Liverpool FC 09/10

Football Genius wrote:The teenage sensation is a left-footed player and is thought to possess an innate footballing brain

MadVillain wrote:Thor Walcott?

aka The new Darius Vassell..

Tweedle wrote:

MadVillain wrote:Thor Walcott?

aka The new Darius Vassell..

What does that make Gareth Bale? the new Ali Diar?

MadVillain wrote:

Tweedle wrote:

MadVillain wrote:Thor Walcott?

aka The new Darius Vassell..

What does that make Gareth Bale? the new Ali Diar?

And yet Bale is scoring at a similar rate in the EPL... 2 in 24, compared to Walmart's 6 in 63. Whilst playing a more defensive position the majority of the time.

Carlsberg is running out of time to negotiate a new shirt sponsorship deal with Liverpool as the Merseyside club hold out for a bumper contract amid interest from a host of leading international companies.

Liverpool are looking to strike a deal similar to the £80 million, four-year arrangement that Manchester United secured this month with Aon, the American insurance giant, but Carlsberg is offering only about half that sum.

The Danish brewer has been Liverpool's main sponsor since 1992, but while talks are continuing and both parties would like their long association to continue, Tom Hicks and George Gillett Jr, the co-owners, believe that the club have been undersold commercially for too long and want a deal that reflects their position as one of the most recognisable brands in world football.

The present deal with Carlsberg, which was signed in February 2007 in the wake of the Americans' takeover at Anfield, is worth £7.2 million a year and expires next summer. Carslberg has until the end of July to negotiate a new contract exclusively with Liverpool but thereafter the club will be able to explore other options.

Liverpool believe that United's agreement with Aon has set the benchmark and that it is only right that they seek a comparable deal as the most successful club in English football history with an enormous worldwide fanbase.

Although Liverpool would like to conclude a deal sooner rather than later, they do not want to “get into bed” with the wrong partner and are prepared to take their time.

Chelsea will also be in the hunt for a new shirt sponsor should they not reach a new agreement with Samsung. Their present five-year deal with the Korean electronics company is worth £10 million a year and expires in June 2010, but with reports suggesting that Chelsea believe that a new contract is worth double that, it remains to be seen if Samsung is prepared to cough up the funds.

Put us on your shirts

£80 million The four-year deal Manchester United signed with Aon takes effect from next summer
£75 million Juventus have a five-year contract with Tamoil, the international oil company
£68 million Bayern Munich's four-year deal with T-Home
£50 million Chelsea signed a five-year contract with Samsung in 2005
£38 million Real Madrid's three-year deal with Bwin.com, the Austria-based online gaming company

Liverpool debt not a problem, say bankers

The Royal Bank of Scotland has taken the remarkable step of writing to Liverpool supporters to explain its continued financial support for the club's unpopular owners, Tom Hicks and George Gillett.

The bailed-out bank has faced severe criticism from Liverpool supporters angered at plans to extend the Americans' £350m credit facility with the RBS and Wachovia ahead of a 24 July deadline. Fans' protests coincided with revelations that Hicks and Gillett's parent company, Kop Football (Holdings) Limited, suffered a £42.6m loss for the year ending July 2008. However, in a response that effectively confirms the banks are content to refinance again next month, the RBS insists the club is "financially healthy", able to meet its debt obligations "comfortably" and revealed it hopes to continue its relationship with Liverpool "for many years to come".

It also stressed the government does not make commercial decisions for the bank since last year's rescue package. This follows attempts by a local MP, Peter Kilfoyle, to pressure the government into blocking the refinancing deal due to the absence of the proposed new stadium on Stanley Park and the repercussions for the regeneration of the area.

"The club does not suffer the burden of debt implied by a lot of the recent press reports and, in our view and that of the executive management of the club, it is financially healthy and able to service comfortably its debt obligations from cash flow generated by its playing and commercial activities," the RBS explained. "It is in our commercial interest to support the club in the manner described above so that it can continue to perform successfully on and off the pitch."

The debt on the club, according to the RBS, is lower than the debt on the parent company to ensure that Hicks and Gillett are legally responsible for the majority of the loans on Liverpool. Representatives of the Spirit of Shankly supporters group, however, claim a similar situation did not prevent Southampton falling into financial peril. The RBS states Liverpool are legally responsible for loans used to repay the debt Hicks and Gillett inherited following their takeover which, in February 2007, stood at £44.8m. "We took great care when making our original loan in early 2007 and when refinancing it last January to distinguish between obligations of the club and obligations of its parent company, the latter being secured by personal guarantees and collateral from the owners and a pledge of the shares they own in the club," added the bank.

Gillett and Hicks will be asked to increase their personal guarantees under the next refinancing deal, with the former agreeing a £333m deal for his stake in the Montreal Canadiens ice hockey franchise last weekend.

James McKenna, a spokesman for Spirit of Shankly, said: "We have been explaining our stance to the RBS about why they shouldn't refinance with Gillett and Hicks and we are very surprised with their response. We were expecting them to talk behind closed doors but the response gives fans a greater insight into how the debt is structured. Maybe if Gillett and Hicks had been more open the situation might be different, but it appears the only reason the RBS are happy is because of the interest repayments they are getting from Liverpool Football Club. The letter also claims the RBS attaches great value in being associated with Liverpool, but there are not many in Liverpool who want to be associated with Hicks and Gillett."

L-r d wrote:It's clear Alonso would prefer to go.

Batman wrote:who will you next?

Batman wrote:who will you next?

Batman wrote:Glenn deletes his own posts

Batman wrote:Nani would easily get into Liverpools first XI.

Batman wrote:Nani will get more playing time this season and will be a huge success.

Batman wrote:In few years time Anderson will be considered one of the top 5 attacking midfield players in Europe and Nani will be considered one of the best wingers.

Batman wrote:who will you next?

shane wrote:well i think alonso wants to go as u guys said and i do think he will join madrid before the summer ends.I think the reason why he will leave because he is not in the regular starting line up but if he thing things will be better a madrid then thats his choice but still need approval