Liverpool FC Forum

by **Reg** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 12:31 am

"felt we were the best buyer because of our track record and the articulation of our plans that we have to strengthen LFC going forward."

What are those plans, TJ ?

by **JBG** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 1:05 am

I think some posters here are kind of missing the point.

Yes, NESV have said that H&G's acquisition debt has been removed and they themselves wont load the cost of their acquistion on the club. But remember, H&G said the same thing and look what happened.

NESV are effectively asking us to take their word for it but we got very badly burned last time round.

As Reg said, that money wont have come for free and I doubt even as many as 17 wealthy investers may not have all put their hands in their own pockets. It would be more reassuring if we know where the 300mil came from and what each member of the group expects as their return.

I find it frankly a bit scary that many supporters are preparing to take their word as gospel given that 95% of fans (including me) probably never heard of them three weeks ago. Its like as if H&G never happened.

I'm not saying NESV are going to be a re-run of H&G but they are asking the fans to take a hell of a lot on faith. Until we start seeing the color of their money (both literally and figuretively) I think its best to remain deeply sceptical.

I cant find where I read it but didnt John Henry tell financial journalists back in Boston last week that NESV dont intend to spend money on Liverpool, that is was going to be a self financing venture?

by **JBG** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 1:11 am

7_Kewell wrote:
Reg wrote:
7_Kewell wrote:the new owners have been making all the right noises, but (as many have said) actions will speak louder than words. On paper, they look good...but like many i'm not taking anything for granted.

First thing first, Roy needs a wad of cash to spend in Jan. our squad isn't good enough and they need to back the manager.

The only wad I'd give Woy is to dry his eyes on the way out.

a) He's wasted what he's been given so far,
b) Obviously far more sensible to give it to his long term successor.

Apart from that agree with you!

i wouldn't say he's wasted what he's been given. Ok, the jury is out on Poulson, but Meirles is a very good footballer.

I wouldnt say that the jury is out on Poulson, I'd say its more of a case of the jury returning after 5 seconds of deliberation and telling the baillif that its time to bring back hanging.

by **Reg** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 1:22 am

JBG wrote:I cant find where I read it but didnt John Henry tell financial journalists back in Boston last week that NESV dont intend to spend money on Liverpool, that is was going to be a self financing venture?

Could be the 'cash injection' which a taken over struggling business usually needs to get back on its feet is the initial purchase price being absorbed off books and from here on in its going to be self-financing for the transfer kitty and stadium.

Its a good deal, between sponserhip, naming rights, tv revenue and competition earnings we should be a viable concern - if we're not the business plan doesn't work so we have to downsize.

by **redsoxfan** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 1:56 am

JBG wrote:I cant find where I read it but didnt John Henry tell financial journalists back in Boston last week that NESV dont intend to spend money on Liverpool, that is was going to be a self financing venture?

This was it:
Liverpool’s new owner John Henry has said that the NESV group will not spend vast amounts of money to resolve the problems at the club.

The American company took over Liverpool in a £300m deal and will now look to restore the club’s fortunes.

However, Henry admitted that this was not a quick solution and that spending money rashly would not be the answer.

The new Liverpool owner also stated that he did not have the resources that Manchester City had to compete in the transfer market and that Liverpool signings would have to be shrewd and sensible.

Henry said, "I don't have 'Sheikh' in front of my name," in an answer to whether Liverpool would spend the sums of money Manchester City owner Sheikh Mansour has.

"When we spend a dollar, it has to be wisely. We can't afford contracts that do not make long-term sense," added the American.

Liverpool have struggled with their form on the pitch and have only won one league game so far this season. Liverpool manager Roy Hodgson has spent very little in the transfer window and he will hope that Henry will provide funds in January.

Off the field Liverpool still have decisions to make over a stadium, but Henry has refused to make promises over money for transfers or his ideas about a new stadium.

The American owner did say that he wanted to restore Liverpool as a top side and that he had not come to the club to make money.

“I don't think any thinking individual buys a sports franchise these days or an English football club to make money,” he said.

The American continued, "Maybe a few, but they should have their head examined. It's about competing at the highest level in the world's largest sport for us, that's why we are here."

I agree 100% that they have to prove themselves to Liverpool fans. That is perfectly reasonable, given the hell you've gone through. I have more certain faith in them, but I have had the opportunity to have watched them operate for 9 years, while most of you haven't.

by **maguskwt** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 2:02 am

7_Kewell wrote:the new owners have been making all the right noises, but (as many have said) actions will speak louder than words. On paper, they look good...but like many i'm not taking anything for granted.

First thing first, Roy needs a wad of cash to spend in Jan. our squad isn't good enough and they need to back the manager.

First things first, they need to sack Roy. Even if they give him the transfer kitty, he doesn't know how to play our best players, so what's the use?

by **zarababe** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 1:38 pm

Reg wrote:
JBG wrote:I cant find where I read it but didnt John Henry tell financial journalists back in Boston last week that NESV dont intend to spend money on Liverpool, that is was going to be a self financing venture?

Could be the 'cash injection' which a taken over struggling business usually needs to get back on its feet is the initial purchase price being absorbed off books and from here on in its going to be self-financing for the transfer kitty and stadium.

