Liverpool FC Forum

by **devaney** » Sat Aug 24, 2013 7:54 am

devaney » Fri Aug 23, 2013 11:06 pm wrote:Red Till I Die - Sorry I posted my response before it was finished. Family just arrived for dinner and it would have been rude to ignore them.

The last sentence simply should have finished with the words: talking about. To suddenly suggest that I'm reverting to type when we were having what seemed a sensible discussion and accusing you of not being a Liverpool supporter is a tad confusing. I have never accused anybody on this forum of not being a Liverpool supporter except BTN but let's face it, it's a bit tricky taking him seriously with the mountain load of negative shight that he posts. Not sure where the reverting to type comment comes from.

My views of FSG may not be as harsh as yours. I certainly don't agree with everything they have done and to suggest that I think we owe them a huge debt of gratitude is wrong. I don't know if the owners of Spurs have accusations of greed thrown at them because they have spent considerably less than ourselves over the past three to four years. FSG could easily have kept the proceeds from the Torres sale but instead they allowed Kenny and Comolli to invest heavily in players. Unfortunately that was an unmitigated fk up which we are still recovering from. How many other clubs during this window have sold two players for a combined loss of £35m? That in itself takes a degree of commitment. I simply do not believe that they are the parasites you suggest.Simply because as a company they have bought a newspaper costing £70m doesn't necessarily mean they should invest more money in ourselves. FSG may well be be opportunistic but surely that is what any sensible business is all about. It doesn't necessarily mean they are vultures.

As for the Stadium when you look around Anfield more and more properties have been purchased. Speed of progress is painfully slow. I do however believe that work is going on behind the scenes. Perhaps I am wrong. Were FSG concerned about the results of the commitment campaign that permitted season ticket requests to be resubmitted at the cost of £5? Again I don't know.

With regards to the purchase price it also has to be remembered that FSG took on the £35m outstanding architectural fees amassed by H & G which contributed towards their first year losses of £52m. They also took over the massive costs of compensating Rafa and his team. The original sale price of £300m did seem incredibly cheap but I don't remember that many companies/individuals queuing up to buy us and certainly not for a lot more more. A company like any property is worth what somebody is prepared to pay for it. Where does your figure of £500m come from?

I'm not sure what you mean when you say they are possibly charging the club interest on the loan for buying the club. What loan? They paid cash. There is no suggestion of interest payments of the magnitude you suggest in the company accounts. I think that is an unreasonable suggestion.

Sorry for the confusion. You were certainly not being accused of anything.

by **eds** » Sat Aug 24, 2013 8:11 am

devaney » Sat Aug 24, 2013 12:00 am wrote:Eds. if we keep Suarez and spend another £25m before the end of the transfer window would this go someway towards helping the antis move a little bit closer to the disillusioned ? I don't mind being disillusioned, it's less stressful

It's a not a question of spending money mate.

My main concern is not signing key players if Rodgers really wants to go for them.

Essentially what the owners are doing is consigning the club to defeat as soon as Spudz or anyone else comes in with a counter-bid.

Fair play to Rodgers for calling a spade, a spade the owners really have f**ked him over this transfer window.

I'm actually quiet shocked that with little over a week left in the transfer window we find ourselves in a position (of needing to bring in players that can improve our starting XI) which is exactly where we were 3 months ago.

I wish I could be in gaga land with the likes of some on here not really caring whether the club does well on the field, as long as we are financially sound, what's the problem? :no

by **Hustler 2** » Sat Aug 24, 2013 8:32 am

We defo need more recruits before the window shuts. At least one.

by **Benny The Noon** » Sat Aug 24, 2013 8:40 am

eds » Sat Aug 24, 2013 8:11 am wrote:
devaney » Sat Aug 24, 2013 12:00 am wrote:Eds. if we keep Suarez and spend another £25m before the end of the transfer window would this go someway towards helping the antis move a little bit closer to the disillusioned ? I don't mind being disillusioned, it's less stressful

It's a not a question of spending money mate.

My main concern is not signing key players if Rodgers really wants to go for them.

Essentially what the owners are doing is consigning the club to defeat as soon as Spudz or anyone else comes in with a counter-bid.

Fair play to Rodgers for calling a spade, a spade the owners really have f**ked him over this transfer window.

I'm actually quiet shocked that with little over a week left in the transfer window we find ourselves in a position (of needing to bring in players that can improve our starting XI) which is exactly where we were 3 months ago.

