,000 per week wage cap???

    Are you mad?

    Thats over 50% more than Yaya Toure is on at the moment.

    I think £75K would be a much more sensible wage cap and any footballer who thinks they deserve to earn more than that is seriously deluded.

    On the idea of the takeover, I think its going to be a long time played out and Mr Huang will not be the last person to come out as a "serious buyer"

  • Comment number 95.

    Check the investigative article written about Kenny Huang and his non-ownership of the NBA team as well as other potential lies that he may have told...

    http://www.sportingintelligence.com/2010/08/24/kenny-huang%e2%80%99s-meteoric-rise-from-obscurity-to-liverpool-bidder-or-not-240808/

  • Comment number 96.

    93. At 00:16am on 26 Aug 2010, Darren wrote:
    I have it on very good authority that Sheikh Mohammed is back in to buy Liverpool
    --------

    I have it on very good authority that you haven't done your research on the Dubai debt crisis and the man at the centre of it.

  • Comment number 97.

    I have it on very good authority that Liverpool are officially unbuyable for anyone with an ounce of sense

  • Comment number 98.

    "I think £75K would be a much more sensible wage cap and any footballer who thinks they deserve to earn more than that is seriously deluded."

    It always makes me wonder how much a footballer like Gergie Best would be worth nowadays. No player today plays with 2 feet!

 

BBC iD

Sign in

BBC navigation

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.