Its a good deal, between sponserhip, naming rights, tv revenue and competition earnings we should be a viable concern - if we're not the business plan doesn't work so we have to downsize.

It's called makuing us 'sustainable' - have not problem with that..

by **Reg** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 1:44 pm

zarababe wrote:
Reg wrote:
JBG wrote:I cant find where I read it but didnt John Henry tell financial journalists back in Boston last week that NESV dont intend to spend money on Liverpool, that is was going to be a self financing venture?

Could be the 'cash injection' which a taken over struggling business usually needs to get back on its feet is the initial purchase price being absorbed off books and from here on in its going to be self-financing for the transfer kitty and stadium.

Its a good deal, between sponserhip, naming rights, tv revenue and competition earnings we should be a viable concern - if we're not the business plan doesn't work so we have to downsize.

It's called makuing us 'sustainable' - have not problem with that..

Agree. The 40 million profit qwe made last year prior to T&T thieving demonstrated we are sustainable.

Take out a 20 year loan on a new stadium against increased revenue, short term loans for a transfer kitty and hopefully that should all balance out. No reason why it shouldnt.

by **Madmax** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 3:25 pm

LFC saga anime

by **zarababe** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 4:19 pm

cool

by **mgabby** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 8:08 pm

redsoxfan wrote:
mgabby wrote:I have a question. Will Ellsbury be back in shape next year for a full season? Do you think V-tek should be the backup catcher? Does big papi worth the money, or do we look for a new DH? Can injured Youk move to 3rd, and make room for Adrian Gonzales on 1st? Will Dice-K ever win 18 again? and do you think the Marlins will take back Backett and Lowel for HenRam?

Thanks.

Ellsbury: yes
Varitek: no, they will groom a young catcher
Ortiz: they will sign his option for 2011
Youkilis: I don't know - will they sign Beltre?
Matsuzaka: yes (but it will be torture watching him do it)
Beckett & Lowell for Ramirez part 2: that would be a heck of deal now that Lowell is retired!

I don't agree on Papi. I think they will not use the option, letting him become a free agent, and sign him for half the money. Same thing was done with V-tek.

I hope Beltre is re-signed! I think Sox should go with everything they have to get Werth. Oh, and Cliff Lee (Bard as closer, move Dice-K to the pen and sell Paps to the higher bidder).

by **Seress** » Sat Oct 23, 2010 5:16 pm

Two NESV officials appointed to Liverpool board

• David Ginsberg and Michael Gordon join as club directors
• John W Henry unable to travel to game because of illness

link to article in Guardian:Changes in boardroom

by **LFC2007** » Sun Oct 24, 2010 1:10 am

Madmax wrote:LFC saga anime

Brilliant

by **alwayslfc** » Mon Oct 25, 2010 5:14 am

Seress wrote:Two NESV officials appointed to Liverpool board

• David Ginsberg and Michael Gordon join as club directors
• John W Henry unable to travel to game because of illness

link to article in Guardian:Changes in boardroom

Big John was ill and unable to travel. Let's hope he was not feeling the stress of owning Liverpool fc before he even started

by **redsoxfan** » Mon Oct 25, 2010 5:54 am

Comments about Liverpool in a Red Sox article from today's Boston Herald:
Sam Kennedy, executive vice president and chief operating officer of the Red Sox, recently spoke about what impact the acquisition of Liverpool FC by New England Sports Ventures, the Red Sox’ parent company, will have on Red Sox fans.

“I don’t think it will affect the average Red Sox fan because John (Henry, principal owner) and Tom (Werner, chairman) are so committed to keeping the Red Sox’ focus on the Red Sox with Larry (Lucchino, team president and CEO) and Theo (Epstein, executive vice president, general manager) and me and Jonathan (Gilula, executive vice president, business affairs) on the business side, but I think it’s a big story for our parent company.

“The misconception I think could have been, although it really hasn’t been written this way, would be that the Red Sox bought Liverpool, because they really didn’t. NESV is clearly establishing itself now as a worldwide player.”

NESV took enormous strides in the past couple of weeks as far as brand names go, but Kennedy stressed that Liverpool and the Red Sox each have their own fan base, and are distinct properties.

“It’s always been that way since 2001 - people are passionate about (the) Red Sox,” Kennedy said, “they’re passionate about Roush Fenway Racing, they may be passionate about NESN, they’re passionate about Liverpool, they’re not passionate about NESV, right? It’s a parent company but it is an important distinction. Liverpool has its own staff, its own stadium, its own set of issues.”

Liverpool’s problems are Liverpool’s problems - not the Red Sox’, and vice versa.

“I think there are some fans who are very, very excited because they happen to be Liverpool supporters and fans,” Kennedy said. “Others are saying, ‘We’re going to be watching to see what the club does here in Boston, is there any negative impact?’ And I think we have a track record here of investing in the ballpark, investing in players, focusing on our business here, so that’s what we’ll continue to do.”
http://www.bostonherald.com/sports....cleFull

Liverpool FC Forum

NESV - OUR NEW OWNERS - Official Thread

Who is online