NESV/Fenway Sports Group: Owners of LFC

A convenient contradiction.
We are told FSG have made our club a financial success in the time they have been here yet when the rewards of financial success are pointed out elsewhere we are supposedly playing "catch up" and cannot afford the same expenditure.
Another "long term" projection maybe?

There's no contradiction - we have been playing catch up. As I explained earlier, this is a matter of public record: our revenues etc are published in public and can be easily accessed by anyone with an internet connection!

These same records show how we are closing the gap financially on the richer clubs. Again, it's a matter of public record and not anyone's opinion.

This is due to a number of reasons - we have a good manager who develops players well; we are getting better at selling for good prices (getting over £140m for Coutinho was fantastic business in my opinion); and we are now earning more through additional revenues brought about as a result of the work that FSG have been doing.

There's no contradiction - we have been playing catch up. As I explained earlier, this is a matter of public record: our revenues etc are published in public and can be easily accessed by anyone with an internet connection!

These same records show how we are closing the gap financially on the richer clubs. Again, it's a matter of public record and not anyone's opinion.

This is due to a number of reasons - we have a good manager who develops players well; we are getting better at selling for good prices (getting over £140m for Coutinho was fantastic business in my opinion); and we are now earning more through additional revenues brought about as a result of the work that FSG have been doing.

We lost our way when the Premier League was set up, and Parry ignored the commercial opportunities, because he was basically a lazy b***ard who thought we could cruise along on history alone.
Anyone who denies this is living a fantasy version of history.

H&G also did a surprising amount of good work on the commercial side (about the only good they did do), but FSG have stepped it up a lot.

I find myself wondering if their preferred option from the time they took over (Klopp, they wanted him from the start) had been available, how much further we could have come.

Hodgson was useless, KK wasted a fair bit of money, and it appears that BR liked to battle the scouts and analysts rather than work with them.

Klopp on the other hand, is very much a team player, and contrary to what people on here think, has been delighted with Edwards contribution.

The framework was in place for Klopp when he came in, and he has certainly made the most of it imo.

Finally, can people stop with this sh*t that they try to push where they say "we sold players to finance purchases".
If anyone can name one player that was forced out of the door, sold against their will, rather than the reality of 3 players acting the c**t to get big money moves, I'm all ears.

That's one side of it however would we have signed the players we have if those hadn't been sold irregardless of how or why they went?

Unless you're suggesting the yacht was paid for by LFC, how is that even remotely relevant to the question of whether or not FSG have invested in the club?

Not saying that we paid all of the money for the Yacht, but i'll be will to bet my left nut that some of it came from LFC

A convenient contradiction.
We are told FSG have made our club a financial success in the time they have been here yet when the rewards of financial success are pointed out elsewhere we are supposedly playing "catch up" and cannot afford the same expenditure.
Another "long term" projection maybe?

erm yes, we were so far behind Man Utd in a commercial and financial sense that yes it takes a long long time to catch up, I would actually say that we are ahead of schedule at the moment, in terms of players we can buy and results we are having and that is mostly down to Jürgen.

That's one side of it however would we have signed the players we have if those hadn't been sold irregardless of how or why they went?

Can't you say that of any club though, the vast majority of clubs have to sell before they can buy, even big boys like Barca and Real Madrid otherwise you end up with an insanely large squad and wage bill. Anyway even if you factor in the sale of Coutinho we have spent £110m since January, are we perhaps planning some sales??

Signing VVD and Keita had nothing to do with Coutinho sale because we bought both of them before we sold Coutinho, you also have no shred of evidence to prove otherwise. It's just assumptions from your part.

Follow the bread crumbs... The offer for both player was made once we knew Coutinho was going to Barca, and how much for

Not saying that we paid all of the money for the Yacht, but i'll be will to bet my left nut that some of it came from LFC

How much do you think as a percentage and why would it matter anyway? For example don't you ever use your salary to buy things?

Follow the bread crumbs... The offer for both player was made once we knew Coutinho was going to Barca, and how much for

Please reply to my post about the extra £110m we've spent of the Coutinho money, how do you account for it?

That's one side of it however would we have signed the players we have if those hadn't been sold irregardless of how or why they went?

Maybe, maybe not.
Only Klopp and the board know that.

It doesn't change the fact though, that we haven't sold players who wanted to stay here. Quite the opposite; we did everything we could to get them to stay.

