NESV/Fenway Sports Group: Owners of LFC

Could be wrong but isn't every bit of money that an owner puts into a football club an interest free loan? Pretty sure Chelsea were in debt to Abramovich before he wrote it off. Its not to say FSG are going to write it off, but I think it's wrong to disparage them because it's an interest free loan when thats exactly how all owners put their money into a club...

Nah mate Hicks and Gillett put money into the club but we had to pay the interest.

Nah mate Hicks and Gillett put money into the club but we had to pay the interest.

Ah well, when it comes to those cu*ts I'm not surprised by that at all mate!

they are a bunch of shysters in it for as much as they can make, they take the cheap option at every turn, even this stadium redevelopment was the cheapest option on the table and was something they had to do under the terms of the purchase of the club - even the mob at Old Trafford realised a few years ago they need to reinvest some of the money the club is turning over into the squad. It is as clear as day that they are biding biding their time until they feel the clubs value is at the top of the curve, they have no interest in sustained success that doesnt fit their business model.

Nah mate Hicks and Gillett put money into the club but we had to pay the interest.

We were more entertaining under those cu*ts & had a solid team of players......*washes out mouth*

Haha what?

This whole idea is to make more money from match-days and increase capacity to be competitive with our rivals. The initial investment will return a profit through increase £££ on match-days. That profit goes back to the owners in one way or another. Whether it is a "loan", "investment" or "payment" the increased revenue as a result of the upgrade is going back to the owners regardless.

The key point is, they put the money up themselves and saved tens of millions in doing so.

Are you criticising this strategy of investing their own money and saving a significant sum of money?

Again, what would you have done?

They wrote off £59m from the H&G failed plans and added £120m from their own pocket to pay for the upgrade.

What would you have done that is different to this? What do you think is a better solution for the club than this?

You need to understand the difference between a loan and an investment

 When they loan us money they get it both way, the value of the club goes up and they get the money back (providing they dont sell the club before the debt is paid off)

If they invested money the value of the club would increase but they would not get the money back.

If the initial investment had only gone up a bit I would say fair enough ! But the investment has gone up be several hundred million, they could pay for it themselves and sitting on hundred of millions in profit

The £59m was an asset, they wrote of an asset. The money owed for the H/G failed plan was payed back to the bank by the club.
I think we owed £50m to a bank when the bought us and we paid that money back.

They wrote off £59m from the H&G failed plans and added £120m from their own pocket to pay for the upgrade.

What would you have done that is different to this? What do you think is a better solution for the club than this?

What I would have done is irrelevant.
JW Henry & Co are accomplished businessmen who made all the right noises six years ago but have failed to deliver.
Not surprising when they see fit to loan the club money and set transfer limitations instead of investing in the acknowledged asset that LFC represents.
This has been the case for six years yet you still parrot fashion, endeavour to convince they are capable of bringing back the glory days on a budget.

What I would have done is irrelevant.
JW Henry & Co are accomplished businessmen who made all the right noises six years ago but have failed to deliver.
Not surprising when they see fit to loan the club money and set transfer limitations instead of investing in the acknowledged asset that LFC represents.
This has been the case for six years yet you still parrot fashion, endeavour to convince they are capable of bringing back the glory days on a budget.

Failed to deliver?

* Increased Anfield capacity - Check.

* Spent sh*t ton on transfers - Check.

You would argue that most of the money available was from outgoing players, but then again Torres was leaving anyway. Suarez wanted to leave the season before the title challenge; for Arsenal, but instead we blocked the move. Sterling, the less I say the better.

* Appointed a World Class Manager - Check.

* Increased Revenues - Check.

* Increased club worth to 1 Billion - Check.

Right, the owners haven't delivered.

Is anyone really deluded enough to think that FSG care one bit about the club outside of the profits they make.

They are businessmen, that's what they are and what they do. To expect them to be romantic football lovers and owners that are going to immerse themselves in the culture of the sport and the city is just silly.

Have they operated financially any different than they said they would aside from some soundbytes about how we can compete with anyone? Nope. And those soundbytes were purely rah rah crap to try and appease discomfort among fans. Really don't see much use in discussing them at all as its a time wasting endeavor.

Failed to deliver?

* Increased Anfield capacity - Check.

* Spent sh*t ton on transfers - Check.

You would argue that most of the money available was from outgoing players, but then again Torres was leaving anyway. Suarez wanted to leave the season before the title challenge; for Arsenal, but instead we blocked the move. Sterling, the less I say the better.

* Appointed a World Class Manager - Check.

* Increased Revenues - Check.

* Increased club worth to 1 Billion - Check.

Right, the owners haven't delivered.

I didn't see the line in there addressing the actual results on the pitch.....you know, trophies and titles. Did you just forget to add that in there?

Not sure what they have failed to deliver on myself.

Just because managers have pissed away millions on pointless transfers, the money was still there to spend.

I don't think anyone disputes that any owner of any business is primarily in it to make money. A football club is no different, and when you've paid 300 million quid for something you'd want a return.

Fans don't mind the value of their initial investment increasing I don't think. Nor do they mind them taking some money out within reason. They should though as an absolute minimum give us the chance to compete for the league while they're doing it. That doesn't mean we should be buying Paul Pogba, but it does mean we shouldn't need to have a negative net spend in a window following an 8th place finish.

