Hicks statement: DIC talks have ended.

A statement has been made by Tom Hicks, co-owner of Kop Football (Holdings) Limited, the company which is the owner of Liverpool FC. The talks with Dubai International Capital are off, Hicks feeling he can’t work under the terms they would impose:

“Based on a meeting held earlier today in Dubai between my representatives and officials of Dubai International Capital LLC, as well as other recent contacts between us and them, I have decided to terminate any further discussions with DIC regarding their possible purchase of a minority stake in Kop and, in turn, in the Club.

“DIC made it clear that if they invested in the Club, they would want it to be managed by committee. Based on my thirteen years of successful experience as an owner of professional sports teams, and based in particular on the situation at Liverpool Football Club over the past year, it is clear to me that such a committee approach would not be in the best interest of Kop, of the Club or of the Club’s loyal and passionate supporters.

“Accordingly, I have decided to exercise my right under the Kop Football (Holdings) Limited partnership agreement to veto any sale of any portion of Kop and the Club to DIC.

“I and my colleagues and representatives will continue to explore a number of other options with regard to the ownership of Kop and the Club aimed at achieving an appropriate ownership, financial and organizational structure for Kop and the Club over the long term.”

Expect more on this of course, but the deal is off.

53 thoughts on “Hicks statement: DIC talks have ended.”

  1. Get this idiot out of the board room, stupid stubborn old yank.  This man does not have the best interests of the club at heart

  2. A little but not enitrely surprised that this has happened.

    DIC (Amanda Staveley in particular) didn’t intimate, she said that they viewed the 49% purchase as the start of DIC’s eventual complete takeover of the club:

    “Tom Hicks knows that in the long run we will be 100 per cent owners of the club, but we are prepared to play a waiting game. We will be able to pay the price for the financing of the club and construction of a new stadium.”

    Tom Hicks is just too bloody stubborn and pig headed and above all proud to submit to this. A fact that extends to us Supporters and ultimately the good of the club too.

    So where does this leave us? Ultimately the answer will lie in whether or not Hicks can raise the cash to buy out Gillett’s stake, if he can, we’d better all pray. If he can’t, expect another 3 months of debate and intense speculation and another ‘will they? wont they?’ debacle concerning DIC.

    Tom Hicks, you are an absolute bastard. Once again you have shown absolute contempt for the wishes of the supporters and quite frankly this leaves us with no doubt whatsoever of where your priorities lie, and they are sent to him via statement once a month.

    Liverpool football club needs it fans even more now than it perhaps arguably ever has done.

    Don’t expect this to be the last we hear of this whole fiasco.

  3. I read somewhere that DIC reckon they can mount a legal challenge to Hicks’ veto against Gillett’s sale. Will they now pursue this. The latest development leaves Gillett high and dry.

  4. I don’t want to come across as as a Tom Hicks supporter but one thing he said rings true. Management by committee really is a nightmare – I live with it everyday at my company. Nothing gets done, every decision takes an age and good ideas get lost of watered down. Sometimes it is better to be ruled by a tyrant than a fractious committee.

  5. When he says ‘would not be in the best interest of Kop, of the Club or of the Club’s loyal and passionate supporters’, he means its NOT IN HIS INTERESTS.

    Time to step up the protests at the Reading game and make sure we do WHATEVER IT TAKES to get the money grabbing prick out of the club before he runs it into the ground!

  6. Gillett must be furious with Hicks. He’s effectively stopped him selling his share. I would imagine that Gillett could sue Hicks if this isn’t resolved soon,

    Unless Hicks can raise the money to pay off Gillett (unlikely given the world-wide current financial problems) then he has no option but to let Gillett sell to DIC.

    The next few days will be very interesting. I imagine Gillett will break his silence quite soon.

  7. Now this is what we call big-baller brinkmanship!

    Hicks wants to own the club of that we shoul be in no doubt. But he doesn’t have the funds – hence the previous lies about not holding talks with DIC – otherwise he’d have done it by now.

