NESV/Fenway Sports Group: Owners of LFC

Empire of the Kop
Empire of the Kop
Liverpool’s net owner funding is ‘second lowest in the division’ – The Athletic
Story by Peter Kenny Jones, Empire of the Kop • 1h ago

Liverpool’s net owner funding is ‘second lowest in the division’ – The Athletic
Liverpool’s net owner funding is ‘second lowest in the division’ – The Athletic
© PA Images/Alamy Images
There is a certain split within the Liverpool fanbase of fans who think we have good owners and those who think quite strongly otherwise, although some recent evidence seems to make a strong argument against those in charge of our club.

A study in The Athletic found: ‘Liverpool’s net owner funding (the money put into the club by owners FSG, less the money taken out in the form of dividends) in the last five years is the second lowest in the division at negative £37million. By contrast, Manchester City’s owners have pumped £81m into the club in that time — and a whole lot more over the last decade.

‘A lack of external funding to augment the internal cash engines has hamstrung Liverpool somewhat. It’s something that needs to change if they are to maintain their position as one of the top clubs in English football and one of the best internal cash generators in the world’.

In summary, FSG are not putting much money into the club – in fact they are taking money and that is certainly not the best position for a football club to be in.


FSG taking money out of the club NO!!!!!!!!!! await usual repsonses

Empire of the Kop
Empire of the Kop
Liverpool’s net owner funding is ‘second lowest in the division’ – The Athletic
Story by Peter Kenny Jones, Empire of the Kop • 1h ago

Liverpool’s net owner funding is ‘second lowest in the division’ – The Athletic
Liverpool’s net owner funding is ‘second lowest in the division’ – The Athletic
© PA Images/Alamy Images
There is a certain split within the Liverpool fanbase of fans who think we have good owners and those who think quite strongly otherwise, although some recent evidence seems to make a strong argument against those in charge of our club.

A study in The Athletic found: ‘Liverpool’s net owner funding (the money put into the club by owners FSG, less the money taken out in the form of dividends) in the last five years is the second lowest in the division at negative £37million. By contrast, Manchester City’s owners have pumped £81m into the club in that time — and a whole lot more over the last decade.

‘A lack of external funding to augment the internal cash engines has hamstrung Liverpool somewhat. It’s something that needs to change if they are to maintain their position as one of the top clubs in English football and one of the best internal cash generators in the world’.

In summary, FSG are not putting much money into the club – in fact they are taking money and that is certainly not the best position for a football club to be in.


FSG taking money out of the club NO!!!!!!!!!! await usual repsonses

It’s called loan repayments for the stand build 🙄


https://twitter.com/gregorypcordell/status/1671220856465260552?s=46&t=_4uI6CiVRqge8WqM7F37Iw

Empire of the Kop
Empire of the Kop
Liverpool’s net owner funding is ‘second lowest in the division’ – The Athletic
Story by Peter Kenny Jones, Empire of the Kop • 1h ago

Liverpool’s net owner funding is ‘second lowest in the division’ – The Athletic
Liverpool’s net owner funding is ‘second lowest in the division’ – The Athletic
© PA Images/Alamy Images
There is a certain split within the Liverpool fanbase of fans who think we have good owners and those who think quite strongly otherwise, although some recent evidence seems to make a strong argument against those in charge of our club.

A study in The Athletic found: ‘Liverpool’s net owner funding (the money put into the club by owners FSG, less the money taken out in the form of dividends) in the last five years is the second lowest in the division at negative £37million. By contrast, Manchester City’s owners have pumped £81m into the club in that time — and a whole lot more over the last decade.

‘A lack of external funding to augment the internal cash engines has hamstrung Liverpool somewhat. It’s something that needs to change if they are to maintain their position as one of the top clubs in English football and one of the best internal cash generators in the world’.

In summary, FSG are not putting much money into the club – in fact they are taking money and that is certainly not the best position for a football club to be in.


FSG taking money out of the club NO!!!!!!!!!! await usual repsonses

They aren't taking money per se...however what they appear to be doing is in loaning the club money to pay for infrastructure items instead of paying for it themselves, they are essentially building equity with zero risk our outlay on their own.

