(Go: >> BACK << -|- >> HOME <<)

Liverpool remain in limbo until bidders put hard offers on the table

The Liverpool board meets tomorrow without formal offers or proof prospective buyers have any money

Liverpool owners George Gillett (left) and Tom Hicks, in the stands during the Champions League semi
Liverpool, for now, remain under the control of George Gillett (left) and Tom Hicks, and mired in debts to RBS and Wachovia. Photograph: Peter Byrne/PA Photos

In the swirl of announcements, declarations of intent to buy Liverpool, the ins and outs of whether the China Investment Corporation is backing Kenneth Huang, and now the revelation that members of the ruling family of Sharjah, in the United Arab Emirates, may be behind the Syrian businessman Yahya Kirdi, two crucial truths stand unmoved.

The first is that the Liverpool board, which meets tomorrow, has still not been presented with formal proposals by any bidder, together with the identity of the planned investors and documented proof that they have the money.

Despite the dramatic burst of publicity and activity around the club, Liverpool's directors have not been furnished with anything substantial to consider tomorrow and that lays bare the second incontrovertible fact. Liverpool Football Club is still, as things stand, owned by Tom Hicks and George Gillett, and owes £237m to Royal Bank of Scotland and Wachovia, who are charging penalty fees the longer the club is not sold, and have the right to call in their loans on 6 October.

About two years since Hicks and Gillett went looking for new investors, and four months since Martin Broughton, the British Airways chairman, was appointed as Liverpool's chairman to sell the club, no firm bid has yet been made. It is striking that no British businessman has apparently even considered buying Liverpool, despite the club's great stature and heritage, because of the scale of debts to pay and a £450m new stadium to finance. No well-known, "blue-chip" operators or corporations have emerged either, leaving supporters, the media and the board itself frantically casting around for any available information on relatively obscure figures.

Of the two which declared their interest last week, the proposed bid fronted by Kirdi has made the most consistently positive statements, and this week promised to formalise their offer within days.

A source close to that deal said yesterday that agreement in principle has been reached with Hicks and Gillett for a sale of the club to Kirdi's backers, although Dan Diamond, president of GameDay, a Canadian consultancy working with Kirdi to broker the deal, refused to confirm whether those investors are in fact from Sharjah.

"Plans are in place to close the deal shortly," the source said. "A proof of funds will accompany the closing of the deal in a form requested by Martin Broughton, the club's board and the owners. Everyone is focused on getting this done, so that the next era in the history of Liverpool can begin."

Meanwhile Marc Ganis, the US-based sports consultant working with Huang, told Sportingintelligence yesterday that CIC, the investment arm of the Chinese government, are not committed as a backer, and said no decision had been made to even present an offer to Liverpool.

Kirdi's proposed bid was met with widespread scepticism when it was announced last week, partly because of the Canadian involvement, and reports that it will involve about $600m (£380m) being paid for the club to Hicks and Gillett. That, for many fans, seemed to place Kirdi too close to the north American pair, who have outraged supporters by loading the £185m they borrowed to buy Liverpool in the first place, on to the club to repay.

Diamond, however, stated last week that Kirdi and his investors have been working on a bid to buy Liverpool since October. Kirdi, a Syrian businessman of relatively modest means based in Canada, is said to represent members of the Sharjah ruling family on various business dealings, and that has led to the conclusion that the potential investors behind him do include members of the al-Qasimi family.

If true, if they move to make a solid offer, and if that offer is accepted – the multiple layers of uncertainty in which this process is currently mired – that suggests major money from the UAE could be made available to Liverpool. Sharjah is the third largest of the Emirates, after Abu Dhabi and Dubai, and while it does not boast the gushing oil resources of Abu Dhabi, members of its ruling family do have access to substantial wealth, in an economy based on crude oil and natural gas.

The structure of the proposed deal is that the debt to RBS and Wachovia would be repaid in full, and the new stadium on Stanley Park, itself more than 10 years in the dreaming, would be financed with a 15-year mortgage on generous terms to the club.

Diamond would not discuss reports that Kirdi's investors have agreed to pay Hicks and Gillett $600m, but it has been asserted they are not seeking to pay Hicks and Gillett as little as possible, as was proposed on behalf of Huang last week. That in itself has aroused further scepticism, in a financial culture in which the emphasis is on seeking to pay as low a price as an investor can get away with. However, a source close to the Kirdi deal said the investors consider Liverpool one of the great football clubs and sporting institutions of the world, not as a distressed company in which control can be wrestled for a price hostile to Hicks and Gillett.