    DIC want the club but do not want to do medium to long term business with Hicks but can’t force him out because of the agreement with Gillett and Hicks. But I suspect in their ‘49%’ proposal they’ve made it as clear as night meets day that they want him out, as they know he does not have the long term funds.

    So, it’s all about how long the ‘agreement’ with his partner, Gillett, lasts until Hicks has no choice but to allow DICs in.

    Let’s hope DIC wins out in the end but sadly it’s not in their gift.

    Now we must do all we can to ‘Get Hicks (and his family) out of our club’. How I dislike the man’s public persona but, sadly, can see why he’s playing hardball. Let’s hope their’s some substance to John Steele’s point.

  8. DIC appear to be as stubborn as the Americans.

    Interesting that Gillett was the one people liked and he is one who is desperate to cut and run.

  9. Please anyone who has "SKYPE" get onto his companies in texas and spam the life out of them. If we distrupt his business he’ll feel the effect on his wallet. His phone numbers are listed under the thread "Shut up and Concentrate on negoiating". I doubt anyone will take my calls but at least i’ll jam their lines and distrupt their daily business. Just imagine what 100 of us could do to their communications structure by emailing, faxing, phoning every spare second we have!!

  10. Amazing, just when you think Hicks can’t get any lower, he  goes and proves  you wrong. he’s lower than an aussie snake.

    I hate the way he now regularly claims to speak for the interests of the fans and the club.  

    It’s desperately sad.  The man is turning us into Newcastle Utd.   Well, I guess we just have to up the protests against him.

    Maybe the fans can file a class action suit against him re his initial claims when buying the club that he wouldn’t be putting any debt onto the club. 

  11. I’m still taking all this in now to be honest, as I’m sure everyone is.

    The leak of that letter over the weekend may have caused more harm than is realised or was expected.

    Everyone assumes Hicks is bluffing about having other investors lined up, and so expected him to eventually give in and hand over control. The determination to hang on – especially if they were offered £80m profit like GG reportedly was – suggests they’ve either got balls of steel or some genuine investment lined up.

    As I say, I’m still taking it all in but I expect more twists and turns. Reports in recent weeks (or less, it feels like years) spoke of legal possibilities to challenge the partnership/shareholder agreement’s validity. But I have to ask, how long would such a challenge take to succeed?

    GG could now have to accept a much lower offer or forget selling his half. He’s under no obligation to sell of course, although he’ll want to be out in less than 16-months when the finance deal ends.

    DIC want the club badly, they say, but they’re not going to get it unless they can challenge that agreement, or offer Hicks the sort of money he won’t turn down. I think the former is unrealistic, the latter unlikely.

    I agree with what someone said above – a committe approach to decision-making won’t work, not unless both partners agree on the appointment of someone they can use for the more urgent decisions.

    Personally my happiest thought in the last two hours since I heard this is that a shorty in Colorado had just heard the same news and would be pretty gutted too.

    Unless DIC make a massive bid to take 100%, or change their demands, both unlikely, it looks like GG has lost out on the kind of profit he thought he’d get.  

  12. What’s worse than a woman scorned? A business man about to lose out on big big monies!

    The twists and turns have only just begun.

    Gillett will have to speak out soon and make his position known.

  13. All good points. 

    I did think DIC were going too far when saying that the 49 percent was only the start of their push to take total control.  

    Hey, maybe the hatred between Hicks and Gillett might be so great, that Hicks is prepared to wait the short guy out (and buy some of his shares for a reduced price later in the year)

    I get the clear impression over recent months that Hicks enjoys aggravation and rows.  He seems to revel in all this stuff.  We have a very dangerous man running the club.   To him this seems to be all a game.   He’s taking the piss.