What I would like to see is for them to say "Hey, we love this club and we know that some day if we sell we will make all of this money back so we are going to pay out of pocket for the Anfield Expansion and the Kirkby training center, that way the club can use the money that they would be repaying on loans to invest in the squad".

They aren't taking money per se...however what they appear to be doing is in loaning the club money to pay for infrastructure items instead of paying for it themselves, they are essentially building equity with zero risk our outlay on their own.

What I would like to see is for them to say "Hey, we love this club and we know that some day if we sell we will make all of this money back so we are going to pay out of pocket for the Anfield Expansion and the Kirkby training center, that way the club can use the money that they would be repaying on loans to invest in the squad".

Spot on that and something I’ve been saying for a very long time , we are basically paying for them to renovate their own house which they will take all the profit from , had this same argument time and again but some are so blind they can’t or won’t see it .

Spot on that and something I’ve been saying for a very long time , we are basically paying for them to renovate their own house which they will take all the profit from , had this same argument time and again but some are so blind they can’t or won’t see it .

Is it not our house ?

When the increased revenue comes in from the stands do we get the money ? Do we not benefit from the stands being rebuilt


Any stadium build is financed by loans or credit lines and then the income from that is paying off the finances

Is it not our house ?

When the increased revenue comes in from the stands do we get the money ? Do we not benefit from the stands being rebuilt


Any stadium build is financed by loans or credit lines and then the income from that is paying off the finances

As I said blind or just don’t want to see , who will benefit more money wise us or them .

As I said blind or just don’t want to see , who will benefit more money wise us or them .

We will 🤷‍♂️ we get the funds every single year from it

We will 🤷‍♂️ we get the funds every single year from it

Not till it’s paid off we won’t , like I said been down this road not entertaining it again you carry on sucking johns pipe if you want I’m off .

We will 🤷‍♂️ we get the funds every single year from it

And if they paid for it instead of loaning the club money, we'd also get the funds NOW instead of having to wait until it's paid off.

Not till it’s paid off we won’t , like I said been down this road not entertaining it again you carry on sucking johns pipe if you want I’m off .

We already have seen the benefits because we haven’t paid repayments every year

And if they paid for it instead of loaning the club money, we'd also get the funds NOW instead of having to wait until it's paid off.

But that’s not how they are financing it - just like other owners when they fully rebuild the stadium or renovate

And we have already had funds from the increased revenue , we have also had more fans being able to go to watch the game , we are getting the benefits

But that’s not how they are financing it - just like other owners when they fully rebuild the stadium or renovate

And we have already had funds from the increased revenue , we have also had more fans being able to go to watch the game , we are getting the benefits

Dallas Cowboys built a brand new stadium some years back. It cost 1.2 billion dollars. The city of Arlington where it resides paid 325 million and the club's owner, Jerry Jones, paid the rest. That's how a long term owner operates. Jerry Jones can be accused of a lot of things, but when it comes to his sports franchise, he spares no expense.

John Henry could have paid out of his pocket to renovate Anfield, but instead he chose the shrewd business move which was to basically loan his own club money. So he has zero risk and he reaps the benefits of increased equity as his investment soars in value due to the very improvement he made the club pay for.

Dallas Cowboys built a brand new stadium some years back. It cost 1.2 billion dollars. The city of Arlington where it resides paid 325 million and the club's owner, Jerry Jones, paid the rest. That's how a long term owner operates. Jerry Jones can be accused of a lot of things, but when it comes to his sports franchise, he spares no expense.

John Henry could have paid out of his pocket to renovate Anfield, but instead he chose the shrewd business move which was to basically loan his own club money. So he has zero risk and he reaps the benefits of increased equity as his investment soars in value due to the very improvement he made the club pay for.

So he made the shrewd decision years ago and we gain the benefit from a stadium that has needed work for decades.


Well done Jerry Jones - maybe we should have asked Liverpool City to help pay for it , and I suspect Jerry Jones has prob more disposable income than Henry but again it’s irrelevant, he made a decision and FSG made a decision


It’s actually a good thing the stadium being sorted and some can do nothing but find the negative in it

So he made the shrewd decision years ago and we gain the benefit from a stadium that has needed work for decades.