I wish I could be in gaga land with the likes of some on here not really caring whether the club does well on the field, as long as we are financially sound, what's the problem?

The pre season gave a false picture of the team being good enough when it was clear we are missing at the very least 3 first team players - 3 months ago instead of looking at squad fillers we should have sown up the first team players we needed and then looked to fill the squad

by **Red Focus** » Sat Aug 24, 2013 8:59 am

It looks more and more likely these owners are not here for the long term. They are only interested in making the accounting statements look good and I believe they're doing this to sell at a huge profit to another owner. A club like LIverpool with a global fan base needs to have a new stadium and where is it? They are not building it and they're are not going to heavily fund BR, just make the club attractive enough to sell to the next highest bidder. I am getting more and more sick of FSG. They've done their part in rescuing us from under administration 3 years ago and now it looks like there's nothing more they can do.

by **devaney** » Sat Aug 24, 2013 9:05 am

eds » Sat Aug 24, 2013 7:11 am wrote:
devaney » Sat Aug 24, 2013 12:00 am wrote:Eds. if we keep Suarez and spend another £25m before the end of the transfer window would this go someway towards helping the antis move a little bit closer to the disillusioned ? I don't mind being disillusioned, it's less stressful

It's a not a question of spending money mate.

My main concern is not signing key players if Rodgers really wants to go for them.

Essentially what the owners are doing is consigning the club to defeat as soon as Spudz or anyone else comes in with a counter-bid.

Fair play to Rodgers for calling a spade, a spade the owners really have f**ked him over this transfer window.

I'm actually quiet shocked that with little over a week left in the transfer window we find ourselves in a position (of needing to bring in players that can improve our starting XI) which is exactly where we were 3 months ago.

I wish I could be in gaga land with the likes of some on here not really caring whether the club does well on the field, as long as we are financially sound, what's the problem?

Eds - I like a bit of both. Financially sound and good on the pitch. Got to agree though if we don't do some impressive work before the end of the transfer window it will have been a lack lustre summer. Keeping Suarez which I expect to happen can be regarded as a success and a demonstration of commitment. Would be easy to sell him and buy a very cheap young replacement that may or not work out. At least they haven't done that - yet !!

by **eds** » Sat Aug 24, 2013 11:19 am

devaney » Sat Aug 24, 2013 8:05 am wrote:
eds » Sat Aug 24, 2013 7:11 am wrote:
devaney » Sat Aug 24, 2013 12:00 am wrote:Eds. if we keep Suarez and spend another £25m before the end of the transfer window would this go someway towards helping the antis move a little bit closer to the disillusioned ? I don't mind being disillusioned, it's less stressful

It's a not a question of spending money mate.

My main concern is not signing key players if Rodgers really wants to go for them.

Essentially what the owners are doing is consigning the club to defeat as soon as Spudz or anyone else comes in with a counter-bid.

Fair play to Rodgers for calling a spade, a spade the owners really have f**ked him over this transfer window.

I'm actually quiet shocked that with little over a week left in the transfer window we find ourselves in a position (of needing to bring in players that can improve our starting XI) which is exactly where we were 3 months ago.

I wish I could be in gaga land with the likes of some on here not really caring whether the club does well on the field, as long as we are financially sound, what's the problem?

Eds - I like a bit of both. Financially sound and good on the pitch. Got to agree though if we don't do some impressive work before the end of the transfer window it will have been a lack lustre summer. Keeping Suarez which I expect to happen can be regarded as a success and a demonstration of commitment. Would be easy to sell him and buy a very cheap young replacement that may or not work out. At least they haven't done that - yet !!

With Suarez I don't think its that easy, if the owners could make a profit off him they would, but they are not stupid mugs.

If they had done this and replaced him with an inexperienced player or young cheap replacement that would have got the entire fan base against them, just like in the last days of the Twit and T.wat regime.

Hence they have held on to him (only just).

It's really the only smart thing they have done in their time here because their list of f**k-ups grows by the weeks. :glare:

by **Hustler 2** » Sat Aug 24, 2013 11:29 am

stmichael » Fri Aug 23, 2013 4:22 pm wrote:Rodgers press conference in full

http://prev.lfc.vn/s14-w02-preview-villa/

I wish Brendan would liven up a bit in press conferences. He always looks subdued.

Even he admits that we're struggling to bring quality in, before the deadline.

