Farhad Moshiri

[Toffeelover]

This is the case. People can keep saying it will benefit LCC with the payments from us but the risk is still substantial.

People will question why a billionaire in a multi billion pound industry is getting LCC to act as a guarantor and if it does go all wrong it will be the people of Liverpool who cover the costs.

People need to take them blue tinted glasses off and see this. Joe's opponents will be against it, non footballing fans will be questioning why and that lot across the park will definately have a word to say.

If people think this will breeze through nice and easy, it wont.

Firstly on paper he may be a billionaire but I bet he does not have anything like 200 mill in cash, secondly what billion pound industry are you talking about?

 

[Toffeelover]

...just every 12 months then? Great. Nothing like the future being secured.

Dave the future can never be secured because one does not know what the future holds!!!

 

[Moomin]

Firstly on paper he may be a billionaire but I bet he does not have anything like 200 mill in cash, secondly what billion pound industry are you talking about?

Premier league.

 

[Toffeelover]

Premier league.

Think about that, how much do we get? what are the funds used for?

 

[Moomin]

Think about that, how much do we get? what are the funds used for?

So the premier league is not a billion pound industry??

 

[roydo]

So the premier league is not a billion pound industry??

Course it is. There aint many industries that arent billion pound ones mind. Outside of sport that is.

 

[Frank Halfcoate]

A water board contract and a stadium that has apparently all major players pulling in the one direction are slightly different animals.

Although both may be described to some extent as "taking the p***"

 

[davek]

Dave the future can never be secured because one does not know what the future holds!!!

Certainly not with this loan.

 

[davek]

Although both may be described to some extent as "taking the p***"

Ha Ha Ha.

 

[joey_macmo]

...just every 12 months then? Great. Nothing like the future being secured.

Yes every 12 months like it always has been, each and every project doesn’t get reviewed, once it’s done it’s done.

Literally nothing to see here.

 

[davek]

Yes every 12 months like it always has been, each and every project doesn’t get reviewed, once it’s done it’s done.

Literally nothing to see here.

Ha Ha. A PL football club getting the local authority to use its loan facility to secure funding for a half billion pound stadium = "nothing to see here".

I actually stood back to admire the chutzpah of that statement.

 

[joey_macmo]

Ha Ha. A PL football club getting the local authority to use its loan facility to secure funding for a half billion pound stadium = "nothing to see here".

I actually stood back to admire the chutzpah of that statement.

I mean should I be surprised that you’ve just totally gone off at a tangent when you’ve been shown to be chatting absolute wham on this topic as usual?

Probably not.

 

[davek]

I mean should I be surprised that you’ve just totally gone off at a tangent when you’ve been shown to be chatting absolute wham on this topic as usual?

Probably not.

Tangent?

The terms and conditions for the loan and interest paid on it (as explained by Anderson himself) are not fixed and are subject to review.

I think it's you not addressing the point isn't it?

 

[Jacko93]

DK = June 2006: Everton select Kirkby site; February 2007: planning permission sought.

Yes Dave, but the design didn't progress as far as this one has as the procurement route was different. More design work has been done, and not investigation on the suitability of BMD than it ever was on DK. If Kirkby was given PP then the real design work would start. With BMD they're not even applying for PP till the completion of stage 3.

 

[joey_macmo]

Tangent?

The terms and conditions for the loan and interest paid on it (as explained by Anderson himself) are not fixed and are subject to review.

I think it's you not addressing the point isn't it?

Yes a tangent, you got pulled up so tried to equate my post to something else.

You were chatting absolute balls about the review of the “invest to earn” terms, your post was absolutely irrelevant.

The terms are fixed for at least 12 months by which time the deal will be done or dead and the review is meaningless to us.

Fully expect you to try to equate this to some other point once again though, all you ever done in these threads is totally misconstrue information then spend 5 pages arguing about it.

Rinse and repeat.