'The price being paid is seen as a negotiated and fair value," the source said. "The new owners will look to be involved at Liverpool for the long term, see the new stadium built, invest in the team. They see supporters as integral to the club, and intend to reach out and involve them."

That sentiment echoes the supporter-friendly message emanating from Huang yesterday, describing supporters as "key stakeholders" and pledging to meet with Spirit of Shankly-Share Liverpool, the unified group which has more than 50,000 registered supporters.

Such diplomacy from prospective buyers of a club as large as Liverpool demonstrates how formidable supporters have made themselves in modern times by organising into trusts and forging a keen, educated view of how their clubs are owned and run. Rogan Taylor, a founder member of Share Liverpool, has talked of Liverpool fans "losing their innocence" as the debts loaded on by Hicks' and Gillett's takeover became clear. SOS-SL are actively seeking to raise £50m to buy a stake in the club, in partnership with new owners, and in return to be granted representation in the running of the club.

Taylor, director of the Football Industries Group at Liverpool University, said that if the warm words for supporters being expressed by the prospective bidders translate into a solid partnership with fans by new owners, it would be: "Truly groundbreaking and mark the shift to a new era."

Before any bright future can dawn, however, the declarations of interest voiced last week must harden into solid offers backed by real and verified money. That has not happened yet, from anyone, anywhere.

"Our priority is to make sure we do not do the wrong deal," said a source close to the sale process. "At present it is not clear how many satisfactory proposals we are going to receive."

That, for all the talk and speculation, is the limbo in which Liverpool remain, laden with debt and out of the Champions League, on the threshold of a new season.


Your IP address will be logged

Comments in chronological order

Comments are now closed for this entry.
  • This symbol indicates that that person is The Guardian's staffStaff
  • This symbol indicates that that person is a contributorContributor

Showing first 50 comments | Go to all comments | Go to latest comment

  • DavidArrrggghhhh DavidArrrggghhhh

    11 Aug 2010, 8:39AM

    I thought any investor could wait and pick it up cheap once the loan agreement with RBS comes to and end in October and the bank effectively own the club?

    In those circumstances, why would anyone pay those american crooks over the odds?

  • shostri shostri

    11 Aug 2010, 8:46AM

    Headline and opening paragraphs - LFC in turmoil
    Subsequent paragraphs - LFC to be lavished with Sharjah funds
    Closing paragraph - LFC still in turmoil...

    A very strange article, particularly as your only "quotes" seem to contradict your intended message.

  • Comeonplease Comeonplease

    11 Aug 2010, 8:47AM

    I'd always thought that Man Utd would be the first big one to go down this road, but its greater inertia has held off the wolves for longer. Though sooner or later, they'll fail to qualify for the CL, and we'll see this story replayed.

  • goto100 goto100

    11 Aug 2010, 8:50AM

    @DavidAaaargghh

    beat me to it. Given the October 6th deadline, why pay the ludicrous price the carpet baggers want? The longer this goes on, the more they will be forced to drop their asking price.

  • Ginganinja Ginganinja

    11 Aug 2010, 8:50AM

    DavidArrgghhhh,
    Totally agree. Wouldn't it be far cheaper to wait until October, when RBS call in the debts, take over the club and look to sell it on at a knock down price? Any buyer now would probably miss the transfer window anyway so what's the point? All these prospective buyers seem to be an awful lot of hot air and very little substance and make me pretty wary.

  • sameasiteverwas sameasiteverwas

    11 Aug 2010, 8:50AM

    shostri

    The article is about the absence of any solid offers. Currently the club is going nowhere. So what part confused you?

    Said it about the Chinese on the Hyde blog but the same goes for Emirates. Supporters have 'lost their innocence' but football has lost its soul. Whoever is pumping in the petro-dollars, anything they win will always feel tainted.

    It'll be interesting to see what SOS-SL actually get out of any deal. Probably we'll just be there to legitimise the whole project. Adds a quaint layer of 'authenticity' to the billionaire's plaything.

  • kingstonian kingstonian

    11 Aug 2010, 8:51AM

    The remarkable things about all this are:

    1) How far away it has become from a normal sale process, with briefings and counter-briefings the order of the day - as indeed it has been since Hicks and Gillett fell out.