Its a lottery then, where we could finish this season. 1st 10 games will tell us a lot about where we will end up.

by **red till i die!!** » Sat Aug 24, 2013 5:24 pm

devaney » Sat Aug 24, 2013 12:06 am wrote:Red Till I Die - Sorry I posted my response before it was finished. Family just arrived for dinner and it would have been rude to ignore them.

The last sentence simply should have finished with the words: talking about. To suddenly suggest that I'm reverting to type when we were having what seemed a sensible discussion and accusing you of not being a Liverpool supporter is a tad confusing. I have never accused anybody on this forum of not being a Liverpool supporter except BTN but let's face it, it's a bit tricky taking him seriously with the mountain load of negative shight that he posts. Not sure where the reverting to type comment comes from.

My views of FSG may not be as harsh as yours. I certainly don't agree with everything they have done and to suggest that I think we owe them a huge debt of gratitude is wrong. I don't know if the owners of Spurs have accusations of greed thrown at them because they have spent considerably less than ourselves over the past three to four years. FSG could easily have kept the proceeds from the Torres sale but instead they allowed Kenny and Comolli to invest heavily in players. Unfortunately that was an unmitigated fk up which we are still recovering from. How many other clubs during this window have sold two players for a combined loss of £35m? That in itself takes a degree of commitment. I simply do not believe that they are the parasites you suggest.Simply because as a company they have bought a newspaper costing £70m doesn't necessarily mean they should invest more money in ourselves. FSG may well be be opportunistic but surely that is what any sensible business is all about. It doesn't necessarily mean they are vultures.

As for the Stadium when you look around Anfield more and more properties have been purchased. Speed of progress is painfully slow. I do however believe that work is going on behind the scenes. Perhaps I am wrong. Were FSG concerned about the results of the commitment campaign that permitted season ticket requests to be resubmitted at the cost of £5? Again I don't know.

With regards to the purchase price it also has to be remembered that FSG took on the £35m outstanding architectural fees amassed by H & G which contributed towards their first year losses of £52m. They also took over the massive costs of compensating Rafa and his team. The original sale price of £300m did seem incredibly cheap but I don't remember that many companies/individuals queuing up to buy us and certainly not for a lot more more. A company like any property is worth what somebody is prepared to pay for it. Where does your figure of £500m come from?

I'm not sure what you mean when you say they are possibly charging the club interest on the loan for buying the club. What loan? They paid cash. There is no suggestion of interest payments of the magnitude you suggest in the company accounts. I think that is an unreasonable suggestion.

Sorry for the confusion. You were certainly not being accused of anything.

i wasnt to know you couldnt finish your post mate so i didnt know what to make of the final sentence and gave a silly remark in response. again my apologies as i didnt intentionally set out to insult you.
my views are harsh on fsg i agree but again il admit to being somewhat of a pessimist where they are concerned. they frustrate the life out of me.
they did make mistakes that window in the fee's paid but thats done and dusted and its like they are punishing us for it, we have gone from overpaying to not wanting to pay. they will not match the prices being asked of the clubs whose players they are trying to sign and it dont matter if that price is 30mil(willian) or 6mil (llori). somebody just walks in and goes stick your valuation and here is our's, now hand him over.
every club loses on some players but also gain on others and it in turn balances out. for example allen 15mil + borini 12mil + coutinho 8mil =35mil. lose 50% on both allen and borini but sell coutinho for 25mil and that gives a profit. in fairness for the paltry £5mil for downing we got we would have been better off keeping him. if he was say leaving villa only this season for £5mil you know we would have snapped him up.
all i would like to see from them is better investment on the level that a top club in the world should be. invest in the team, make top 4 = extra revenue or invest in the stadium = extra revenue that will allow us to compete where we should be. that is what i thought they would bring to the table not austerity like measures.
from what i have read on the stadium it seems nothing is concrete from the clubs end and its been mostly driven by the council. they seem more eager to start than us. did H&G not have 2 sets of plans ? one for a redevelopment and another for stanley park. where those plans that bad that every thing had to be scratched amassing to that amount.
rafa left the club months before they bought us so along with the architectural fees was included in the purchase price which was them paying £200mil off the clubs debt and giving an undertaking to pay the rest.the 200mil is interest free and we still pay rbs the remaining. the 200 mil wasnt really free and still has to be paid back and maybe i was again harsh in saying over a short period. in the 1st set of accounts they published i can recall a significant increase in revenue only to be eaten up by administration charges. revenue has increased at a massive rate and in turn that was supposed to benefit the team but yet that progress is minimal despite heavy wage cuts.
the £500 mil i used was actually less than hicks valuation albeit backed up by forbes valuation that year. the point was though that if we where worth that would they have still of been interested. deloitte has us worth around 350mil last year and i doubt they would have been interested in that figure either.
they are much better business men than H&G thats for sure and to grow a brand by that much in 3 years is impressive stuff so we are making money but it still isnt enough to enable the team to compete for the best players and thats why im skeptical. maybe in ten years it will but football is a dog eat dog business and it evolves all the time with bigger players changing the game and if they arent willing to compete now they wont then.
this is all just my opinion mate and i know its a half empty but but borne out of frustration, after 3 years it looks like they just bailed us out rather than be willing to invest enough to boost us up a few rungs. they have accepted we are at the bottom and want us to claw ourselves back up. if they are truly here for the long term then i dont know why they wont gamble a little.
ten years ago none of us would even be concerned about finances at all but now it has completely overtaken the most important thing which is the football.
i do miss them days :nod

