• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

ENIC

They were almost bankrupt. They had to sell to pay off a debt of €250m. If they didn't the banks would have seized them. Now they may well have found a new buyer but if not they would have been asset stripped and may have gone the way of rangers.
Other clubs in serie a are in a similar mess. Juventus had to write to their shareholders to tell them that due to the criminal investigation. They might not be able to refinance their loans. As a result they might go bankrupt. Milan similar as are roma.

View attachment 13534

Thats the state clubs are in. We miss a payment or two on our debts what happens?
But as always happens with big clubs they didn't get seized by the Banks and didn't get asset stripped.

Let's see whether or not Juventus manage to refinance (I bet they do, just as Barcelona did).

Of course the big difference between ENIC and the Italian clubs is that our owners are sitting on a huge paper profit on their ownership. If only they were prepared to sacrifice a bit of that huge profit to allow the club to compete with the big boys.
 
In which case it will cost Villa only about £5m to have him for the rest of this season.... If Coutinho is responsible for them achieving just one single place higher in the table then he's just about paid for himself.... and that's before you consider the fact that by signing him Villa have probably ensured that they will have a few more of their matches selected for TV. Seems an absolute bargain when looking at the signing like that really.

Good signing for Villa I think, doesn't mean he would have been a good signing for us.
 
But as always happens with big clubs they didn't get seized by the Banks and didn't get asset stripped.

Let's see whether or not Juventus manage to refinance (I bet they do, just as Barcelona did).

Of course the big difference between ENIC and the Italian clubs is that our owners are sitting on a huge paper profit on their ownership. If only they were prepared to sacrifice a bit of that huge profit to allow the club to compete with the big boys.

What do you mean as always with big clubs? Were rangers not big? Were liverpool?

They only realise their profit if the club is sold.
 
What do you mean as always with big clubs? Were rangers not big? Were liverpool?

They only realise their profit if the club is sold.
Rangers? Not really. The Scottish league is tiny.

I must've blinked and missed Liverpool getting relegated and becoming a has-been of English football?

Also interesting to consider that both of those clubs you mentioned have been more successful than Spurs since they entered and exited their financial difficulties.
 
Rangers? Not really. The Scottish league is tiny.

I must've blinked and missed Liverpool getting relegated and becoming a has-been of English football?

Also interesting to consider that both of those clubs you mentioned have been more successful than Spurs since they entered and exited their financial difficulties.

Liverpool were seized by the banks, then sold to fsg. Hicks and Gillet were left with nothing from it.

I am not looking it from a fans perspective. I'm looking at it from enics perspective. They're not going to risk losing the club just because the fans want a new striker.
 
I really don't remember much of this at all... guess it was 12 years ago



The Liverpool chairman, Martin Broughton, today promised the club's fans "a bright future" after Royal Bank of Scotland won its legal battle to force the club's owners, Tom Hicks and George Gillett, to reconstitute the board and so allow a sale to proceed.



After Mr Justice Floyd ruled that Hicks and Gillett had breached their contract with RBS, the bank owed the majority of the club's £237m debt, Broughton said a board meeting would be convened that could result in the club being in new hands by tonight.

In a damning verdict, the judge ruled that in trying to sack two board members and replace them with their own appointments, they had been guilty of "the clearest possible breach" of a corporate governance agreement they signed as a condition of a refinancing arrangement with RBS in April.

Under that agreement, Broughton was installed to oversee the sale of the club and the duo recognised that only he could change the make-up of the board and they promised not to interfere in the sale process.

The judge, who said it would be "entirely wrong" to grant a counter-claim from Hicks and Gillett designed to postpone the £300m sale of the club to Boston Red Sox owners New England Sports Ventures, ordered Hicks and Gillett to produce papers allowing the board to be reconstituted by 8pm tonight.

The pair, who stand to lose more than £100m in loans made to the club if the sale to NESV goes through, will also have to pay costs estimated at between £250,000 and £500,000.

"We will get the board reconstituted by 8pm this evening and have a board meeting soon after that. We will continue the sale process," said a jubilant Brougton.

Asked whether the club would be in new hands by tonight, he said: "There is a board meeting this evening to determine whether or not that is the case."

Hicks and Gillett will be invited to attend by conference call, but the 3-2 majority in favour of Broughton, managing director Christian Purslow and commercial director Ian Ayre means that they will be able to complete the sale process, subject to legal advice.

Broughton said the board would take legal advice on whether it could proceed with the sale to NESV as planned in light of a later, higher offer from Singapore businessman Peter Lim.

