Liverpool Rumours Archive September 08 2010

 

Use our rumours form to send us liverpool transfer rumours.


08 Sep 2010 23:34:04
Just read this on 606. It makes good reading. Lets hope eh lads. Razor-Red. YNWA

Ha Ha is all I can say. He was a chancer like all these wannabe tycoons interested in the club. I have a finance background, follow LFC from the far East and can tell you that this guy would have been a disaster for the club. As I have posted elsewhere, the first tell is that he was silly enough to be 'bidding' at this early stage in any case.

The club is about to be available to a buyer at a dramatically lower price once the loan from RBS is foreclosed upon. We don't know how much lower, or whether a buyer might be able to swoop at a real fire-sale price, given that the RBS team might reckon that they can restructure things a bit, package and then sell at a better number. My thought is that this latter possibility is minimal: football isn't their game, they are already making handsome money on their actual game, lending and levying fines on late payment etc, and finally, I am very confident indeed that at this point in proceedings several buyers will emerge rapidly. In an acquisition timing is everything.

Broughton is acting for RBS, not Hicks and Gillette, who are effectively out of the picture. The owners and bank have a common interest, however: this is to start a bidding war for the club. Acquisitions work like auctions - the price gets higher as the number of bidding parties gets larger, all things being equal. The owners can quietly encourage a bid in the hope of flushing another bid out or getting a better price. The bank wouldn't mind this either. However, ultimately RBS doesn't really care and they can sit back and take 60 mil for their time rather than encouraging a chancer to try and buy a club! No wonder that the chairman has not been in a rush to lose the chance to make this 'free' 60 mil for his employers.

Unless a vanity purchaser comes forward and decides to flash the cash to his mates, we are in for a wait, but by the end of the year, there will be a buyer. From then on we are sweet because unlike Chelski, ManU and Arsenal, LFC can be transformed by the simple but pricey business of sorting the stadium out. LFC operates on a substantial cash-flow disadvantage relative to its peers. This matters hugely. The lower the asking price, the higher the available cash to a purchaser to do things with on stadium and squad, all things being equal.

So, fingers crossed and just be glad that against the odds, we got a top manager who knows our league and can operate on a budget; that we kept our big names (Stevie and Torres are LEGENDS here in Asia. I mean MASSIVE MASSIVE names) and that those fools from over the pond have been banished. We may just escape intact as a club. . .

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 22:46:17
Sharkey, many thanks for clearing up the fact that the article i posted last night was mis-information by the media. usually i do not make comment on articles that i reproduce, but i totally agree with you on this occasion . normally i post items that i feel our fellow supporters can use to make up their own minds on what b/ s or truth the media is writing about our great club!
please do not think that i purposely try to mis-lead anybody on this great site!
redsincebirth
Y.N.W.A

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 19:59:37
The 'arms dealer' story is pure fabrication. Things now moving fast behind the scenes with announcement due soon. Hold on to your hats reds fans, its going to be an interesting couple of seasons.

Peter Gilchirst

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 19:23:45
I am a fan of lfc for over 30 years and the club is on its knees, but if people read the artical by daily mirror david maddox all red fans can get these two out of the club, he states october 6th is when rbs needs paying of or the two idiots might get refinacing from some where else. now lfc needs every lfc fan to try and bloke this by stageing a campaign against the banks and finance company
rbs has an open day on the 23 rd september for anyone to attend which is going to be attended by lfc groups so instead of posting takeover rumours lets get are club back and wage a campaign against these two who have ruined are club with empty promises and lies

dedicated reds fan

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 19:16:20
After seeing Ilner last night for the Swiss, can we stop the Liverpool rumours. He is not Liverpool class.
David Degen just as poor as Phillip Degen?

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 18:17:39
All this talk of an arms dealer buying the club - - Stop talking rubbish - The industry and the money made from it is classed as high risk and UK legislation would never allow a known 'dealer' to make such a purchase.

()()

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 18:15:56
Heard a rumour from a good reliable source that Gomez has gone to war with B Munich - Trying to buy himself out of his contract and become a 'free' agent, therefore available to clubs to pick up now - and he has expressed a desire to join the Red's, so who knows!

His buy out clause is huge, but apparently he is willing to pay it!