I know people will say "ah but Jürgen says the money is there" and I know he has. I wonder though just what are the terms of the managers employment, what sort of expectations are being asked of him. By that, I mean I'm pretty sure Mourinho and Conte will have been told in no uncertain terms that they are expected to finish AT LEAST in the top four. Now we've slashed our squad and wage bill though, I've no doubt we can survive perfectly well without the Champions League. The owners probably don't give a bollocks whether we get into it or not in truth, and as such are perfectly happy to buy into Jürgen's long term building plan.

Me though, I'd be saying to a manager "look, there's 100 million quid, now get us right back up there if you can". Sounds a bit more urgent to me than "you take your time fella, let us know if you need any cash".

If we DO get into the Champions League we'll obviously need a much bigger squad to cope with all the games. Is anyone confident these guys will stump up the cash, saying "no worries Jürgen we saved shitloads last season"? I'm not.

That doesn't mean we should be buying Paul Pogba, but it does mean we shouldn't need to have a negative net spend in a window following an 8th place finish.

Why does everyone have such a big problem with finishing the transfer window with a negative spend? Did you not see the state of that squad before the summer window opened? Of course we were going to be selling more than we bought.

If Wijnaldum was a £25m left back people wouldn't be complaining about it so much.

I didn't see the line in there addressing the actual results on the pitch.....you know, trophies and titles. Did you just forget to add that in there?

No mate that's for the manager and players to deal with. I'd take it up with them...

We currently have;

3 keepers
9 defenders
12 midfielders
5 forwards


Yes, that's a very "thin" squad.
29 players, before we even look at the 9 players out on loan.

http://www.liverpoolfc.com/team/first-team

We currently have;

3 keepers
9 defenders
12 midfielders
5 forwards


Yes, that's a very "thin" squad.
29 players, before we even look at the 9 players out on loan.

http://www.liverpoolfc.com/team/first-team

Does look thin on paper  in the CB dept but without Euroean football some of those may not even get a game.

And if we are short into the season there in the Jan window.

Does look thin on paper but without Euroean football some of those may not even get a game.

And if we are short into the season there in the Jan window.

Hes being sarcastic - correct me if I'm wrong Swab! - it's a far from "thin" squad! Hull have about 16 first team players, now that's a thin squad!

Hes being sarcastic - correct me if I'm wrong Swab! - it's a far from "thin" squad! Hull have about 16 first team players, now that's a thin squad!

Yeah I know mate because I forgot to add in the CB dept which I have corrected.
What with the Sakho incident and young Joe not yet having played a full PL game at CB.

Honestly think some fans want our owner's to go daft spend all the money and go bust alah; Glasgow rangers, Leeds & Blackburn, all massive clubs who spent too much and almost died, none are playing top flight footi (well gers are back just).

This is klopps 1st proper transfer window, he has stripped the squad back and added some class to 1st team.

Lets see where it takes us. YNWA

Hes being sarcastic - correct me if I'm wrong Swab! - it's a far from "thin" squad! Hull have about 16 first team players, now that's a thin squad!

Yes, I was being a bit sarky.

How anyone can describe our squad as "thin" is beyond me.
Lacking in quality in a couple of position? Yes.
Thin? No.

Honestly think some fans want our owner's to go daft spend all the money and go bust alah; Glasgow rangers, Leeds & Blackburn, all massive clubs who spent too much and almost died, none are playing top flight footi (well gers are back just).

This is klopps 1st proper transfer window, he has stripped the squad back and added some class to 1st team.

Lets see where it takes us. YNWA

What I don't get either is that when we do spend millions on players that don't work out the net spend argument is mysteriously absent and outgoing spend used against any individual(s) some people see fit to target like Brendan last year.

NET spend is well and truly back on the agenda now make no mistake about it, it's official! Under Rodgers it never got a mention, the only number you needed to know about was the "spunked 300 million" (on most of the players who are still in our first team amongst others). Now, my guess is NET spend will be talked about more and more going forward.

It's correct too, it should be IMHO. it'd be daft to say "Jürgen has just spunked 70 million quid" or whatever it is while not taking into account all the money he's brought in.

Failed to deliver?

* Increased Anfield capacity - Check.

Paid for by the club - check.

* Spent sh*t ton on transfers - Check.

Suarez and Sterling are good examples - £130+m and mediocrity signed as replacement, JW Henry & Co are unwilling to pay for quality to the detriment of the side - check.

You would argue that most of the money available was from outgoing players, but then again Torres was leaving anyway. Suarez wanted to leave the season before the title challenge; for Arsenal, but instead we blocked the move. Sterling, the less I say the better.

Torres, Suarez, Sterling, all replaced with mediocracy or potential. Where did the money saved go?

* Appointed a World Class Manager - Check.

The less said about FSG's farcical manager record the better.
They had to get it right eventually, Klopp's credentials are beyond question, can the same be said for JWH & Co?
The jury is still out on the issue of Klopp being successful with the present owners in charge.

* Increased Revenues - Check.

* Increased club worth to 1 Billion - Check.

Right, the owners haven't delivered.

Still no trophies after six years - check.

The FSG business model is floundering in a football context.
Buy the Financial Times if that's your thing instead of the Football Echo.