  14. Surely by now Hicks must  realize that the Club’s "loyal and passionate supporters" all unanimously want him to f**k off and die somewhere………preferably quietly !!!….therefore by even making this statement the only logical inference is that Hicks is perfectly happy rubbing our noses in it.  My strong belief is that Hicks enjoys all the attention of being the tail that wags the dog.  This leaves us only one true option.    I’ve said this before guys and I’ll say it again (because I know this goes deeply against the grain for all of us) but in the short term we have to be disciplined enough, as a group, to completely boycott anything and everything LFC sells until Hicks gets the message.   Half measures won’t work with this bastard and I’ve personally seen this coming for a while now.  We can only force Hicks out by ensuring that the value of his "asset" (while it remains in his hands) becomes economically unsustainable  for him to continue owning.   Whether we realize it or not the reality is that Tom Hicks’s financial plans are all completely dependant on us supporters.  We have it in us to just say "No" and put Tom Hicks in a hopeless position.  

    On the issue of Gillett’s shares I find it very difficult to believe that the share sale position could be anywhere near as black and while as Hicks’s camp are making out.  It would be the most onerous partnership agmt in history if it was.  I read several reports last week to the effect that the talks between DIC and Hicks were designed to forestall a major legal battle with Gillett and DIC on one side Hicks on the other but not many people seemed to think Hicks was on strong ground.   Therefore I don’t think we’ve seen the last of DIC (and I thank God for this) but it does mean that we have to play our part.  Never before has LFC needed its fans to stand up as it does now.           

  15. Jim i agree, now what if GG doesn´t like it and feels that his only option is to sell to DIC.!! with him and DIC going to court together it might tip it in their favour…this is all hypithetical, but what if…thats the next big question. DIC can wait, but what if Gillett won´t wait..

  16. 13 years of successful experience as an owner of professional sports teams??????

    Every thing this guy touches goes down the toilet, just look at the rangers.  Those fans want rid of him too.

    For the first time in all of this I am truly concerned.  I always thought that it would work itself out eventually and the dumb yank woulf leave.  Other investors?  More cash strapped yanks borrowing millions and taking the profits.  DIC had a vision. 

    Anyone getting in to bed with Hicks can only have the same attitude as he.  Move in sell up and take off. 

    I never thought I would see the day that I would say this, but an empty stadium would speak volumes.

  17. this is never going to end is it, evry time theres a snippet of good news, Hicks loves to put the boot in and make us angrier than ever. how the hell does he see Liverpool becoming a force with its fans demonstrating and slagging him off constantly at every game? Surely he realisess that on a global market, all the world is seeing is this club self destructing by the hour. I get so upset and irrational(one post i was irrational and regret writing it to be honest) that i almost want to write to David Moores and askign him just what the fuck was he doing and thinking selling to him? in fact, Hicks wasnt even interested until Gillett couldnt afford it. So who is to blame for all of this? Moores?Parry?Gillett?Hicks? there are so many poor decisions our club has made over the years its just unbelievable to think once we were the greatest club in the world on and off the field. Sadly, David Moores must take his share of the blame. He has sold us to a monster

  18. How could us Liverpool fans get hold of the Rangers team and join forces? Would this be an option to try and work out?

  19. Taking a wider view of this whole debacle. 
    These negotiations are bizarre.  And I say that with regard to both DIC and Hicks. 

    What other set of business negotiations have ever been played out, back and forth, on a daily basis, in the media.   I am sorta surprised (and disappointed) at DIC’s media tactics.  And maybe we are seeing the type of way they operate. 

  20. Jim, I don’t think DIC need to challenge the agreement itself per se but rather Hicks’s interpretation of what the agreement requires.  This may seem like a minor point but in terms of the legal balance of power it is very important.  Hicks’s abrasive blustery personality is prone to make him talk utter bollocks in front of the media out of pride but this would cut no ice in a courtroom.  As I say, I’ve never heard of a partnership agreement which gives one partner an unrestricted veto right on the other selling his shares.  This would be like forbidding one partner in a broken marriage from getting out.   Pre-emption rights are generally fairly standard.  They provide that if either partner wants to sell his/her shares to a third party they have to first offer those shares to the other partner at the same price.  Usually there is a time limit for the other partner to accept and complete the sale.  Once this time limit expires without acceptance the would-be seller is free to sell to whomever he wants.  The agreement between Hicks and Gillett may involve some variation on this but I’d be surprisd if Hicks could simply forbid Gillett from selling because he (Hicks) doesn’t like DIC.     