Players move on, new players come in.
We got good money for them, although not as much as people suggest due to add-ons etc.
We pumped the money back into the squad and Klopp has done very well in this regard.
KK wasted a lot, BR wasted a fair bit.
Klopp, by my recollection hasn't wasted any and his signings (recommended by the supposedly sh*t committee) have all been pretty good so far.
Let's not forget, Klopp wasn't keen on Salah initially, but the "sh*t committee" persuaded him otherwise.

To me, context is important when it comes to net spend; players wanted out, we got good money for them, sometimes the money has been used well, sometimes badly, but since they came in we've mostly been on an upwards curve.

Maybe, maybe not.
Only Klopp and the board know that.

It doesn't change the fact though, that we haven't sold players who wanted to stay here. Quite the opposite; we did everything we could to get them to stay.

Players move on, new players come in.
We got good money for them, although not as much as people suggest due to add-ons etc.
We pumped the money back into the squad and Klopp has done very well in this regard.
KK wasted a lot, BR wasted a fair bit.
Klopp, by my recollection hasn't wasted any and his signings (recommended by the supposedly sh*t committee) have all been pretty good so far.
Let's not forget, Klopp wasn't keen on Salah initially, but the "sh*t committee" persuaded him otherwise.

To me, context is important when it comes to net spend; players wanted out, we got good money for them, sometimes the money has been used well, sometimes badly, but since they came in we've mostly been on an upwards curve.

Only slightly iffy signing from Klopp was Grujic and even he might come good.

It's widely recognised by sources who aren't part of LFC / FSG that the interest rates on those loans are very favourable and we'd have struggled to get similar rates elsewhere. It's a business and FSG are accountable to their shareholders in other branches of the business. It's not some fantasy lala-land scenario where work that costs over £100 million just happens magically.

I asked you how else the club should pay for this and you replied that wasn't the point. I disagree - it's entirely the point. If not through the club's funds and borrowing from FSG, how else does this get paid for?

You are obviously and conveniently once again missing stuff here, I did state quite clearly that Anfield's extension was facilitated by way of a loan from FSG.

For me , with a few exceptions FSG have pretty much run the club in the way they said they would, like it or not that's the way they have worked

JFC i think i killed a few brain cells reading the last few pages today.

typical stuey, when faced with facts react with ad hominem argument

What the hell are you rambling about?

Your comment on the 80's is accepted fact.
Post something relevant instead of historical comment everyone is aware of and has little or no bearing on the subject matter.

That's because the stadium expansion and other work in developing the club's infrastructure costs money and also needs to be paid for.

Living beyond our means was never the right approach - 'we still only invest on whatever we make from player sales' - ask Leeds fans what they think about spending money the club hasn't got.

The owners have done a good job on you haven't they.

Ah, that famous Leeds united line. The thing is though, football has moved on from 15 years since Leeds where in the top flight. The money in the game now is insane.

Liverpool/FSG have plenty of money to spend on transfers so don't be so foolish to think otherwise. We have the money from player sales, which is re invested, but we also have the money from the new tv deals and our prize money from the CL. Not to mention all the other revenue the club generates because of how big it is.

The owners have done a good job on you haven't they.

Ah, that famous Leeds united line. The thing is though, football has moved on from 15 years since Leeds where in the top flight. The money in the game now is insane.

Liverpool/FSG have plenty of money to spend on transfers so don't be so foolish to think otherwise. We have the money from player sales, which is re invested, but we also have the money from the new tv deals and our prize money from the CL. Not to mention all the other revenue the club generates because of how big it is.

Forbes published this list of most valuable football teams and we are ranked 8th as most valuable.

In terms of profit we are also 8th (out of the top 10) but we do better as a % of revenue, coming in at 5th.

Spurs is pretty interesting. They have the 10th highest revenue but 3rd highest income in $ and highest income as % of revenue. Their owners must suck beyond belief.

https://www.forbes.com/soccer-valuations/list/#tab:overall

Signing VVD and Keita had nothing to do with Coutinho sale because we bought both of them before we sold Coutinho, you also have no shred of evidence to prove otherwise. It's just assumptions from your part.

For argument's sake, let's say every penny were from player sales so why is it relevant? how is that a horrible thing? I remember the argument on here when Rodgers was buying sh*te players that it was FSG's fault and how cheapskates they were for not giving Rodgers money. They made Alisson and VVD the highest earners, how can you say FSG don't want to put a lot of money in players? They also offered Coutinho sh*t load of money (even Klopp admited that) but he refused. You're just assuming things.