    2) How every bidder, EVERY bidder, has said or done something that has, shall we say, been contradicted by research into their backgrounds.

    Sites like "Anfield Road" and "Sporting Intelligence" have pursued different bidders in recent days but have both undergone the same process, starting to write about the anomalies in each bidders' tale...and being unable to stop for many thousands of words.

    There's even been conflicting stories about whether Broughton is pursuing the best deal for the club or for the current owners. And, the key to the future, whether Hicks and Gillett can be outvoted on any preferred bidder decision.

    The remarkable thing about all this SHOULD be that Hicks, in particular, expects to get paid for the work he & Gillett have done at Liverpool, believing that future profits from the new stadium (due to open this month, as "Anfield Road" pointed out) should be factored into the current selling price. But are any of us really surprised at the nerve of the man?

    As ever, the only people so far to come out of this grubby tale with any consistent credit are the supporters groups and supporters web-sites which have been vigilant in their scrutiny of potential bidders.

    They have every right to feel let down. Again.

  • vastariner vastariner

    11 Aug 2010, 9:01AM

    If there's ever an example why there ought to be controls on football along the lines of controls on monopolies and quasi-monopolies, it's that Hicks & Gillett stand to make a profit from being utter failures at running their company. The value of Liverpool is nothing to do with its value as a business and everything to do with it having a monopoly position. Treat football clubs like utilities. Capped costs, restricted pricing increases and stop them financially doping to control the market as they wish.

  • shostri shostri

    11 Aug 2010, 9:03AM

    @sameasiteverwas

    Not sure what has made you think I'm confused. I said it's strange and this was borne of its overly-sensationalist and contradictory theme. "LFC in limbo" - very good, as it has been for the last 2 years...

    I agree entirely with your sentiment though - irrespective of whether the funds originate from Sharjah or China, the spirit of the club has been lost.

  • MattLeHoosque MattLeHoosque

    11 Aug 2010, 9:05AM

    It is ironic that Liverpool fans tended to be the loudest when spitting curses at Chelsea FC for having an owner who wanted to put money into his club, rather than strip mine it for all it was worth.

    It seems like the best way out for LFC at the moment is to find a benefactor who is willing to put the needs of the club first and plough in some cash.
    It is already a bit late for the coming season, unless a cash rich investor comes in within a couple of weeks, the manager will just have to make sure that this season is a bit more of a success than the last.

  • yetanothergunner yetanothergunner

    11 Aug 2010, 9:07AM

    What's class clown VomittingMeerkat's view on this?I'm guessing he's predicting great times ahead for Liverpool and bad times ahead for Manchester United.

    More importantly, how will this impact Arsenal?

  • the103 the103

    11 Aug 2010, 9:12AM

    "[Lionel] Messi can do some amazing things, but anything he can do Joe can do as well, if not better.

    Are people really surprised that there isn't a queue of owners-to-be anxious to pay Mr. Gerrard millions each year?

  • crisgod crisgod

    11 Aug 2010, 9:15AM

    So are RBS/Wachovia going to play hardball in October?

    A 10 point deduction for going into administration would really take the shine off any sale.

    And Torres would be free to play in the Champions League after a January transfer!

  • llcooljoel llcooljoel

    11 Aug 2010, 9:15AM

    It is ironic that Liverpool fans tended to be the loudest when spitting curses at Chelsea FC for having an owner who wanted to put money into his club, rather than strip mine it for all it was worth.

    Prove it.

  • Msay Msay

    11 Aug 2010, 9:17AM

    And the award for desperately and pathetically trying to turn this into a Liverpool v Man Utd thread goes to.....(drumroll please).........Jonathan Higginsell!!!!!

  • Phack2 Phack2

    11 Aug 2010, 9:18AM

    ginganinja, davidaaargghhh, goto100:

    Why not wait until Oct 6 then pick up the club for a song? Well, at that point the bank will own the club and will want to realise the best price to try to recover the debt they original put inot the club. In addition, if 4 or 5 bidders think the same, then we get back to an auction process. By securing a deal now (which would pay off the banks debt - all they actually want, they don't want to own the club) the new owners might also get a few days of this transfer window to bring some new players in.

    Also, sameasiteverwas:

    Supporters have 'lost their innocence' but football has lost its soul. Whoever is pumping in the petro-dollars, anything they win will always feel tainted.