    The truth is that there is nothing inherently unusual about different parties owning shares in a football club and not always seeing eye to eye.  Lots of companies have this scenario.  The only problem here is that (as Toshackrises points out) we have a particularly arrogant, abrasive character as the other partner.   

  21. Suprised but not much. I live in India and the support for liverpool here and the rest of asia is unmatched except by manyoo. Sad a couple of jokers who probably never saw a football (soccer?) game are playing a game of brinkmanship with the emotions of millions. The only way they can be brought to their senses is when we stop buying merchandise and season tickets. If anything the ‘spirit of Shankly’ group needs to co-ordinate a sustained campaign for a financial boycott. Yes it may hurt us in the short term but then does anyone think that we can get a trophy next year with Hicks in charge. If we truly say we support the club through thick and thin then a financial boycott is the only solution for the long term well-being.

  22. Toshackrises.  It may well be Hicks who was using the media by releasing that letter (or some other party out of potentially many who had access to it).  I personally don’t see any benefit to DIC in releasing the letter.  The letter itself doesn’t actually say anything of any note that we didn’t already know anyway.  I believe Hicks is the personality more likely to engage in gamesmanship and then use it to come off publicly as the aggrieved party.  What we know for sure is that the reasons given by Hicks for terminating the talks would have been well known to him for sometime before today.   Therefore the implied suggestion that he only found out today that DIC would want a 49% say in the running of the Club is once again clearly false.  

  23. In a roundabout sort of way, I can’t help but think that this will turn out to be a blessing in disguise, albeit a blessing that may take some time to show itself.
    Few of us really want Tom Hicks to have anything to do with the club – every one of his grubby fingerprints should be erased from every scrap of paper that bears the LFC insignia. By puffing up his chest and attempting to play the big man, he may very well have shot himself in the foot. Think of the kind of influence and persuasion DIC (thanks to the sheik) has over the banks – in this case, RBS. Hicks (or THicks as he should be know) will need to go hat-in-hand when it comes time to get money for the new stadium (the one thing that’s going to dramatically influence the financial value of the club). If/When he can’t get it, DIC will be well-poised to swoop in and take sole ownership.
    Like I say, it may take some time, but this may not be such disheartening news afterall…

  24. I’ve been a life-long LFC supporter, and I don’t think I’ve missed one match (albeit from Belgium!) in the last three or four years. This endless soap about takeover by DIC and Hicks resistance is addictive. I’ve been doing in the last couple of months what I never used to do – rush to the computer as soon as I come back from work to find out about latest developments. However, if we stand back a bit from this crazy daily soap, one  thing is certain: DIC will be sole owners of LFC in the fairly near future, and Hicks is only driven by spite and greed to make more money from his priceless Anfield asset. The only worrisome thing about it all is that the whole drama is not likely to have come to an end before the onset of the next PL campaign, and transfers risk being frozen owing to the stalemate involving Hardy Hicks and Laurel Gillett. Thanks a lot, Jim, for all these thoughtful (and, yes, rational!) pieces on the recent events. ‘Fantasy Rafa’ has become my most pleasant read every day. Kind regards to all the LFC fans from remote Belgium! I wish I could be a Scouser! 

  25. The man is a leech, and there is no two ways about it! He has to be got rid of, by hook or by crook! He might well think he has won this battle, but rest assured he will never, never win ‘this’ war! FTY-SYOTOS 

  26. Hicks – Go Now! Leave this club  you grabbing b*st**d. You obviously don’t have the interests of this club – just your own greedy self interest. GO!

  27. DIC should walk away.  The amount they were offering was too much anyway.  Hicks wants everything and will give up nothing.

    As for the ‘leaked memo’ I think DIC absolutely did leak it, same reason as Staveley’s comments about eventual 100% control.  They know comments like this will wind Hicks up.  They know he is emotional and prone to angry, knee-jerk responses.  They know the biggest pressure on Hicks is from us, the fans, and everything Hicks is currently doing is increasing that pressure.

