ლივერპულელებო მართლაც მაგრად გეშველებათ იმ არაბმა შეიხმა თუ იყიდა თქვენი გუნდი. მსოფლიოში მე-5 კაცია სიმდიდრით და აბრამოვიჩი მონაგონი იქნება. თან კლუბის საქმიანობაში ჩარევას არ აპირებს და მურსიც და პერიც ადგილებს შეინარჩუნებენო. სიმართლე გითხრათ ეს არ ვიცი კარგია თუ ცუდი, მაგრამ ზოგადად კლუბი რომ გაძლიერდება ფაქტია.
* * *
Liverpool; Dubai Or Not Dubai - That Is The Question
Stephen Orford
05/12/2006 10:00:00.
read: 622 times.
"It is easy to see why Moores, a man so deeply bound to the club both emotionally and financially, would be reluctant to flog his prize asset to the first chancer who comes along."
To invest or not to invest, that has been the question for many of the rich dogs found sniffing around the bottom of Liverpool Football Club over the last few years.
Saddled with £80million worth of debt and with a stadium move to push through, the Anfield club have made no secret of their desire to seek financial assistance. So the opening of takeover talks with the investment arm of the Dubai government is a not entirely unpredictable move, but one which will provoke much debate among the club‘s many fans across the world.
Dubai International Capital (DIC) is owned by Crown Prince of Dubai and United Arab Emirates Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum. The Sheikh is thought to be the fifth richest man in the world, and his family is highly influential in the horse racing world. The famed Godolphin racehorse stable is run by the family, while other DIC interests include the Madame Tussauds group, the Travelodge hotel chain and the London Eye.
The group are thought to be interested in a £450million buy-out of the Merseyside club, with talks at a reasonably advanced stage. The start of the due diligence process gives DIC the right to look at the Liverpool accounts ahead of any decision about a takeover, and could lead to the end of the long-time ownership of the club by David Moores. Moores currently owns a 51% stake in the club, but has shown a reluctance to completely sell out to previous suitors.
Yet it is easy to see why Moores, a man so deeply bound to the club both emotionally and financially, would be reluctant to flog his prize asset to the first chancer who comes along. Takeovers are such a thorny issue that it can often be difficult for even the most hard nosed of businessmen to detect a genuine offer from a publicity stunt. To then ensure that the club is being passed on to a trustworthy buyer is even more tricky. At the last count DIC is the fifth party thought to be interested in a bid for the five-time European champions, following in the footsteps of former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Sinawatra, local building magnate Steve Morgan, New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft and Montreal Canadians ice hockey bigwig George Gillet Junior.
Sinawatra withdrew his interest and has since been the subject of a military coup in his homeland, while Morgan also pulled out of contention after the club’s persistent rebuttal of his advances. His frosty relationship with Moores was thought to be at the heart of the failure to agree a deal, with Morgan a fierce critic of the club during the tedious but trophy heavy Gerard Houllier regime. Media speculation about Kraft’s interest came and went at the back end of 2005, while more recent murmurings about Gillet have seemingly been quietened by this new development.
Traditionalists may be opposed to the idea of the club becoming the seventh Premiership outfit sold to a foreign investor. Perhaps more than any other top flight side, Liverpool is a club drenched in tradition, and which has often resisted fully buying into this highly commercial sporting era. Reds fans may have scoffed when the Glazer family brazenly waltzed into Old Trafford with an alleged fistful of debt, but now it could be their turn to ponder the implications of big money investment from a relative unknown.
When those same traditionalists also ponder the fact that Manchester United attract over 30,000 more spectators per game to Old Trafford than Liverpool can muster at Anfield, they may embrace the new investment ideas for fear of being left behind. For some years now Chelsea have been able to outbid any other club in the world for the game’s best talent, while Arsenal’s recent move to the Emirates Stadium is set to increase their revenues in the long run, thus raising spending power in the transfer market accordingly. Liverpool are still just about recognised as part of the Premiership’s so-called “big four”, but failure to deal with their debt problems and to facilitate more match day fans may see them slide back into the pack over the next decade.
There are some who worry that the foreign ownership of all of United, Chelsea, Portsmouth, Aston Villa, Fulham and now West Ham United is leading the game down a dangerous path. We have seen with Heart of Midlothian in the Scottish Premier League what damage can be done by getting into bed with a stranger. The Edinburgh club’s Lithuanian owners have turned the events at Tynecastle into a soap opera which often takes on the proportions of a badly directed circus. Yet that same takeover has allowed them to flirt with the idea of matching Celtic and Rangers at the top of the SPL table over the last two seasons. All fans of all clubs crave glory on the field more than anything else, and it is all too easy for a club to rip out its soul in the chase for silverware.
Those against the recent takeovers in British football would argue that it is just as vital to maintain a club’s identity as it is to further its progression competitively and commercially. This is something which Moores and the Liverpool board will have to keep strongly in mind before they decide to sell a sporting institution.
So, Dubai or not Dubai, now becomes the question for the Anfield hierarchy. Having turned up their noses at so many previously amorous potential partners, they should have all the experience they need to get the decision right.
By Stephen Orford
4 December 2006
http://www.squarefootball.net/article/article.asp?aid=3957 This post has been edited by LA_NY on 5 Dec 2006, 20:41