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 17:52:07
According to the Czech news agency - Spenzta 234 - the arms dealer Markus von Hohenzollern-Viett IS interested in Liverpool and apparently is in discussion with two major American investors.
They suggest it is a last-minute deal and was wondering if this is the person we have been reading about 'under the radar' recently.

The news agency also reports that Viett has expressed an interest in 'twinning' (?) Liverpool FC with a major Bundesliga club and forming an alliance that will develop youth players between the clubs.

Interesting.

If you honestly think the premier league would allow a club to be owned by an 'INTERNATIONAL' arms dealer ur either very naive or just completely stupid would never happen in our lifetime. .!

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 17:02:24
Chelsea are looking to bring jesus navas in january. After readin this I all the more pray , tat we are taken over. . So tat we have the cash to bring in quality wingers like Navas , and also sanchez. Come on Roy, chelsea are running away with all top quality players. Navas would fit in perfectly at liverpool, he would be ideal to keep torres happy, not only about the future of the club but also cos he ll be provided with many goals from this excellent provider.
And to the guy who said we won't get quality strikers in jan cos they ll not move to a club tats not there in champions league. When city can attract stars why not the legendary club like ours.
And I think Arda will be ours in january. All hopes rest on an effective take over. . Lets hope for the best guys.
La Nina

()()

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 17:02:17
08 Sep 2010 15:24:36
What's the deal (really) about this "Markus von Hohenzollern-Viett"?
A quick search on Google turned up precisely nothing.

However, an arms dealer owning our great club?!?

I would be absolutely horrified at the prospect.
And so would any true Liverpool supporter.

BRILLIANT POINT. ALSO WHAT ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF THE CLUB BEING USED TO LAUNDER MONEY?

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 16:14:32
Hey ed, what do you think about us going after benzema and is there any truth in it?

{Editor's Note: I think he would be available at the right price; I think that price would be too high for us; I doubt he would be keen on warming the bench at Liverpool.}

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 15:34:27
Bob the Red {ed's note - I watched the interview that Sky twisted to say that, believe me VDV did not say he chose Spurs over anyone. Though, like I said the other day, I think there is a good chance he would have chosen Spurs anyway, there is a strange misconception floating around that London is a good place to live!}

Bob and ED do you not think if LFC and M.City were in the Champions League instead of Spurs then he would've went to one of them? i.e if MAN'URE were looking him then that's were he would've went and nothing really to do with London which we know some players prefer.

Blair Mayne YNWA

{Editor's Note: It is possible, but it is all "ifs and buts" - he has gone to Spurs.}

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 15:24:36
What's the deal (really) about this "Markus von Hohenzollern-Viett"?
A quick search on Google turned up precisely nothing.

However, an arms dealer owning our great club?!?

I would be absolutely horrified at the prospect.
And so would any true Liverpool supporter.

()()

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 15:24:28
Many have commented that the board can out vote H&G. However if H&G are the majority shareholders then presumably the could sack the board.

Bob

I apologise Sharkey as it was Bob who said this!

Blair Mayne YNWA


They can't though, the RBS were ready the pull the plug in March until a request came in from G+H to hold off and give them six months to sell the club, RBS agreed but with the caviat that Barcap carried out the sale along Martin Broughton who was brought in but more importantly they demanded that G+H signed away their voting rights and any possible power of veto and so a new board of five- Broughton, Purslow, Ayre, Hicks, Gillett was formed with the full power to prevent any possible sale or refinance without a majority vote and likewise it left G+H powerless to do anything about it.

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 15:17:15
08 Sep 2010 15:09:21
According to the Czech news agency - Spenzta 234 - the arms dealer Markus von Hohenzollern-Viett IS interested in Liverpool and apparently is in discussion with two major American investors.
They suggest it is a last-minute deal and was wondering if this is the person we have been reading about 'under the radar' recently.

The news agency also reports that Viett has expressed an interest in 'twinning' (?) Liverpool FC with a major Bundesliga club and forming an alliance that will develop youth players between the clubs.

Interesting.

PERSONALLY DON'T THINK HE IS RICH ENOUGH (900M EUROS) TO COMPETE AGAINST CHELSEA, MANCITY ETC.