by **The Good Yank** » Sat Aug 24, 2013 7:42 pm

I'd dare say that the win against Villa today was actually a "Tactical" win. Major adjustment in philosophy for The Boss to decide to play a sit back approach in the second half to do a couple of things. Limit their ability to hit on the counter. Don't let our CB's get isolated by Benteke.

Wasn't pretty at all, but that's what has to happen sometimes to get the points.

by **damjan193** » Sat Aug 24, 2013 7:49 pm

The Good Yank » Sat Aug 24, 2013 7:42 pm wrote:I'd dare say that the win against Villa today was actually a "Tactical" win. Major adjustment in philosophy for The Boss to decide to play a sit back approach in the second half to do a couple of things. Limit their ability to hit on the counter. Don't let our CB's get isolated by Benteke.

Wasn't pretty at all, but that's what has to happen sometimes to get the points.

Very much different than what was expected that's for certain. Although it was very obvious, he said so himself that he wanted us to sit back in our own half in order to not give Villa space and prevent counter attacks, something which they are good at. But I'm not really a fan of that kind of approach. On another day, Benteke's second shot would have went in and we would have gone home with just a point.

by **red till i die!!** » Sat Aug 24, 2013 7:52 pm

damjan193 » Sat Aug 24, 2013 7:49 pm wrote:
The Good Yank » Sat Aug 24, 2013 7:42 pm wrote:I'd dare say that the win against Villa today was actually a "Tactical" win. Major adjustment in philosophy for The Boss to decide to play a sit back approach in the second half to do a couple of things. Limit their ability to hit on the counter. Don't let our CB's get isolated by Benteke.

Wasn't pretty at all, but that's what has to happen sometimes to get the points.

Very much different than what was expected that's for certain. Although it was very obvious, he said so himself that he wanted us to sit back in our own half in order to not give Villa space and prevent counter attacks, something which they are good at. But I'm not really a fan of that kind of approach. On another day, Benteke's second shot would have went in and we would have gone home with just a point.

sometimes you just got to win ugly lads, we wont have it all our way all the time so have got to expect games like this. we know we would have gotten a point out of that in previous seasons but kudo's to rodgers in what was a good diciplined performance.

by **Benny The Noon** » Sat Aug 24, 2013 7:58 pm

Got to give the boss credit today - played it smart against Benteke - it wasnt pretty by any stretch but it got the job down for him

by **devaney** » Sat Aug 24, 2013 8:00 pm

Red Till I Die - Good post mate and a good read. I know exactly where you are coming from and your reservations about the owners are understandable. I think their conservative approach can be frustrating and let's face it as fans we all struggle with that.

I do think we are progressing however. Last season I think we would have lost today's game and last weeks game against Stoke. During the first half today some of the football and control was impressive to say the very least. The second half certainly showed why we need to spend more before the end of the window.

2nd in the league. Maybe you could top the glass up just a touch....

by **red till i die!!** » Sat Aug 24, 2013 8:16 pm

its overflowing as i type :nod

even to the point that il have to change my shirt soon :nod

it wouldnt be so bad if they didnt feed us the money to match anyone and we dont need to talk our actions will do it for us. but any way rodgers is doing ok with what they are giving him and they have to realise the potential is there this season if they can fully back him.
delighted with the position but just getting a little worried we might lose out on goal difference come next may :laugh:

Liverpool FC Forum

Brendan Rodgers thread (signs extended contract)

Who is online