But given his confidence that the board followed a diligent sale process with the assistance of Barclays Capital – it emerged in court that around 130 expressions of interest were whittled down to the two final contenders – a sale to the Boston Red Sox owners appears by far the most likely outcome.

The board will also take legal advice on whether to proceed with a parallel legal process seeking a declaratory judgment from the court to rubber stamp the sale. That may now be unnecessary given today's verdict but if goes ahead, the judge said it should be heard on October 21.

The judge said it would be "inappropriate" for Hicks and Gillett to appeal, but the option of an application to the Court of Appeal remains open. They admitted breach of contract but claimed they had been driven to it because they had been frozen out of the sale process by the "English directors", who considered themselves "the home team" and behaved in a "secretive" manner. They claimed that full consideration had not been given to higher rival bids, with the board favouring NESV's offer.

Keith Oliver, a lawyer at the duo's solicitors Peter & Peter, said he was consulting with Hicks and Gillett on their next steps.

"We are disappointed by the judge's determination on the application and Mr Hicks and Mr Gillett will now be considering their next steps," he said.

NESV's chief, John W Henry, posted a message on Twitter. "Well done Martin, Christian & Ian," he said. "Well done RBS. Well done supporters!"

Had the sale been blocked, RBS may have felt administration was the only option when the loans became due on Friday, which would have incurred a nine-point penalty for the club from the Premier League.

The judge said that the ongoing damage to the club in the light of continued uncertainty and the potential impact on its sale price of a nine point penalty that was a factor in deciding the case today rather than going to a full hearing.
 
They don't have to be £40m....

Jesus Corona went from Porto to Seville for a very small fee as he was out of contract in the summer and had told Porto he wasn't signing a new one. Given that he is a top class attacking RWB he could've made a big impact in our current team and formation. A player like Nahitan Nandez at Cagliari would also improve us in the RWB position and could be got for well under £20m IMO.

There are also a huge number of players out of contract this summer who's clubs would likely sell if netting a good fee, just as Conte's Inter Milan took advantage of when buying Eriksen from us). I suspect that the difference is our chairman wouldn't be prepared to pay 17m for a player to be brought in now who could be secured for no transfer fee in the summer. In paying that money for Eriksen, Inter Milan prioritised winning. That isn't something that I see our owners doing.

Here is a list of players out of contract in the summer (or already out of contract) who might improve positions in our squad....

Dybala (forward)
Kessie (CM)
Brozovic (CM)
Sule (CB)
Dembele (WF)
Alvarez (WF/CF)
Belotti (CF)
Azmoun (CF)
Kamara (DM)
Ginter (CB)
Lingard (AM/WF)
Romagnoli (CB)
Denayer (CB)
Mazraoui (RB)
Kramaric (forward)
Felipe (CB)
Grillitsch (CM)
Tolisso (CM)
Bernardeschi (WF)
Mbemba (CB)
Zagadou (CB)
Origi (CF)
Muani (CF)
Gigot (CB)
Modric (CM)
Eriksen (CM)
Perisic (LWB/WF)
Pavon (WF)
Brereton Diaz (CF)
Isco (CM/AM)
Xeka (CM)
Johnstone (GK)

Almost any of those could be secured if our club offer the commensurate wage to the player as though they are on a bosman and then agree a fee with the club (I doubt any of this list would be anything like £40m right now, even the players at clubs challenging for their league title).
Good selection of names there, but most are going to sit tight until their contract is up. Vlahovic has already indicated he will wait till the summer even though Fiorentina are willing to sell. Makes sense from his point of view, he waits to see who is in the CL next season and will more likely get a higher salary as well.
 
I really don't remember much of this at all... guess it was 12 years ago



The Liverpool chairman, Martin Broughton, today promised the club's fans "a bright future" after Royal Bank of Scotland won its legal battle to force the club's owners, Tom Hicks and George Gillett, to reconstitute the board and so allow a sale to proceed.



After Mr Justice Floyd ruled that Hicks and Gillett had breached their contract with RBS, the bank owed the majority of the club's £237m debt, Broughton said a board meeting would be convened that could result in the club being in new hands by tonight.

In a damning verdict, the judge ruled that in trying to sack two board members and replace them with their own appointments, they had been guilty of "the clearest possible breach" of a corporate governance agreement they signed as a condition of a refinancing arrangement with RBS in April.

Under that agreement, Broughton was installed to oversee the sale of the club and the duo recognised that only he could change the make-up of the board and they promised not to interfere in the sale process.

The judge, who said it would be "entirely wrong" to grant a counter-claim from Hicks and Gillett designed to postpone the £300m sale of the club to Boston Red Sox owners New England Sports Ventures, ordered Hicks and Gillett to produce papers allowing the board to be reconstituted by 8pm tonight.

