red till i die!! » Sat Sep 01, 2012 12:26 pm wrote:Thommo's perm » Sat Sep 01, 2012 12:43 pm wrote:devaney » Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:57 am wrote:Boscarf lad your maths are shight like most of the anti FSG comments on hereDalglish and Comolli spent (wasted) close to a £110m. The value of the players that they sold was less than £80m. During this transfer window LFC have spent £30m with players sold totalling a maximum of £15m. In just over 12 months FSG have allowed a net sum of £45m to be invested. I accept that we did very little on the last day of the transfer window except get rid of a player costing £80k a week and producing very little in return.The loss of Adam should be deemed a bonus together with the loss of Spearing. Bellamy I liked and would have preferred that he stayed but age and fitness was against him. Don't lose sight of the fact that we were the fifth or sixth biggest spending club during the transfer window. FSG if they are half as bad as some of the fukwits on here claim could easily have said to Kenny and Comolli fk off we're keeping all of the money from the players that have been sold and you can have £30m and start doing some decent work in the transfer market. I hate to say this but if Moyes can buy Arteta, Lescott, Cahill and Jelavic for less than £16m for the lot of them then it is not our owners that are at fault when it comes to transfer dealings. Can anybody reasonably blame them for not throwing ridiculous amounts of money at new players when you look at the way Dalglish and Comolli p.issed over £80m down the Mersey. In FSG first year LFC showed a loss of £60m. They couldn't really be accused of asset stripping could they.
Moyes is a genius when it comes to transfers
He is suited to a club with no money.
Hopefully Rodgers is similar
we are the 8th richest football club in the world thommo and a giant compared to neverton.
the value of the club has increased since the cowboys left but where our problem lies is that other than the purchase price they shelled out they wont dip in to their own pockets.the purchase price of the club is what they will grow and make their profit on.
i suppose we can be thankful they arent asset stripping either but would it have killed them to stretch to the extra 2 mil to land a replacement for carroll.
quite frankly im disapointed that they have gone the route they have and not backed their man properly but have sent him to do a job with no laces in his boots and an arm tied behind his back.
and@ devaney,that 60mil in losses fsg posted in their first year was down to the stadium plans having to be scrapped at a cost of £40-£50mil.that was t&t's baby and inherited by fsg when they bought the club.they decided to scrap them and start again while the club picked up the cost of it.
Red - I know why LFC made a loss. The point I'm making is that it would have been very easy to avoid making such a substantial loss by not giving Dalglish and Comolli £110m which unfortunately they wasted. Where exactly did the £45m come from if they didn't dip into their own pockets? If they hadn't spent it the loss would have been nearer £15m which would have ensured there was going to be a lot more money in their pockets sooner rather than later!
by