Liverpool FC Forum

by **Redrider** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 10:47 am

The World Bank, might be very appropriate. LFC has been a bit like an under-performing nation over the last few years !! Our GNE has been well in excess of our GDP and GMR !! :laugh:

by **FrankM** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 10:56 am

Has anyone heard who the "Liverpool Legend" is that is supposed to be involved in the L4 consortium. Also has Jeffries ever given any views on the new stadium.

I must say that as someone who has supported the club for 40 years I would have great sympathy with David Moores who along with his family has been prepared to put his money where his mouth is. However as stat elsewhere we are standing still at the moment and we need to decide if we want that situation to continue or if we want to start catching up.
We have the manager in place but if we are unable to back his judgement up with financial clout then we will see the others move out of sight.
From what I read both Morgan and Jeffries are lifelong fans, and if they are then I believe they can only have good intentions for the club.
It would be nice to know exactly what they are offering.

by **LFC #1** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 11:32 am

John Barnes' Granny wrote:
peewee wrote:
The Canadian Red Army wrote:
John Barnes' Granny wrote:It looks like Morgan is becoming a major player once more.

BTW, I hear Morgan is worth 350m. However, does he lead a consortium who will front some of the money or does it all come from his own pocket? Buying a controlling interest in Liverpool, providing the manager with some hard cash to spend and putting a decent financial plan for the stadium in place would cost at least 100 to 150million in the short to medium term. I think I have heard that some of Morgan's investment money comes from other parties.

world bank
thats where some money would come from

do you actually know what the world bank does?

Yeah, peewee, I might nip down to the World Bank this afternoon to get a new car loan.

by **LFC #1** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 11:40 am

For me, if we are going to take a big influx of cash I think The Morgan deal would be the best one.

He is a Liverpool fan and would act in the best interests of the club, and he has said:

"I have got an offer on the table and you can have the money in the bank by Christmas to give money to Rafael Benitez and get the new stadium on the go. Please accept my offer."

the things he mentioned are the major financial issues at the club at the moment and with a major influx of cash from Morgan, these things could be dealth with.

However the Moores family have been involved with the club for a long time now and rest assured as Parry said in his speech at the AGM, the board will act in the long-term interests of the club and they will not let Morgan in if they don't see it in the best interests of the club, it's fans and shareholders.

Parry etc are smart and are not money hingry, they have rejected offers (rightfully so IMO) from various sources, namely the Thai bid from Thaksin Shinawatra, so if a deal is struck one which is heopfully to the benefit of the club both in the short and long term.

by **Ciggy** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 11:59 am

LFC #1 wrote:For me, if we are going to take a big influx of cash I think The Morgan deal would be the best one.

He is a Liverpool fan and would act in the best interests of the club, and he has said:

"I have got an offer on the table and you can have the money in the bank by Christmas to give money to Rafael Benitez and get the new stadium on the go. Please accept my offer."

the things he mentioned are the major financial issues at the club at the moment and with a major influx of cash from Morgan, these things could be dealth with.

However the Moores family have been involved with the club for a long time now and rest assured as Parry said in his speech at the AGM, the board will act in the long-term interests of the club and they will not let Morgan in if they don't see it in the best interests of the club, it's fans and shareholders.

Parry etc are smart and are not money hingry, they have rejected offers (rightfully so IMO) from various sources, namely the Thai bid from Thaksin Shinawatra, so if a deal is struck one which is heopfully to the benefit of the club both in the short and long term.

But hes all for the ground share so noway would any of us want that :glare:

by **LFC #1** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 12:04 pm

didn't realise that, bit of a conundrum then.

edit:

yes, now I remeber, he wants to build the new one but groundshare with Everton while it's being built doesn't he?

by **parchpea** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 12:09 pm

He may personally be in favour of a groundshare but the board where unanimous by all accounts in giving it a big no last night. If the fans are also dead against it then theres no way it will go through. You also have to consider oppostion at Everton which Im sure will mirror majority opinion at Anfield. I would be astounded if it went through whether Morgan likes it or not.

by **LFC #1** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 12:10 pm

good point parchpea.

by **Leonmc0708** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 1:16 pm

Morgan is a media whore who will have us mid table with Curbishly or O,Neill running the team onto oblivion.

This can not be allowed to happen.Long term is what matters. Not quick millions in front of your eyes to buy some new players, which is what I've seen on the forum.

All they see is £50m here and £50 there and they think we'll be in to buy Ronaldinho and fu@k knows who else they've seen on CM.

Morgan to me is just flashing the cash. It's like me winning £2m on the lottery tomorrow and buying up Wrexham. Okay, I've saved the ground and the club, but I'll have nothing left to invest in the club long term. Morgan hasn't got a long term plan.