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 15:13:08
Blair Mayne YNWA noted at 08 Sep 2010 14:44:05:

"I was trying to say Sharkey IF G&H refinance with Barcleys that when the time comes to pay back Barcleys which G&H probably could not do that Barcleys clients IF interested would probably get it cheaper than G&H were hoping to get for it."

The purpose of refininacing would be to give breathing space whilst the club is sold - as long as any interest payments are made there will not be an issue. There would be enormous repercussions if a bank sold on the business at a preferential rate to an existing customer. Hopefully it will all be resolved soon without any more bloodshed.

Sharkey.

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 15:09:21
According to the Czech news agency - Spenzta 234 - the arms dealer Markus von Hohenzollern-Viett IS interested in Liverpool and apparently is in discussion with two major American investors.
They suggest it is a last-minute deal and was wondering if this is the person we have been reading about 'under the radar' recently.

The news agency also reports that Viett has expressed an interest in 'twinning' (?) Liverpool FC with a major Bundesliga club and forming an alliance that will develop youth players between the clubs.

Interesting.

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 14:58:25
Many have commented that the board can out vote H&G. However if H&G are the majority shareholders then presumably the could sack the board.

Bob

I apologise Sharkey as it was Bob who said this!

Blair Mayne YNWA

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 14:44:05
And we know that Barcleys have some very interesting share holders and clients i.e Abu Dhabi, Sheikh Mohammed and QIA just to name a few. And IF the rumours are true that any of these are interested in buying LFC then what a great position they would be in as Barcleys/ Barcap would probably put more pressure on G&H after refinancing with them hopefully anyway."

I am not sure I understand what you are saying here. I would guess that the reasons that buyers are not rushing to put their cash on the table is the future commitments that are required, rather than the purchase price. And by this I am talking about the money required to build a new stadium.

"But no matter what way you look at the situation G&H will have to go if not October then sometime."

Correct, I agree.

Sharkey

I was trying to say Sharkey IF G&H refinance with Barcleys that when the time comes to pay back Barcleys which G&H probably could not do that Barcleys clients IF interested would probably get it cheaper than G&H were hoping to get for it.

And IF the rest of the board blocked G&H in June then why can they not do it again? Nothings changed since June except G&H getting more desperate. And your comment about G&H being the main share holders/ owners and could sack the rest of the board is confusing mate. Do you not think IF they could sack them they would've done it after he opposition from the other 3 board members in June. It looks like to me they can't sack the other 3 board members even IF they wanted to.

Blair Mayne YNWA

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 14:36:17
08 Sep 2010 14:00:43

I can assure all Liverpool fans the club is very very close to being sold. 100% fact from a very genuine source. I do not know who or how much the deal is worth just that it is very close. Macca

I REALLY HOPE WE GET IT RIGHT THIS TIME AND DON'T END UP IN A WORSE FINANCIAL STATE THAN WE ARE NOW. BEST TO WAIT SO WE GET THE RIGHT NEW CUSTODIAN FOR THE CLUB. IF WE GET THIS WRONG FORGET LIVERPOOL BEING PART OF THE ELITE SUPER CLUBS FOR MANY YEARS.

()()

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 14:35:11
They have already used the shares as collateral with RBS so I can't see how they can use them to get another loan. When you buy a house you don't get the deeds until you have paid your mortgage in full

{Editor's Note: It would not be another loan - it would be the refinancing of the existing loan so the shares can be used.}

()()

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 14:32:12

{Editor's Note: We are now done on the religous posts.}

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 14:20:54
08 Sep 2010 12:47:53
Unsigned wrote at 07 Sep 2010 18:44:58:

"I realise that there has been nothing released from 'official' sources concerning the 'names' concerned in the prospective takeover but should we believe the names that are constantly mentioned on the rumours pages of the past month or so as genuine (Ellison, Sheikh maktoum, Sharjah etc).
Was the earlier mention on Banter, of owners from oil rich Kazakhstan a 'slip' of inside knowledge of the situation or just a joke?"

I don't know where the rumours of Larry Ellison came from - perhaps it is just wishful thinking as he is rather well off. Aside from his sailing interests his portfolio is devoid of sports investments. He does however have a son who has a reputation for squandering large sums of money. I would suggest Ellison is a complete non-starter.