Well done Jerry Jones - maybe we should have asked Liverpool City to help pay for it , and I suspect Jerry Jones has prob more disposable income than Henry but again it’s irrelevant, he made a decision and FSG made a decision


It’s actually a good thing the stadium being sorted and some can do nothing but find the negative in it

No one said it wasn't a good thing that the stadium is sorted, it should have been sorted out of FSG's pocket, not hamstring the club with debt. I was merely giving you an example of how an owner that actually is invested in the club he owns acts. You are welcome to put your head in the sand, Lord knows you are never going to cast an accusatory finger at FSG so carry one believing what you want. I simply believe that they could go a step further than they have if they really want this club to compete with the big boys. I think at this point they don't care about winning trophies every single year...they just want to win enough to keep the club's valuation high for when they sell. If they cared about the club, they'd be at matches, they would be in the city, they would look more like Ryan Reynolds at Wrexham. They saw an opportunity, they got the club for a song and they've made shrewd business decisions that will one day see them pocket a huge amount of money. Good for them...and good for us to an extent, but not as good for us as it could be should we have owners that were more invested in the club.

No one said it wasn't a good thing that the stadium is sorted, it should have been sorted out of FSG's pocket, not hamstring the club with debt. I was merely giving you an example of how an owner that actually is invested in the club he owns acts. You are welcome to put your head in the sand, Lord knows you are never going to cast an accusatory finger at FSG so carry one believing what you want. I simply believe that they could go a step further than they have if they really want this club to compete with the big boys. I think at this point they don't care about winning trophies every single year...they just want to win enough to keep the club's valuation high for when they sell. If they cared about the club, they'd be at matches, they would be in the city, they would look more like Ryan Reynolds at Wrexham. They saw an opportunity, they got the club for a song and they've made shrewd business decisions that will one day see them pocket a huge amount of money. Good for them...and good for us to an extent, but not as good for us as it could be should we have owners that were more invested in the club.

We aren’t “hamstrung with debt” 🤦‍♂️

And we pay off the loan when we can , there is no set repayment

We aren’t not spending because of loan repayments.

As for not casting an accused finger at them , I was one of those that walked out during a game because of them - what have you ever done apart from cry on a forum

Who cares about owners at the game , Man City’s owner has been twice in the whole time he owned the club.  They don’t need to be at the game , they don’t need to act like Ryan Reynolds, they don’t need to care about the club

We have spent the last 6 years competing with the big boys and out performing all bar one who is state funded

Christ shall we go back to Moores who cared for the club ?

They are successful sports investments and have turned the club hugely around from the mess it was

It always the same crying from the likes of you

We aren’t “hamstrung with debt” 🤦‍♂️

I guess you don't understand what hamstrung means. It means we can't spend because we are using that money to pay back debt, debt that shouldn't be saddled on the on the club. You don't agree, that's fine.

And we pay off the loan when we can , there is no set repayment

Again...we shouldn't have to be repaying anything. JWH and FSG should have taken on the renovation costs themselves in my opinion. You don't agree that's fine.

We aren’t not spending because of loan repayments.

Well no, we are. And you have even said that the club only spends what it has to spend. If we don't spend because we don't have and we don't have because we are spending on repayments, then yes, we are not spending because of loan repayments. You don't agree, that's fine.

As for not casting an accused finger at them , I was one of those that walked out during a game because of them - what have you ever done apart from cry on a forum

I'm not crying about anything. I really think you need to take a course on logic and debate. What you are doing is using logical fallacies to try and add weight to your argument. An argument that doesn't really make any logical sense. You walked out of a game...good for you. That's one time you've done something (at least you say you've done it...none of us would ever really know, you could be making it up) that you believe tells them you are unhappy with them concerning one specific issue. We aren't discussing that issue, we are discussing the issues surrounding their fiscal strategy for the club.

Who cares about owners at the game , Man City’s owner has been twice in the whole time he owned the club.  They don’t need to be at the game , they don’t need to act like Ryan Reynolds, they don’t need to care about the club

Just an example of an owner you don't have to question their passion for the club they own. JWH's passion for this club is easily questioned and certainly supporters are well within their rights to desire owners that are more emotionally invested. You don't agree that's fine.