    Please, you'll have us in tears in a minute. So lots of the new the owners' money comes from oil. Is that any difference from Jack Walker's coming from steel...The Moores family from retail...The Edwards family from meat packing ffs.

    Or is it the fact that at least they were OUR steel makers, retailers and meat packers??

  • llcooljoel llcooljoel

    11 Aug 2010, 9:22AM

    The most reliable information we have is that the club secretary expects a deal to be done in the next month or so. Everything else is just speculation. The deadline for offers is Friday and so it follows that the bids will be made then, it's not unreasonable for interested parties to use all the available time to consider all the issues and investigate to the furthest extent possible.

    We also know that Kenny Huang met two supporters groups to discuss the bid with them this week; hardly the act of a man disinterested in tabling a serious offer. Basically the article is just confirming that journalists are being kept mostly in the dark over a private business deal. Too many on here are guilty of just believing everything they read in the press whether properly evidenced or not. For shame....

  • llcooljoel llcooljoel

    11 Aug 2010, 9:30AM

    I've started and I can't stop.

    Anyway.

    The main reason for not waiting until October, as has probably been said, is that at that point Liverpool will likely receive a ten point penalty for administration thus probably forcing most of the best players to push for a move away in January. This will devalue the club no end, and to have to immediately try and replace a Torres/Gerrard/Cole/Agger makes no business or practical sense. Particularly when Man City are able to gazump everyone else for practically any player, and in these days of agent-engineered transfers when no half-decent player is able to remain unheralded for long.

  • llcooljoel llcooljoel

    11 Aug 2010, 9:34AM

    Let's just all agree to blame Capello, works a treat for everything else.

    Too right. He can't even speak proper English or nuffink the shifty, lazy foreigner. If he hadn't insisted on telling Rooney to play like an unfit pub footballer, or Terry to demonstrate exactly why he shouldn't even have been made captain in the first place...!

  • tobeeornot tobeeornot

    11 Aug 2010, 9:36AM

    It is striking that no British businessman has apparently even considered buying Liverpool, despite the club's great stature and heritage, because of the scale of debts to pay and a £450m new stadium to finance. No well-known, "blue-chip" operators or corporations have emerged either, leaving supporters, the media and the board itself frantically casting around for any available information on relatively obscure figures.

    What British businessman or 'blue chip" corporations own Chelsea, United, Arsenal or the new money boys, City? It is not striking at all. Maybe you should do your own due diligence before writing this scaremongering crap.

  • righthandpulltrigger righthandpulltrigger

    11 Aug 2010, 9:42AM

    The most reliable information we have is that the club secretary expects a deal to be done in the next month or so

    which in itself is pure speculation when non of the supposedly interested parties will commit to a firm bid.

  • MattLeHoosque MattLeHoosque

    11 Aug 2010, 9:43AM

    Prove it.

    I don't really have to prove it.
    That was just my experience of hearing the songs sang by LFC fans at games and hearing them on radio phone ins (scouse is quite distinctive) and reading on Internet blogs. Others are just as noisy depending on their own clubs' situation.

    Many football clubs were/are attractive playthings/investments for rich people across the world. Look at Manchester City. Most clubs would welcome investors that don't sap the life blood out of their club as opposed to the franchising of a "brand" in order to pay off the loan agreements that are heaped on top in order to make a profit for overseas owners.

    To some fans, the way their club is currently being run is the only "correct" way and those boundaries will shift with their own clubs changing circumstances.

  • Corinthian11 Corinthian11

    11 Aug 2010, 9:45AM

    Whoever it is who eventually bites the bullet and takes a punt, is going to have to come up with a mind boggling amount of money, to pay off the debt, fund a new stadium and find some small change to give to the manager to splash out on adequate replacements for their ageing stars.

    However, with the soon to come changes in how media is distributed and owned with the clubs potential for raising revenue through direct streaming - the potential for making a return on any investment in the medium to long term, particularly in the medium to long term is tantalising.

    I'm only speculating (Like everyone else here) but I'd argue that the next couple of months are going to be the most important in the club's history - it's make or break time ladies.

  • llcooljoel llcooljoel

    11 Aug 2010, 9:51AM

    which in itself is pure speculation when non of the supposedly interested parties will commit to a firm bid.