The pair, who stand to lose more than £100m in loans made to the club if the sale to NESV goes through, will also have to pay costs estimated at between £250,000 and £500,000.

"We will get the board reconstituted by 8pm this evening and have a board meeting soon after that. We will continue the sale process," said a jubilant Brougton.

Asked whether the club would be in new hands by tonight, he said: "There is a board meeting this evening to determine whether or not that is the case."

Hicks and Gillett will be invited to attend by conference call, but the 3-2 majority in favour of Broughton, managing director Christian Purslow and commercial director Ian Ayre means that they will be able to complete the sale process, subject to legal advice.

Broughton said the board would take legal advice on whether it could proceed with the sale to NESV as planned in light of a later, higher offer from Singapore businessman Peter Lim.

But given his confidence that the board followed a diligent sale process with the assistance of Barclays Capital – it emerged in court that around 130 expressions of interest were whittled down to the two final contenders – a sale to the Boston Red Sox owners appears by far the most likely outcome.

The board will also take legal advice on whether to proceed with a parallel legal process seeking a declaratory judgment from the court to rubber stamp the sale. That may now be unnecessary given today's verdict but if goes ahead, the judge said it should be heard on October 21.

The judge said it would be "inappropriate" for Hicks and Gillett to appeal, but the option of an application to the Court of Appeal remains open. They admitted breach of contract but claimed they had been driven to it because they had been frozen out of the sale process by the "English directors", who considered themselves "the home team" and behaved in a "secretive" manner. They claimed that full consideration had not been given to higher rival bids, with the board favouring NESV's offer.

Keith Oliver, a lawyer at the duo's solicitors Peter & Peter, said he was consulting with Hicks and Gillett on their next steps.

"We are disappointed by the judge's determination on the application and Mr Hicks and Mr Gillett will now be considering their next steps," he said.

NESV's chief, John W Henry, posted a message on Twitter. "Well done Martin, Christian & Ian," he said. "Well done RBS. Well done supporters!"

Had the sale been blocked, RBS may have felt administration was the only option when the loans became due on Friday, which would have incurred a nine-point penalty for the club from the Premier League.

The judge said that the ongoing damage to the club in the light of continued uncertainty and the potential impact on its sale price of a nine point penalty that was a factor in deciding the case today rather than going to a full hearing.

Also the narative became that the fans forced them out. Which they didn't. The financial crash happened and the banks grabbed as much money as they could to survive.
We are possibly entering a worse crash. China is looking like it's fudged.
 
I think Enic have been good for Spurs, said on another thread Levy one of the best chairman out there HOWEVER they are hitting a crossroads in part not helped by Covid but also their own doing. The whole Poch to Jose to Nuno to Conte has been odd for various reasons, by luck rather than design we are in pole position now for 4th but again seem to be reluctant to kick on, we need a fresh face in the team, Conte can only coach so much. Additionally I can be patient and for stadium to pay forward however what looks bad PR is the purchasing of land for apartments and golf clubs
 
Is Coutinho creative? I thought he was a long shot merchant that offered little off the ball, doesn't sound like an ideal Conte player to me
I didn't want him, but he is reasonably creative. He tends to shoot more than say an Eriksen would but he can and will play though balls. He's fairly press resistant as a bonus. Not the player for us especially in this system, but a decent player and potentially a very good one in the right system.
 
Also the narative became that the fans forced them out. Which they didn't. The financial crash happened and the banks grabbed as much money as they could to survive.
We are possibly entering a worse crash. China is looking like it's fudged.
Could be worrying if so considering the huge debt that we currently have to the banks.
 
Liverpool were seized by the banks, then sold to fsg. Hicks and Gillet were left with nothing from it.

I am not looking it from a fans perspective. I'm looking at it from enics perspective. They're not going to risk losing the club just because the fans want a new striker.

Everyone here knows the clubs financial situation due to the stadium and particularly covid. I say particularly covid because that is lost revenue we cant get back, whilst the stadium is all on long term low interest repayments thanks to the excellent work of Levy.

What do you think the outside investment Levy is working on is going to do? Its going to be someone giving the club a load of money to spend on players. This is what Lewis could do himself but he will not. That is where the anger is, because in 20 years he has never done that to any level whatsoever. This zero tolerance approach has surely cost us CL places and trophies over the years. We are feeling the full effects of this zero approach policy again right now in this window, which will imo cost us another CL place this season.

So your condescending comments of new strikers risking the future of the club blah blah doesnt stack up and is simply straw manning people who are rightly extremely critical of Lewis’ ultra selfish approach.
 
Back