We have spent the last 6 years competing with the big boys and out performing all bar one who is state funded

We did not outperform all but one this year, not even close. And those clubs that we didn't outperform are already showing signs that they are willing to do whatever they can to keep us behind them. What is at question is whether FSG have the same mindset. I believe they don't. You don't agree that's fine.

Christ shall we go back to Moores who cared for the club ?

What a silly thing to say...because someone that wants this club to be unbeatable would rather it go back to a time of unsustainability and low performance? I'm not sure what you are even trying to argue?

They are successful sports investments and have turned the club hugely around from the mess it was

They've turned many aspects of the club around yes, but it's not like they did anything that any other reasonably positioned owners couldn't have done. The biggest hurdle was getting Hicks and Gillette out...who bought us wasn't near as important as the fact that SOMEONE did and got rid of those two idiots.

It always the same crying from the likes of you

Try to not resort to thinly veiled attacks. Firstly, they don't hurt my feelings as you may think they do, and second, they add nothing to your arguments and only serve to make you look childish. So please just stop. We can debate the these topics without resorting to childish tactics. I'll agree to that if you will.

I guess you don't understand what hamstrung means. It means we can't spend because we are using that money to pay back debt, debt that shouldn't be saddled on the on the club. You don't agree, that's fine.
 Again...we shouldn't have to be repaying anything. JWH and FSG should have taken on the renovation costs themselves in my opinion. You don't agree that's fine.
 Well no, we are. And you have even said that the club only spends what it has to spend. If we don't spend because we don't have and we don't have because we are spending on repayments, then yes, we are not spending because of loan repayments. You don't agree, that's fine.
I'm not crying about anything. I really think you need to take a course on logic and debate. What you are doing is using logical fallacies to try and add weight to your argument. An argument that doesn't really make any logical sense. You walked out of a game...good for you. That's one time you've done something (at least you say you've done it...none of us would ever really know, you could be making it up) that you believe tells them you are unhappy with them concerning one specific issue. We aren't discussing that issue, we are discussing the issues surrounding their fiscal strategy for the club.

Just an example of an owner you don't have to question their passion for the club they own. JWH's passion for this club is easily questioned and certainly supporters are well within their rights to desire owners that are more emotionally invested. You don't agree that's fine.
We did not outperform all but one this year, not even close. And those clubs that we didn't outperform are already showing signs that they are willing to do whatever they can to keep us behind them. What is at question is whether FSG have the same mindset. I believe they don't. You don't agree that's fine.
 What a silly thing to say...because someone that wants this club to be unbeatable would rather it go back to a time of unsustainability and low performance? I'm not sure what you are even trying to argue?
 They've turned many aspects of the club around yes, but it's not like they did anything that any other reasonably positioned owners couldn't have done. The biggest hurdle was getting Hicks and Gillette out...who bought us wasn't near as important as the fact that SOMEONE did and got rid of those two idiots.
Try to not resort to thinly veiled attacks. Firstly, they don't hurt my feelings as you may think they do, and second, they add nothing to your arguments and only serve to make you look childish. So please just stop. We can debate the these topics without resorting to childish tactics. I'll agree to that if you will.

🤦‍♂️

The club pays the loan money back when it wants , if they feel they have money there to pay something of them then they will , there isn’t a player we haven’t signed because we had to pay some money to pay of the loan


It doesn’t matter what you think they could do - they are doing it the way they think is best


Why didn’t Moores in the 20 years do better then ? Why didn’t he sort of the stadium ? Get the revenue up - if it’s only something a reasonable owner would have done

That statement is a perfect example of always look to downplay and find the negative in anything the owners have done


As for what other clubs are doing - we have started to bring in players - so have other clubs, are we not showing that we want to improve on a poor season

As for their “strategy” - it’s quite clear going by the improvements made to the club that their strategy has worked very well and they have shown themselves to be very astute sports investment businessmen

It’s very hard to see ones that have done better within the Prem and been successful

🤦‍♂️

The club pays the loan money back when it wants , if they feel they have money there to pay something of them then they will , there isn’t a player we haven’t signed because we had to pay some money to pay of the loan

Like I said, agree to disagree, I do believe we haven't signed players because we didn't have the money to do so, money that was tied up in loan repayments. Not sure that can be proven either way, but if you have some sort of evidence, then so be it.