In Moores and Parry we trust. We have done for years and we will continue to do so.

by **maximus** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 1:22 pm

Leonmc0708 wrote:Morgan hasn't got a long term plan.

Sorry Leon mate,

Don't want to pi55 on your bonfire and all that, but how do you know that? I would asume someone who is looking to invest that much money in a club with aview to taking over, does not do so, wihout a long trerm plan.

I am as sceptical as the next man about this whole 'takeover' issue, but how do you really know that Morgan has no long term plan??

by **Leonmc0708** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 1:24 pm

Maximus, he has lived the whole thing thru the media, talking first to them to win the support of fans.

If he had some long term plan, he would have laid it out to win the votes, but none has come across..

by **The Canadian Red Army** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 1:53 pm

would you rather see this beautiful club with a rich history and solid players and a great coach be ruined by some dumb americans or would you want to see it stay in england with the bid of morgan
we could also go with a co-operation between morgan and moores which would take his share down to 25% but morgan would have 26% share because of the influx of money coming into the club this could also be a logical path seeing moores still wants to be around liverpool

by **JBG** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 1:53 pm

I think change is necessary, but it has to be the right change.

Nobody doubts Moores' love for the club and the decency of the man, but there are a number of things he must answer for:

1. Graeme Souness' regime and the waste of vast sums of money (in early 1990s terms) on players who cost the club dearly.

2. The mistake of appointing Roy Evans and again, the misuse of funds on certain players.

3. The Roy Evans-Gerard Houllier disaster.

4. Sanctioning some of Houllier's spending (Ziege and Diouff immediately spring to mind but the Diomonde transfer is a scandal that nobody talks about).

5. The neglect of the stadium issue in the 1990s when money was there.

Moores is a good man, and he provided all of his managers with hard cash. However, he showed blind faith in his managers, and ultimately all of the major appointments and signings were major failures of judgement, and as the big kahuna, the buck has to stop with him. I feel sorry for him as he tried his best and always backed his managers (only Man UTD and Arsenal in recent years have shown as much faith in their managers as we have) both with words and hard cash, but when things fail as badly as they have, the person ultimately in power has to take the blame. Thats just a fact of life.

The stadium issue has always been there. I remember even as a kid in the 1980s, people were talking about expanding Anfield (back then it was a couple of old grannies in the neighbouring houses that proved problematic). The stadium debate is not new, its always been there. What boils my blood was that in 1992, 1993 and 1994 Man UTD, who were a coming club but were no where as powerful off the field back then as they are now, announced a series of plans to upgrade Old Trafford. There was talk at Liverpool of doing the same, to match them blow for blow, but the necessary will was never there. It should have been dealt with back then. Instead, its been left to fester and now it is the dominant issue surrounding the club.

While he was a good chairman in certain ways, overall people will always associate his tenure with the long barren run of the 1990s and the early to mid 00s.

What is most important to me is that we get a viable and satisfactory plan in place for the new stadium, and the cost of it doesn't break the club. Our debt needs to be managed. We need to start making more money from merchadising abroad (thats what the foreign investors are really after). The academy needs to be encouraged and new home grown talent groomed. I'm prepared to try and scrape by on minimal transfer funds for the next couple of years if it means that the current structures are bolstered and a decent stadium is put in place, with the object of closing the gap financially with Man UTD and other competitors in the long term.

The new stadium will be a severe drain on resources, but Alex Ferguson was curtailed in his spending for a couple of seasons in the early 1990s as Old Trafford was upgraded, and for the most part, Arsene Wenger has had to sell to buy as Ashton Grove is being built. There can be no more Diomedes, Cheyrous and Barmbys: pointless expenditure of money simply because it was available. Instead the money needs to be spent wisely and cautiously.

by **The Canadian Red Army** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 1:54 pm

Redrider wrote:The World Bank, might be very appropriate. LFC has been a bit like an under-performing nation over the last few years !! Our GNE has been well in excess of our GDP and GMR !!

HAHAHAHAHA

by **The Canadian Red Army** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 1:56 pm

peewee wrote:
The Canadian Red Army wrote:
John Barnes' Granny wrote:It looks like Morgan is becoming a major player once more.

BTW, I hear Morgan is worth 350m. However, does he lead a consortium who will front some of the money or does it all come from his own pocket? Buying a controlling interest in Liverpool, providing the manager with some hard cash to spend and putting a decent financial plan for the stadium in place would cost at least 100 to 150million in the short to medium term. I think I have heard that some of Morgan's investment money comes from other parties.

world bank
thats where some money would come from

do you actually know what the world bank does?

world bank is also for larger corperations
microsoft had money from world bank and a bank in china
and holland i believe when it was it its growth stage

Liverpool FC Forum

Rick parry agm talk - Intresting read......

Who is online