    I've got a research proposal due on the 27th but it's not nearly ready to be submitted just yet. Does that matter that I'll wait until the deadline to do so, even if that extra time means it'll be more thoroughly constructed and evidenced? It's ridiculous to start scaremongering about the lack of firm bids for a very complicated business opportunity when the deadline is yet to expire.

  • llcooljoel llcooljoel

    11 Aug 2010, 9:54AM

    I remember the year Joe Cole won the Ballon d'Or...

    or did that not happen?

    I'm not sure they give out that particular award for being good at tricks in training.

    Or did you not read the quotes from Gerrard correctly?

  • crisgod crisgod

    11 Aug 2010, 9:56AM

    There's little point in expecting live streaming automatically to be the financial saviour of indebted clubs. The hackers will have broken the encryption within days and the hacks will be available for all those punters in the Far East and everywhere else to watch live streamed games for free on the internet.

    Although if the clubs are wise they will give the live stream away and make the profits on locally specific advertising.

    The merchandising of shirts etc, are mostly cheap copies anyway with none of the income from them coming back to the clubs.

    The only income stream that the clubs have total control of is match day tickets, and Liverpool haven't got that new stadium yet, so they are condemned to losing ground against the clubs with bigger stadia until the new stadium is built.

  • lachute lachute

    11 Aug 2010, 9:57AM

    Sharjah Emirate is hardly a glowing beacon of financial power.....the banks should repossess and sell it back to a mix of the fans and investors. Forget a new stadium until the debts are sorted. Sell better palyers and start again.....

  • Burntfaceman Burntfaceman

    11 Aug 2010, 9:59AM

    Looking at the most recent example of the recession defying hubris of football -Man City, then it becomes clear that even £200-300ml lavished (partly wasted) on playing staff still doesn't guarantee success, their ground is leased from the council, but still the total investment is to date circa £700ml.

    Why investors would pay and then invest a sum equal to that for LFC to then begin a re-building process does not make sense. £300ml to buy the business, £200ml to fund player acquisition, £400ml to build a stadium to perhaps be in the top 4..£1bl for a loss making business in this economic environment? It' isnt as easy to buy success as RA did with Chelsea, his timing and getting Mourinho was spot on..that possibly won't ever be replicated..

    Hicks & Gillet will ride this storm through, they'll get to Oct with no buyer but re-structre the debt somehow, perhaps with Torres gone in the Jan window...they'll take LFC down a division before losing money on the deal, or handing back their $50ml each gains..

  • akno akno

    11 Aug 2010, 10:00AM

    I'm not sure they give out that particular award for being good at tricks in training.

    Or did you not read the quotes from Gerrard correctly?

    When he speaks all I hear is white noise

  • Hoppolocos Hoppolocos

    11 Aug 2010, 10:01AM

    Whilst the possible ten point deduction etc., may be a consideration the fact that any prospective buyer could save about £300M by waiting does seem to point to them delaying any bids. What are Hicks and Gillette going to do if they do? They can wait it out and get nothing, or they can drop their price and it may then go right to the wire - a midnight closure of the deal. Therefore can't see anythign happening soon and whilst a new buyer amy be in the best long term interest of the club L'pool are looking pretty screwed for this season.

  • buddha9 buddha9

    11 Aug 2010, 10:03AM

    LL(not) CoolJOel

    I'll prove it -- i'm researching online communities and football notice boards I've got over 5000 online BBC posts for the two years from when Roman took over chelsea - the vitiriol from liverpool supporters has to be read to be believed and now they want sympathy -- so there's the proof. You can have a look if you want but i know you won't -- self righteous stupid and arrogant as you are I know that none of this will convince you - you don't really care about the financial situation of your club --you just want to pretend you're cool ( which u are most def not) and bag Rooney Capello and Terry in that tiresome boring manner which has so endeared liverpool supporters to the rest of the country.

    Actually LFc has virtually been run by the banks for the past 9 months. Its a financial basket case.

  • cavelier5 cavelier5

    11 Aug 2010, 10:06AM

    So, there has been no news on the takeover for a few days therefore that in itself is news? I'm confused.

    From what I can see any potential owner will be getting one of the worlds great clubs at a reduced rate - the chance of no one bidding for it is non-existant.

    I must say however the thought of the club becoming the play thing of a cash-rich Middle Eastern royal family, or for that matter the Chinese government, makes me feel slightly queasy. Unfortunately they are the only ones who have the financial muscle to make these things happen. We'd all love a billionaire local lad made good to plough his cash into the club he loves but that isn't going to happen, so we have to be pragmatic. If they pay the existing debt, build the stadium (without loading enormous restrictive debt on the club again), and give Roy a big wedge each season, then I guess we should be happy.