Sharkey.

AND WHAT ABOUT INTERST FROM KAZAKHSTAN?

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 14:14:37
Blair Mayne YNWA eloquently wrote at 08 Sep 2010 13:22:26:

"Sharkey enlighten us with these comments!

This is simply not true - Hicks and Gillett own the shares in the club - should they wish to use those shares as collateral for a loan to refinance the debt then that is entirely up to them.

Sharkey

So in effect Sharkey they would use their shares as collateral to refinance the loans and then eventually lose control at the club because we all know that LFC cannot continue with the present regime to work as a buisness and eventually the debts will be called in once again."

They would indeed use the shares as collateral – but that does not mean that it would result in them losing control – as long as they continue to service the debts (by making their payments). What it would do is provide them with more time to dispose of the club.

"And do you honestly see anyone refinancing these 2 Cowboys? I know Barcleys have a refinancing package on the table but that will mean that G&H will probably have to give up control either to Barcleys or RBS."

They have already discussed refinancing with BarCap and it would not mean giving up control – what they would likely have is someone put on to the board by the bank or other loaner.

"And we know that Barcleys have some very interesting share holders and clients i.e Abu Dhabi, Sheikh Mohammed and QIA just to name a few. And IF the rumours are true that any of these are interested in buying LFC then what a great position they would be in as Barcleys/ Barcap would probably put more pressure on G&H after refinancing with them hopefully anyway."

I am not sure I understand what you are saying here. I would guess that the reasons that buyers are not rushing to put their cash on the table is the future commitments that are required, rather than the purchase price. And by this I am talking about the money required to build a new stadium.

"But no matter what way you look at the situation G&H will have to go if not October then sometime."

Correct, I agree.

Sharkey.

()()

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 14:12:55
08 Sep 2010 13:48:23

07 Sep 2010 18:52:54
No disrespect to Thompson but for me he wasn't a man motuvator in the dug out he just shouted at players for 90 mins. If he was a good coach why didn't he go into Management? He did my head in on Sky Sports News as well. I swam with his sona Danny an Phil an have met him a few times. I have no doubt the man lives and breathes LFC but that doesn't mean he's magic. Liverpool have also had better players. Let's not forget this is the man who helped to force Robbie Fowler out of the door.

Spriggo

YES I AGREE, THOMPSON DID FORCE ROBBIE FOWLER OUT. BUT HE IS STILL A LEGENDARY FIGURE IN LIVERPOOL HISTORY.

Yes, he was captain and lifted the European Cup in 1981.
He is staying at Sky Sports anyway.

()()

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 14:10:11
When talking about football in general and this website at a recent corporate event just outside London with some well connected colleagues, I mentioned the rumours of the day before the end of transfer deadline day and that Liverpool would 'shock the football world' with an announcement the following day. I said to them nothing obviously happend and I blamed issues surrounding the ownership of the club. But my colleagues (who are not Liverpool supporters but have no axe to grind with the club and also have a positive feeling for the club) said that the management team for David Beckham were in talks with Liverpool about a short term loan until January with a view to something more permanent. They said that apparently new owners wanted Beckham at the club and also Beckham was tempted to return the Prem. League in order to get back in the England team. Wages and fee to release him from LA Galaxy was agreed, but his injury was the reason the deal fell through at the last minute. They suggest though that the deal may happen in January 2011 when Beckham has proved his fitness in LA and Liverpool are under new ownership.
I have to say I was not sure about this rumour especially as Beckham is such a big ManUtd supporter and as his house in Hertfordshire has now been put up for sale (he apparently still has propperty in Cheshire though) but he does seem desperate to play for England again. So you never know especially if new owners want him as their first 'big' name purchase. Whether he could still cut it at Prem. League level is another matter.
Believable or unbelievable?

{Editor's Note: Unbelievable. If Beckaham is proving his fitness in LA in January he will be there on his own. The US season runs from March through October/November.}

()()

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 14:05:04
Liverpool will not be signing a world class striker in the Jan window. The truth is that Roy is pinning his hopes on the new 16yr old kid Suso who scored a wonderful goal on his debut in the reserves last night. This is why he rushed the work permit through as fast as he possibly could.
Rumours is that he will be looking at bringing in more creative wide players with Torres and/ or Suso as the target men in the same style he adopted as Fulham.