    Let’s see what happens next.

  28. I agree 100% with what Julie says. Hicks’s schemings are going to backfire fairly soon and cause his own undoing, though, again, I hope next season will not be jeopardised by the stalemate.

  29. Big worry is that an announcement like this might damage team morale.  They’ve been playing well while DIC have looked like getting a share, so timing of this is atrocious.  I hope it doesn’t affect their performance tomorrow night, but if they play lousy, we’ll know why.

  30. Even though (as Hop rightly points out) the timing of this throw-toys-out-of-the-pram announcement sucks (if Hicks truly cared about the team and the fans, would he blow his blustering horn the night before a huge match?), I wonder if he’s been played like a fiddle by DIC and Stavely (who is only "a pretty smart woman" in the Texan’s opinion…surely code for "l’il lady" in his eyes).
    According to the ownership agreement, Hicks and Gillett both have 90 days to exercise their right of first refusal on the other’s shares–now that Gillett has (allegedly) agreed to sell his 50%, Hicks must come up with the cash within that timeframe in order to prevent Gillett from selling them to anyone else. If (and, I’ll admit this is a big "if") DIC/Stavely know that in the present economy Hicks is unable to raise that kind of money in that timeframe, then the leaked press releases and correspondence on the weekend were intentional, to deliberately anger Hicks and force his hand.
    Once the 90 days are up, presumably Gillett is legally free to sell the full 50% to whomever he wants. DIC comes out that 1 extra percent ahead and forces him to deal with them as a full partner.
    Mind you, 90 more days of watching all this bickering and brinkmanship is going to give us all ulcers!

  31. I have doubts that the 90 day clause exists. It seems to have started as a an opinion on one of the forums and has become accepted as gospel. If it was as easy as waiting for this to expire DIC would not be talking of legal challenges to the Hicks veto. The agreement between Hicks/Gillett has not been made public and will be specific to them and their perceived needs – it may even be subject to US jurisdiction.I take some heart (but not much) from the Dreamland quote from Mr al Ansari. This seems to suggest that Hicks has named a price for his shares, albeit at this stage an unacceptable one for DIC. 

  32. I am unbelievably p*ssed off with Hicks’ decision.

    Here’s some steps I’ve taken myself this year and I’m sure most fans have done this already or are thinking about it…

    – cancelled e-season ticket on official site
    – not renewing official supporters membership
    – stopped buying official matchday programmes
    – stopped buying anything from official LFC store
    – cancel LFC tv subscription (yes, you lose setanta in the process, but small price to pay if you can find another way to watch the few games that are shown)

    in short, that ‘bar-steward’ (for all the good he’s done the club, he might as well be) is not gonna get a penny from me above the face value of the ticket.

    someone mentioned that an empty stadium would speak volumes but my loyalty lies with the players (youth and senior), the coaching staff and rafa. imagine they come out at anfield to have only opposition fans at the anfield road end. it would get publicity but players would be affected and on their current run of form, i wouldn’t want that to happen. 

    i have no loyalty at boardroom level until hicks leaves.

    joining forces with rangers fans across the pond is not a bad idea either…

  33. Most clubs are run by a Board of Directors so I do not see any difference with Liverpool FC being run by a committee with the same power as a Board of Directors.

  34. Empty seats arent going to do anything.if we dont buy tickets someone else will. even if we buy tickets and dont go we’ve lined his pockets.theres no way i’m missing games because the team will suffer.


  35. Anfielder, you could be right.  I wouldn’t put anything past Hicks.

    But given the way that DIC have been playing the media in recent months, with leaks almost every other day, suspicion has to fall on them. 

    Thicks MUST have other interested parties lined up; or else he is simply vying for better conditions from DIC.  OR perhaps, he’s turning the screw on his ex-friend Gillett.

    Whatever his thinking, he’s playing brinksmanship with the very future of Liverpool FC. And the maddening thing is, he clearly revels in it.  He seems to have no honour or any sense of common decency. 