No one is denying Klopp is the real deal, he's fantastic and he is attracting a lot of players to the club, but again he isn't the one with money, the owners are and they are the one supporting him with it. That's what every supporter want, the club owners supporting the manager in the transfer market.

Keita was bought this summer. The deal was made last year, but the transactions go through this year. Therefore, after the coutinho sale.

The only evidence needed is our net spend. Before this summer was it negative under Klopp?

Even after we've spent 200m or so this summer, our net spend under klopp is still considerably low. And with half a dozen or so players certain to leave it will go even lower too.

I've explained it about ten times already today but Alisson and Keita would not have signed for Liverpool if it wasn't for Jürgen klopp. So instead of signing two world class players, we would have signed four or five alright ones for the same fee if we had a different manager like Rodgers. The same money would have been spent, but on dross. It's klopp who is bringing a certain calibre of player here - NOT FSG.

JFC i think i killed a few brain cells reading the last few pages today.

Have a sit down cause I don't think you've got them to spare

Have a sit down cause I don't think you've got them to spare

Holy crap, that’s what we’re down to here? Are you 12?

The owners have done a good job on you haven't they.

Ah, that famous Leeds united line. The thing is though, football has moved on from 15 years since Leeds where in the top flight. The money in the game now is insane.

Liverpool/FSG have plenty of money to spend on transfers so don't be so foolish to think otherwise. We have the money from player sales, which is re invested, but we also have the money from the new tv deals and our prize money from the CL. Not to mention all the other revenue the club generates because of how big it is.

Yet some are quite happy with the proposition that the capitol you indicate evaporates and is never used to improve the prospects of LFC, could that be described as creaming the pot I wonder?

Improving profit margin stats and increasing dividends does little for our football status.

Cough cough Suarez and Coutinho cough cough players of note.

So the manager only exerts 1% of influence then, in that case what in the name of f**k are you banging on about with Jürgen being so important then? especially when we have just shelled out 2 record breaking transfer sums, and no it doesn't matter where that money came from it was still paid out.

Instead of hitting the reply button instantly and waffling on talking rubbish with a load of smoke coming off your keyboard, just slow down, take a second, and read what I'm actually saying before you respond. You said nothing I say makes sense. But I've made 2000 or so posts and have 1000 little likes. A 50% ratio. So it seems most people understand what I say but you don't.

I didn't say klopp is 1% influence.

What I said was, in today's football world money talks 99% of the time. But fortunately for Liverpool, we are in that other tiny 1%, and the reason we are in that tiny 1% is because of Jürgen Klopp. It doesn't matter that we can't pay the highest wages at the moment, because we have a manager who everybody wants to play for. We are part of a project, klopps project, and everybody wants to be a part of it.

Both Keita and Van Dijk could have got more wages elsewhere. Do they care? No. Because they want to play for Klopp. As I keep saying, it's that bloody simple. If we had a different manager in charge then they would have chosen the wages instead.

Just imagine we didn't have klopp and we still had Brendan Rodgers. We approach Van Dijk and say come and play for us big Virgil. But both Chelsea and city do the same thing and they offer him higher wages.

What do you think he's going to do? Look mate, you can kid yourself all you want and say he still would have signed for us and you can talk about our history and you can talk about how great anfield is on a European night, but I think your incredibly naive if you genuinely believe that.

Truth is, I don't actually think you do believe that. I think you know full well we wouldn't have a chance in hell at signing somebody like Van Dijk if it wasn't for Jürgen. So I don't know why you're still quoting me and arguing just for arguments sake.

Let's just hope Jürgen klopp is at Liverpool for a long, long time because I'm absolutely certain that when he decides to leave, presuming FSG are still here and presuming we appoint somebody like F***ing Eddie Howe to replace him, we won't be persuading anybody of a high standard to sign for us and we will go back to signing sh*te like downing and benteke and being miserable in F***ing 8th.

FSG have backed every manager under their ownership with the money they've made from sales. But that's it. So going back to the original point of money talks, when Brendan wanted Sanchez or Costa or Willian did FSG throw more money at them to persuade them to sign? No.

Have FSG thrown money at Virgil and Keita for them to sign? No. Because other clubs offered them more money. But we're in that little 1% because money doesn't matter when you have klopp as manager. They want to play for him.

Without klopp, we're fu**ed.

All walked out - Camino was brilliant, but tiring.
2,000km over about 12 weeks.

Wow thats some going!

Oh and welcome back.