TrueRed73

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 13:47:14
Bob wrote regarding Liverpool ownership at 08 Sep 2010 13:12:15:

"Technically if they used their shares as collateral for a loan then if/ when they defaulted on that loan the lenders would take ownership of the club."

Broadly yes. It would be determined by the specific contract details and it would be most unlikely that the lenders would ever take control of the club.

"This is subtly different from using the ground, Melwood, the players etc as if these were used as collateral then on defalut the assets would be taken from the owners. At least if the shares were used then assets and ownership would go together."

There are several points here. I don't think it would be possible to separate the stadium etc from the shares in the club. The value of the tangible assets (stadium, land and investments) is only about £50M in any case.

"I doubt that the players could be used as collateral on a loan. May be the player's contracts could, but arguably the contracts could be viewed as finiancial liabilities rather than assets so probably wouldn;t be very good collateral."

This is correct - the club would not be able to borrow agaisnt the intangible assets - the players.

"Many have commented that the board can out vote H&G. However if H&G are the majority shareholders then presumably the could sack the board."

I have seen the comments - it is of course not as simple as that. The most interesting thing to me would be if Hicks & Gillett looked to float the club on the stockmarket - I am sure that it must have been considered.

Sharkey.

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 13:22:26
Sharkey enlighten us with these comments!

This is simply not true - Hicks and Gillett own the shares in the club - should they wish to use those shares as collateral for a loan to refinance the debt then that is entirely up to them.

Sharkey

So in effect Sharkey they would use their shares as collateral to refinance the loans and then eventually lose control at the club because we all know that LFC cannot continue with the present regime to work as a buisness and eventually the debts will be called in once again.

And do you honestly see anyone refinancing these 2 Cowboys? I know Barcleys have a refinancing package on the table but that will mean that G&H will probably have to give up control either to Barcleys or RBS. And we know that Barcleys have some very interesting share holders and clients i.e Abu Dhabi, Sheikh Mohammed and QIA just to name a few. And IF the rumours are true that any of these are interested in buying LFC then what a great position they would be in as Barcleys/ Barcap would probably put more pressure on G&H after refinancing with them hopefully anyway.

But no matter what way you look at the situation G&H will have to go if not October then sometime.

Blair Mayne YNWA

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 13:19:55
To Sharkey:

Interesting piece on Ellison and the others supposedly interested.
One name that has not been mentioned is Markus von Hohenzollern-Viett who is a 37 year old Bavarian who now lives in Monaco.
He has been involved in the arms business for more than 20 years and took over the family run business (Aksan MR87) in 2004 and is reputed to be worth more than €900 million.

Rumours have been circulating for some months now that he has been interested in a takeover of a large European football club. He has been seen at Borussia Dortmund for a number of their recent games (last season and early this season) and also at AZ Almaar.

Despite a fairly low profile, he has been investing heavily in Czech football and is rumoured to be behind the recent abortive deal to buy the Sauber F1 team.

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 13:12:15
Re:

This is simply not true - Hicks and Gillett own the shares in the club - should they wish to use those shares as collateral for a loan to refinance the debt then that is entirely up to them.

Technically if they used their shares as collateral for a loan then if/ when they defaulted on that loan the lenders would take ownership of the club. This is subtly different from using the ground, Melwood, the players etc as if these were used as collateral then on defalut the assets would be taken from the owners. At least if the shares were used then assets and ownership would go together.

I doubt that the players could be used as collateral on a loan. May be the player's contracts could, but arguably the contracts could be viewed as finiancial liabilities rather than assets so probably wouldn;t be very good collateral.

Many have commented that the board can out vote H&G. However if H&G are the majority shareholders then presumably the could sack the board.

Bob

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 13:02:57
Redsincebirth reproduced an article at 07 Sep 2010 23:04:22:

"The annual wage bill in the 2008-09 accounts was £90.8 million and this year the figure will be around the same, but for the first time Liverpool have dipped into the red. When asked whether the crippling £40 million interest repayments which wipe out all operating profits are paid monthly, putting a strain on the club's cash flow, the response was that, as such detail is not a matter of public record, the club have declined to answer."