It doesn’t matter what you think they could do - they are doing it the way they think is best

Well....but it does. It matters what all of us think, even those of us that disagree. We are the club's supporters and even though I know you think I don't count because I don't live in Liverpool and don't go to games in person, I'm still a club supporter and it should matter what supporters think to an extent. I don't think there are many on this forum asking for anything outrageous, just wanting to see more ambition.

Why didn’t Moores in the 20 years do better then ? Why didn’t he sort of the stadium ? Get the revenue up - if it’s only something a reasonable owner would have done

That statement is a perfect example of always look to downplay and find the negative in anything the owners have done

Which oddly is no different than you always looking to find the positive. Neither is more productive or more important. And I don't think it's only ever looking to find the negative. It's just being a realist especially during times of struggle. None of us want to finish 6th or 7th or hell even 2nd 3rd or 4th. So why can't we discuss what it may take to finish 1st. Every single year.

As for what other clubs are doing - we have started to bring in players - so have other clubs, are we not showing that we want to improve on a poor season

Well, it's clear we backed out on Jude because of money, it's been reported we like Barella but we won't spend that, I believe at least a couple of our reported "targets" have release clauses so it should have been pretty simple to get those deals done if the players were down for it. Maybe that's not the case, I guess we won't know till we know.

As for their “strategy” - it’s quite clear going by the improvements made to the club that their strategy has worked very well and they have shown themselves to be very astute sports investment businessmen

Their strategy has worked best for them....the club has benefited in some ways as a secondary matter, but some might say we've not benefitted in other areas (player expenditures). Hard to say but with Klopp at the helm, it's hard to think we couldn't have done better with some of the players he's wanted and couldn't get (remember he's mentioned wishing FSG would take more chances).

It’s very hard to see ones that have done better within the Prem and been successful

Well, that's not a reason to explore other areas where we CAN do it better. As I've said in the past, just because another club hasn't made something work, doesn't mean we shouldn't try, especially if we have better managers, coaches, etc.....

Now now let's all play nice.

LIP has predicted a big summer of spending for us this window so we can all rest assured Fenway will compete with our competition even if its for just for this window.

We can be assured Macalister at 35 million is just the tip of the iceberg lettuce.

Now now let's all play nice.

LIP has predicted a big summer of spending for us this window so we can all rest assured Fenway will compete with our competition even if its for just for this window.

We can be assured Macalister at 35 million is just the tip of the iceberg lettuce.

We will start the season with a squad that Klopp believes is good enough to challenge and win trophies

We will start the season with a squad that Klopp believes is good enough to challenge and win trophies

Two questions...
(1) How do you know/think Klopp believes ??
(2) Even though summer signings are not all done and dusted do you believe also?? 

Two questions...
(1) How do you know/think Klopp believes ??
(2) Even though summer signings are not all done and dusted do you believe also??

1. He will learn from the mistakes of last summer

2. Yes I believe we will have a squad that will challenge again

We will start the season with a squad that Klopp believes is good enough to challenge and win trophies

I see how you have changed your wording

I’m pretty much I read from you we will have a big summer and spend. It’s clear you have back tracked and even if we finish our business now

You will come out with the above

When you have two extremes, such as yourself defending the owners and then someone else really having a go

The answer is in the middle usually

The money the owners have taken out could have been reinvested in the team, make no mistake about that and the evidence is clear to see after last season

Edit, we will be mid pack again in terms of spending, like before. Expect one more transfer and then maybe a loan or a freebie

The owners have taken us far as they can and are holding the club back for sure, hence why we need owners who will invest 20-25m per season which can be added to our budget to get us competing again.

Without investment from the owners, it will be very difficult for us to compete again with Manchester City as we are not keeping up, but hopefully we can fight for 4th going forward until they sell up

It’s astonishing they took money out as loan repayments when the value of the club was going up instead of reinvesting, that is a huge red flag and signs of owners who do not wish to compete but only care about the $$