Why can rich people not just appreciate what they get??

[Rocksuperstar]

Seems Hicks and Gillet, the Laurel & Hardy of football club ownership, who should be thankful for getting anything at all out of the sale of Liverpool after the way they treated the club, let alone 60m profit, are still contesting the sale of the club and now are pushing for a court order to be lifted so that they can persue damages of about £1bn.

Former Liverpool co-owner Tom Hicks has asked the High Court to lift orders that are preventing him and business partner George Gillett from seeking about $1bn (£620m) in damages.
The two believe they are due compensation following the forced £300m sale of the club to New England Sports Ventures (NESV) last October.
At the time, they described the sale as "an epic swindle".
Mr Hicks wants damages from former club directors and Royal Bank of Scotland.
RBS had provided Mr Hicks and Mr Gillett with a large loan facility which they used to help buy the club.
A spokesperson for the bank said: "The courts described the claims made by Hicks and Gillett last year as 'not realistic and abusive'. Any further claims against RBS will be vigorously opposed."
The former directors include the chairman of British Airways, Sir Martin Broughton.
Mr Hicks and Mr Gillett believe the club was worth a lot more than the £300m that NESV, the owners of the Boston Red Sox baseball team, paid.
They tried to block the deal, but the High Court granted anti-suit orders that prevented the owners taking action in the Texas courts.
Forced sale
The two US businessmen bought Liverpool in 2007 for £220m, shortly before the club reached the Champions League final for the second time in three years.
After initial investment in the squad, supporters quickly became disillusioned at what they saw as broken promises - namely to start work on a new stadium and not to load debt onto the club itself.
When the financial crisis hit in 2008, it became clear the owners did not have the financial muscle to compete with other Premier League teams' lavish spending.
After initially looking for fresh investment, they reluctantly agreed to sell the club last year, but were looking to make a handsome profit.
Fellow board members took the view that the price they wanted - reportedly around £800m - was wholly unrealistic, and forced through the sale to NESV.

Seriously, guys, what the merry f*ck are you thinking?? You bought a club for a cut price sum, ripped the guts from it, offered no investment for new players, got far too involved in the day to day running of the club, then refused to sell when everyone in the entire cosmoverse begged in some cases, earnestly advised in others, you to sell and wash your hands of this saga. You were obviously not suited to club ownership with no clue about football, you made hundreds of thousands of 'pool fans hate you for almost destroying their club, and now you're honestly going ahead with this hilariously mickey mouse law suit?? On whose advise is this? The numbers, for a start - where do you come to the figure of 1bn? What can you possibly claim you are owed even near half that figure - you bought that club for little over £200m and have done nothing at all to increase it's value - you're businessmen, surely you can see this basic problem in your argument? :shrug:

All this will do is make you look like bigger mugs than you alread are and, hopefully, this action will deter anyone else from doing business with you, now they know how you operate.

 

[Bobishism]

To be fair, they invested quite a bit into new players. I'm not sure how much of that was their money.

 

[punky]

Seems Hicks and Gillet, the Laurel & Hardy of football club ownership, who should be thankful for getting anything at all out of the sale of Liverpool after the way they treated the club, let alone 60m profit, are still contesting the sale of the club and now are pushing for a court order to be lifted so that they can persue damages of about £1bn.



Seriously, guys, what the merry f*ck are you thinking?? You bought a club for a cut price sum, ripped the guts from it, offered no investment for new players, got far too involved in the day to day running of the club, then refused to sell when everyone in the entire cosmoverse begged in some cases, earnestly advised in others, you to sell and wash your hands of this saga. You were obviously not suited to club ownership with no clue about football, you made hundreds of thousands of 'pool fans hate you for almost destroying their club, and now you're honestly going ahead with this hilariously mickey mouse law suit?? On whose advise is this? The numbers, for a start - where do you come to the figure of 1bn? What can you possibly claim you are owed even near half that figure - you bought that club for little over £200m and have done nothing at all to increase it's value - you're businessmen, surely you can see this basic problem in your argument? :shrug:

All this will do is make you look like bigger mugs than you alread are and, hopefully, this action will deter anyone else from doing business with you, now they know how you operate.

The figures boggle most normal people's minds, so let's bring it down to something more managable.

They are probably spending $10m chasing a possible one $1,000m pot.

Think of it like when people claimed back their bank charges. Would you spend £1 chasing a possible £100 return even though it was your fault you went overdrawn? Of course. Doesn't matter about fault or whatever. The possible prize is worth the initial cost. So long as they get back more than they paid they'll be happy. And if they don't they'll probably write it off as tax anyway. Or maybe their lawyers work on retainers + expenses and are twiddling their thumbs.

It's all relative.

 

[fortworthspur]

I think they wouldnt be rich in the first place if they were the sort of people that appreciated what they had.

 

[hans]

To be fair even though they were absolute *****s, they did get get screwed over by the liverpool board.

 

[Azrael]

I think they wouldnt be rich in the first place if they were the sort of people that appreciated what they had.

This.

 

[sidford]

fact is mate their not super rich. their wealth was pure paper wealth without much liquidity.
tom hicks has been forced to sell most of his sporting franchises in the states becasue he doesnt have the cash to fund them and gilletts malls are in serious bother.
the lads did well when the global market was in good shape because much like property investors they bought one asset and the kept remortaging to buy a 2nd and then remortaging both to buy a third etc
the lads will still live a lifestyle well beyond what most of us will ever see but they are not super rich and im guessing their lifestyles will be nowhere near as extravagent as they once where

 

[CosmicHotspur]

Being rich doesn't necessarily bring appreciation or happiness of what they have for some people.

It's a fact that the majority of millionaire lottery winners admit that they are no happier than they were before they won and some are not as happy.

It's how you spend your money that counts and if it's all self-indulgent luxury, rather than spreading it around to help others, any happiness experienced will be ephemeral.

I received an e-mail a few weeks ago with a photo of a bunch of oil Sheiks standing by a new car one of them had just bought. It was a custom-built Lamborghini with a metallic silver finish and that bodywork was pure platinum. It probably cost enough to fund a hospital or clinic including the staffing. It will make that man happy until he craves for and acquires his next selfish whim.

As for the Liverpool situation, millionaires like Hicks and Gillet will usually rise to the top - scum has a tendency to do that.