Just to put this nonsense in to context, the doom mongers who wrote it are spouting a series of inaccuracies – particularly with respect to the phrase "but for the first time Liverpool have dipped into the red". This is a plain and simple untruth. Liverpool were making a loss long before Hick and Gillett arrived and for some reason the authors of these pieces fail to recognise, probably deliberately, this. For example, 2006/ 07 saw a loss of £21.665M posted, 2005/ 06 a loss of £5.161M and 2003/ 04 a loss of £21.903M – and many other examples exist back over the years.

I would urge posters to check the details of what they post before they contribute further misinformation.

Sharkey.

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 12:47:53
Unsigned wrote at 07 Sep 2010 18:44:58:

"I realise that there has been nothing released from 'official' sources concerning the 'names' concerned in the prospective takeover but should we believe the names that are constantly mentioned on the rumours pages of the past month or so as genuine (Ellison, Sheikh maktoum, Sharjah etc).
Was the earlier mention on Banter, of owners from oil rich Kazakhstan a 'slip' of inside knowledge of the situation or just a joke?"

I don't know where the rumours of Larry Ellison came from - perhaps it is just wishful thinking as he is rather well off. Aside from his sailing interests his portfolio is devoid of sports investments. He does however have a son who has a reputation for squandering large sums of money. I would suggest Ellison is a complete non-starter.

Sharkey.

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 12:46:53
The vast majority of people seem to think we are going to sign a very good striker in Jan (better than the likes of carlton cole, kevin Doyle etc mentioned in the transfer window) but we're not. You've got to assume any quality striker will be playing for a team in the CL or Europa cup and be busy pushing for domestic honours. So why is a club going to make its squad weaker? Answer they're not. We might agree deals for a new striker in Jan but don't expect him to arrive at LFC until next season.

Personaly I'd like to see what Gomez from Munich could do for us and that's we're assuming we qualify for the CL next season. Kun Agero? Forget him

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 12:38:14
Unsigned wrote at 07 Sep 2010 21:13:30:

"G&H can't just ask for refinance from Barclays Capital it needs to be a board decision and I am sure that in the best interests of LFC the three other members would block that move."

This is simply not true - Hicks and Gillett own the shares in the club - should they wish to use those shares as collateral for a loan to refinance the debt then that is entirely up to them.

Sharkey.

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 12:36:15
Arda Turan scored the winner for Turkey last night against Belgium. I think that's 3 goals in his last 3 games for Turkey.

Is it just me or can anyone else not believe we didn't buy this guy!

Blair Mayne YNWA

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 12:13:10
Why not Connor Wickham?- because Ipswich want 10 mill for him and there are a lot of young strikers with more experience available for around that money.
Connor looks one for the future but there are no guarantees of continued improvement.

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 11:44:22
Stop writing every rumour you see on the liverpool website we can all read. .

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 10:56:38
08 Sep 2010 09:37:51
I've heard that Benzema is a potential target for Liverpool in January

I also heard that 3days ago on the liverpool web site

El Irish Nino

()()

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 10:36:45
Looks like liverpool will put in a bid for elia from hamburg in the january transfer window

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 09:37:51
I've heard that Benzema is a potential target for Liverpool in January

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 09:17:21
Ed - we keep hearing rumours about a deal in place for Kun Aguero etc. Has there ever been any contact with the player that you know about? {ed's note - not for a long time mate, there was contact before he moved to Spain, but nothing but having him watched occasionally ever since.}

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 09:03:14
To the person who said "Is there any truth of Liverpool signing young French striker Yaya Sanogo from Auxerre in January? ?"
Why not Connor Wickham? All foreign playrs eventully want to go back home - we need to build the team around locals and then add some foreign stars in their prime.
Red Herr Ing

()()

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 08:53:19
Liverpool looking at 17 year old Inigo Ruiz de Galarreta from Atheltic Bilbao.

()()

 

 

 

 

 

08 Sep 2010 00:37:03
People will think that this is unbelieveable, but mark my words, Liverpool will sign MARIO GOMEZ and ALEXIS SANCHEZ

()()