  36. That stupid money hungry American knows nothing about sport and, more specifically, football. His pathetic American sports company is in trouble and thats the only reason he wants to hold on to the goldmine that is Liverpool. With an owner like him our club is in big trouble!  

  37. Gutted to hear this. My heart sank when I heard on 5 live Hicks had pulled the plug. I don’t know whether to laugh or cry at the fact he thinks he’s doing something in the best interest of the fans. As long as the money rolls in he doesn’t care one iota. I pray that the next step is not Hicks buying the other 50% as it seems he’s no idea concerning money other than to borrow borrow borrow with no liability on himself, only the club and the fans that stand to lose out.   DIC may be reported to be wating in the wings still but surely they won’t take being messed about once more. Twice in two years they’ve lost face concerning LFC.

    I hope the lads put in a blinder tonight to give us all something to smile about again.

  38. Gillett wants out, Hicks is desperate for finance  which DIC have by the ton. Hicks cannot afford afford the new stadium alone, he wants a silent partner who will invest in the club without wanting a say in how it is run. He’s going to find it very difficult.
    DIC are in it for the long term and will wait  to pick off Hicks when the time is right.
    In the meantime fans should do everything in their power to make their feelings felt. Although it will be painful for all concerned this should include boycotting the club and sponsors.
    Thomas O Hicks is the worst thing ever to happen to LFC, he will kop it eventually.

  39. Not slightly surprised. Hicks is SOLELY motivated by money and potential financial gain – something you would only expect from a cut-throat businessman. But surely he must realise that DIC will only take so much rejection and  (regardless of what he says) they are his (and Gillett’s) best opportunity of making a good profit from this situation. In short, this is yet another dramatic bluff.  HE KNOWS that his position is untenible at LFC and that his departure is inevitable. I’ve research his entire history in business, his involvement and slippery dealing with Bush, among others etc. and he is no fool. I really think he will go sooner or later. But let’s just hope, it’s not too late for the club. And I would ask how Parry and Moores can p(with conscience) possibly consider remaining at the club after this fiasco.

  40. As always, I find myself concurring 100% with Jofrad.  All is not lost folks and although Hicks (as usual) is doing his best to pretend otherwise the financial pressure on him is immense.  Don’t forget that he has numerous bankers and and financiers to answer to and his "empire" is in financial trouble.  The legal and financial situation does not favour Hicks long term and DIC know this.  However we must try to co-ordinate our resistance and be disciplined in it to keep maximum pressure on Hicks.  Everyone seems to agree that a loud and public demonstration of anger and disgust aimed squarely at Hicks is in order.  The only question is whether we wait until the Reading game or do it prior to this outside Anfield.  Personally I favour this rather than doing it at half-time during the Reading game.   If we had a convincing public demonstration separate from a game and then an empty or half empty stadium for the Reading game this would really grab media attention.  I realize that many of us have pre-paid or season tickets but this only makes the statement of refusing to attend the game all the more powerful.  I honestly think the players loathe Hicks as much as we do and are waiting for things to be brought to a head.        

  41. action is a must not just talking . we had to show this bastard that he is not wanted . it’s a shame for mr.perry and moores  with the trouble they put us in and now they are silent. are they realy supporters or just greedy bastards like that old yank

  42. Unlike government officials, private businessmen are accountable to no one if they have no shareholders. However, the chink in THicks’s armour is his currenty dependancy on the banks right now. Like Anfielder says, his empire is in financial trouble. He is trying to lure attention and investment to Hicks Sporting Group, which includes the Dallas Stars, the Texas Rangers and, what is considered to be the true jewel in the crown, LFC. Without the football club, the company’s cache is measurably devalued.
    To fight back means hitting him on two fronts: depriving him of stadium-generated revenues (no matchday programmes, food and beverage, merchandise through the LFC shop, club subscriptions) AND letters of protest to Royal Bank of Scotland in the UK and Wachovia Bank in the US to undermine his credibility. If seeds of doubt can fester within the banks’ heirarchy about HSG financial legitimacy, it will force his hand.

  43. GUYS!!!









Comments are closed.