    Hopefully the new owners are proper businessmen who realise that taking the supporters (i.e. the customer) into consideration is of paramount importance. Whoever it is will prattle on with the usual bullshit rhetoric of 'caring for the supporters' and massive immediate investment into the team, as the two bastards did, but we will only know a couple of years down the line. Once they own the club they can pretty much do as they please.

  • mike65ie mike65ie

    11 Aug 2010, 10:09AM

    The Kirdi is a ruse, not even being considered.

    Meanwhile Marc Ganis, the US-based sports consultant working with Huang, told Sportingintelligence yesterday that CIC, the investment arm of the Chinese government, are not committed as a backer

    What does that mean? That CIC are interested, are potential backers but have not made a firm decision or something else?

  • cavelier5 cavelier5

    11 Aug 2010, 10:10AM

    Hicks & Gillet will ride this storm through, they'll get to Oct with no buyer but re-structre the debt somehow, perhaps with Torres gone in the Jan window...they'll take LFC down a division before losing money on the deal, or handing back their $50ml each gains..

    burntfaceman - luckily it is not up to Hick and Gillett which takeover bid is accepted or not. If the three other (supposedly) independant board members out vote them then they will have to take what they're given.

  • Navigator Navigator

    11 Aug 2010, 10:10AM

    @ llcooljoel

    It's ridiculous to start scaremongering about the lack of firm bids for a very complicated business opportunity when the deadline is yet to expire.

    Largely true although you do generally know the identity and quantity and quite a lot of the detail of any bids before any deadline, speaking from personal experience.

    Despite how it looks, I wouldn't say there is any cause for alarm at this stage in terms of Liverpool being owned by RBS and therefore, ultimately, the taxpayer. I doubt very much it will get to that.

  • JonathanHigginsIII JonathanHigginsIII

    11 Aug 2010, 10:15AM

    And the award for desperately and pathetically trying to turn this into a Liverpool v Man Utd thread goes to.....(drumroll please).........Jonathan Higginsell!!!!!

    Like it needed me to prod it in that direction.

  • llcooljoel llcooljoel

    11 Aug 2010, 10:16AM

    @cavelier5

    I would go further and suggest that Broughton and Purslow in particular have a vested personal interest in making sure that the new owners are credible. Their reputations are at stake over this and especially Broughton, he will be gone after the takeover and his whole career relies on trustworthiness.

    @Navigator

    Exactly. Deadlines are a standard operating procedure within corporate takeovers, and in themselves no cause for particular concern.

  • mafs mafs

    11 Aug 2010, 10:18AM

    It'll be a shame if Liverpool go bust, but any football club, company, individual or country will have to someday meet that challenge if it runs on debt.

  • llcooljoel llcooljoel

    11 Aug 2010, 10:20AM

    @MattLeHoosque

    I think the banter was just as fierce both sides to be honest, plenty of Chelsea fans winding up Liverpool fans and vice-versa. Both sides always insist the other is/was worse.

  • isfootballfun isfootballfun

    11 Aug 2010, 10:23AM

    yetanothergunner
    11 Aug 2010, 9:07AM

    What's class clown VomittingMeerkat's view on this?I'm guessing he's predicting great times ahead for Liverpool and bad times ahead for Manchester United.

    More importantly, how will this impact Arsenal?

    It wont impact Arsenal at all. Meerkat will still be living in the 80's in the belief that Liverpool are a big club and have a chance of winning the league, Arsenal fans like Ronald21 will still act like a retarded child with ADHD and Arsenal will still think that playing pretty triangles and not scoring goals means good football

Showing first 50 comments | Go to all comments | Go to latest comment

Comments are now closed for this entry.

Comments

Sorry, commenting is not available at this time. Please try again later.

Guardian Bookshop

This week's bestsellers

  1. 1.  American Caesars

    by Nigel Hamilton £25.00

  2. 2.  Flavour Thesaurus

    by Niki Segnit £18.99

  3. 3.  It's All About the Bike

    by Robert Penn £16.99

  4. 4.  Music and Sentiment

    by Charles Rosen £16.99

  5. 5.  Elephant's Journey

    by Jose Saramago £12.99