by Leonmc0708 » Mon Dec 06, 2004 4:36 pm
I've just spotted this article from the Torygraph on the red and white site, revealing the rather Morgan-like opinions of the leader of the 'Hollywood' bid from the L4 consortium
'Nobody has heard of Liverpool in LA'
By Andrew Warshaw (Filed: 05/12/2004)
One of the two rival tycoons bidding for control of Liverpool launched a savage attack on the club's recent malaise last night.
Mike Jefferies, the Los Angeles-based movie mogul, said: "In Los Angeles you see Manchester United shirts but no one has heard of Liverpool."
Jefferies, who is thought to be putting together a £100 million bid to outflank rival bidder Steve Morgan, said the club "pulses through his veins" before heaping more blame upon the club chairman David Moores for Liverpool announcing a record loss of £21.9 m at their AGM on Friday.
"Liverpool is a club run as a plaything of its owner," said Jefferies. "It has had 15 years of bad management and is now valued at one-fifth of Manchester United." A former journalist who made his cash through business internet services, Jefferies is chairman of Milkshake Films and producer of Goal, a multi-million pound movie about a South American footballer who arrives in the Premiership. The film, which includes a cameo performance from David Beckham, was partly shot on location not at Jefferies' beloved Anfield but at St James's Park.
Two interesting points as far as I can tell:
1. Although the Kraft family involvement does sound promising, I'm not happy about Jefferies' slating of Moores. Unless I have read it out of context, it sounds a bit harsh. Also would Rick Parry keep his job if that's their opinion of his work? I personally think that in him we have the best man for the job.
OR
2. Has Jefferies got a point - are we being too loyal to Moores? For all his obvious integrity, humility, amenability with the staff and players, and love for the club, is he a good enough businessman to take us to where we want our club to be? I'd like to think he is, but I'm not sufficiently clued up in the ways of business to judge. Although this article initally repels me, they 'might' have a point?
JUSTICE FOR THE 96
