Jump to content

Recommended Posts

That story seems to go agaist what the BBC are saying.


Huang, who is the head of Hong Kong-based investment company QSL Sports Ltd, is thought to value the club at around ?325m.


A statement issued from his Hong Kong representatives said: "Mr Huang would like to emphasise that he has registered interest in investing in Liverpool FC but has made no formal bid."



I don't really care who the new owners are, as long as it's run well, and the debt is sorted.

Groan...


Personally I'd like to see what Roy can do with the current squad this season (plus a new striker and left back).. before we recruit half the Barca team ;-)


My own preference has always been to build upon the existing stadium, one stand at a time, even if it means eventually it is in effect a brand new stadium with all the corporate trimmings it would still be upon the holy ground that is Anfield with it's unparalleled history and prestige.

A few prospective owners have been linked with the Club but the one that worries me is the Syrian / Canadian bid which reeks of having Hicks and Gillett as silent partners.


I remember when the Thai Prime Minister Thaksin was linked with a takeover at Liverpool and the Human Rights angle was thrown into the mix yet when it was little old Citeh the same fair weather knockers couldn't be bothered. So whoever comes in for Liverpool will always get beaten with a stick.

Spurs have drawn Young Boys of Berne in the play-off to reach CL - I think Spurs will be very happy with that fixture rather than some of the more daunting tasks they may have faced. Be good for English football if Spurs can actually reach CL stages as if only to introduce a bit of excitement at the group stages where they are likely to be in a stiff group what with their poor seeding.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • TBH if people don't see what is sectarian in the materials linked to above when they read about them, then I don't think me going on about it will help. They speak for themselves.  I don't know how the Greens can justify promising to be a strong voice for one particular religion. Will that pledge hold when it comes to campaigning in East Dulwich (which is majority atheist)? https://censusdata.uk/e02000836-east-dulwich/ts030-religion
    • Saying one thing so everyone can understand, and something different that only select people can understand is not inclusive, it’s dangerous.  
    • I'm not deliberately swerving anything. What exactly have they said in their communications in languages other than English that you object to? Why would they put those communications in other languages when the whole point was to connect with a specific group of people? Apologies if I've missed your point.
    • The point (which you're swerving) is not that the Greens spread their message in a language other than English - it's what they have said, and why they're shy about saying the same thing in other languages, including English. If a party in Northern Ireland circulates leaflets in Ulster Scots only that tells voters to elect them so they can be a strong Protestant voice, and has videos in Ulster Scots only that seek to discredit the First Minister by showing (a propos of nothing) images of them meeting the Pope - is that inclusivity or sectarianism?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...