Liverpool FC Forum

Just read Willian's price could have been closer to 40M 

30-32 Million pound for the player and a 5 Million pound signing on fee.

Kenny Kan » Wed Aug 21, 2013 11:08 am wrote:Just read Willian's price could have been closer to 40M 

30-32 Million pound for the player and a 5 Million pound signing on fee.

Rumoured that the £5mil fee went straight to the club and not the player.

so how does it make it any cheaper? 32 +5 is the same as 32 +5 isn't it?

Reg » Wed Aug 21, 2013 11:23 am wrote:so how does it make it any cheaper? 32 +5 is the same as 32 +5 isn't it?

Well some of the rumours have the signing on fee as part of the 32 mil euros

There is lots flying around at the moment and when he signs we will possibly find out - but the main objective will be that Spurs have strengthened once again

Benny The Noon » Tue Aug 20, 2013 10:51 pm wrote:

Ben Patrick » Tue Aug 20, 2013 10:44 pm wrote:Agree to disagree on this as if you think kenny knew f*ck all about what we were playin for players your wet behind the ears.

Kenny wanted the players and Comolli got them and sorted out the fees and wages as a DoF does. He wasnt responsible for the budget that was Comolli's job. That's why Comolli was sacked. The two main fees that were problems were Carroll ( read his book for what he knew about that ) and Downing. But neither of us know exactly what on during the summer - read plenty of rumours about Comolli and Kenny having no say in some players.

Either way he fully deserved another season and the owner changed their expectations hence why BR didn't get sacked.

Care to expand on this Benny? What's your point? You're saying the owners have lowered their expectations with the club and ae prepared to settle for 'cheap' 6th place finishes?

You seem determined to stick the knife into the club here. How about Anzhi knew Tottenham are about to have an injection of over £80m and they know this and want a percentage of it for Willian, something we're simply not prepared to match?

For the record I've never seen Willian kick a ball so I can't say how bothered I am about seeing him in a Spurs shirt, for what its worth I'd like to see us bolster that part of the side and hopefully we will

I think we could be in a catch 22 situation, that is, we weren't prepared to release additional funds for Willian, now, when we attempt  to bring other players in, clubs  will think we are a little desperate seeing as the window shuts soon and hike the prices up anyway. Wonder what will happen then, will the Owners pay up or settle for no new players for the starting XI

Grobbelrevell ‏@MarkBruceRevell

Net spend comparison since FSG took over #LFC in 2010:

#LFC: £86,027,800
#THFC: £31,820,800
#AFC: -£14,973,200

Much of the the current criticism of FSG and #LFC is based on frustration, which appears to be centred on an alternate financial reality.

The indisputable fact is, there *has* been investment in #LFC under FSG. In comparison to direct rivals, considerably so.

Whether it's enough to bridge the gap (short term) considering our starting point relative to others is another question entirely.

Surely this doesn't include the 50 million that Spurs have just spent?

Most of that spend for us would have surely been when Kenny was in charge. I'd like to see our net spend from Rogers' arrival till date.

damjan193 » Wed Aug 21, 2013 11:40 am wrote:Surely this doesn't include the 50 million that Spurs have just spent?

Yes I think it does and I'm sure it will come as a shock to a lot of people. Take a look at this: http://www.transferleague.co.uk/premier ... sfers.html

devaney » Wed Aug 21, 2013 12:58 pm wrote:

damjan193 » Wed Aug 21, 2013 11:40 am wrote:Surely this doesn't include the 50 million that Spurs have just spent?

Yes I think it does and I'm sure it will come as a shock to a lot of people. Take a look at this: http://www.transferleague.co.uk/premier ... sfers.html

I did the math and it's true that Spurs have made a net spending of 30m since 2010. We've had a net spending of 35m since Rodgers arrived (summer of 2012). Spurs clearly have more money than we thought and they're yet to sell Bale! No wonder they're spending like crazy.

But our owners net spending (since 2010 when they took over) isn't 80m. It's around 65m.

Reg » Wed Aug 21, 2013 8:44 am wrote:

eds » Wed Aug 21, 2013 4:33 pm wrote:

Reg » Wed Aug 21, 2013 6:07 am wrote:What about the suppoed 30 million PLUS 50% sell on value that was in the paper?

You think that's good business?

Errr hello....?

First of all I don't live in the UK so I don't read the rubbish that is printed.

If you think that Tottenham signed a contract with a 50% sell on clause you are a very simple lad. No club would sign such a high percentage.

Keep painting this delusional picture that Totteham's management are amateurs and ours are world class, it's f*cking hilarious.....

I don't live in the UK either, I read it on the net (Times/Telegraph/Independent, I don't remember which).

I haven't passed an opinion on the Spurs management, just asked a question, so pull your knickers back up and get on with your day. 

So your asking for me to comment on something you read about which is most likely bs......

Err ok?

Knickers seems to be around your head there Reginald lad

damjan193 » Wed Aug 21, 2013 12:10 pm wrote:But our owners net spending (since 2010 when they took over) isn't 80m. It's around 65m.

Find this site a little more reliable.....

http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/liverpool-fc/transfers/verein_31_2010_default_default_alle_a_default.html