NESV/Fenway Sports Group: Owners of LFC

The FSG PR machine has done an unreal job in regards to this.

Who makes out we are poor ?

By the same token, why do we make out as if we don't spend when we have the second biggest wage bill in the Premier League?

And if we are rich, then why focus on the need of owner investment?

We do not have the second largest wage bill

Chelsea, United and city will have more for sure

Most likely things will have changed this season but can only say with certainty with the latest published accounts, which are for the 2021/22 season and yes, we had the second biggest wage bill then

I’ll try and break down the rant


First a question - if a club needs to have owners constantly pumping money in each season does that not mean the club is spending beyond its means and is be definition a poorly run club

The fact that we stand on our own two feet self sufficient and have been able to win multiple trophies the very proof that the club is very well run

It’s a very strange take that you see a club only  being run well if someone is having to constantly put money into it and the club spends more than  it makes. That’s a one way road to trouble without a never ending pot


Let’s look at the furlough scheme - the club furloughed the staff and looked at the government scheme which was open to every single business, the club lost income and any businessman would look at it - but they didn’t understand the feeling and instead the club paid all the staff 100% and the club took the hit on the losses.

Trademark- again they believed the club was losing out in income and revenue

“The club’s trademark application came to light two months ago, with the club insisting it was purely “in the context of football products and services” and to stop people benefiting from the sale of what they described as “inauthentic products” relating to Jürgen Klopp’s European champions.”

Peter Moore, the club’s chief executive officer, said: “It should be stressed that our application was put forward in good faith and with the sole aim of protecting and furthering the best interests of the club and its supporters. Nevertheless, we accept the decision and the spirit in which it has been made.”

Again trying to get more money into the club so that more money can be spent on players etc


Super league - every top club went with it and it was clear why , the CL is no better and the soul of the club was fine when they all jumped into the Premier League. It’s also very noteworthy that the new CL is doing what the super league was looking to do

There is no doubt that if it went ahead and we as a club didn’t go into it then we would have been left behind

A few things - the loan for stadium was not taking out against the club

Any interest for the loan is not taken by FSG and they are earning not a single cent from the loan

I think what we need to satisfy some is to bring the value of the club right down , we can’t have all this improvements and the people the own club benefit from the improvements


Comparing them to the Glazers is both laughable and shows a complete lack of understanding


Will finish with a simple question- do you think FSG have a big pile of cash ready for the club to spend ?

You’re again missing the point, most likely purposely

To answer your question, if owners invest 20m per season, it is not a sign of a poorly run club, if the club can run within its means, but that does not allow them to remain competitive. The owners can and should invest if they wish to compete

You’re acting as if people are saying owners should fund the club to survive when the point is to INVEST in the club to remain competitive among the elite. A lot is also not being asked for

Your reasoning for covid, attempting to buy the name Liverpool and the super league are simply excuses. It’s poor business behaviour exposed, sorry, not getting away from that.

There is no reason they could not invest in the club instead of leveraging to build the stadium which has hurt our player purchases which is clear to see

Ultimately, there is no excuse for us being almost bottom of the premier league for owner investment. No amount of excuses to deflect from that can change that, it shows that level of commitment and their approach  to the club and how they see it

The answer is no

Now my question, do you think it’s acceptable for us to be near the bottom of owner investment?

Do you think asking owners to investment 15-20m per season in a multi billion dollar asset that is constantly increasing is out of the ordinary or ridiculous to ask ?

I expect you to twist it again and your responses shows your manipulation as you did before

Most likely things will have changed this season but can only say with certainty with the latest published accounts, which are for the 2021/22 season and yes, we had the second biggest wage bill then

I don’t think anyone says we don’t spend, it’s simply stating the owners don’t invest which is holding us back, we are near the bottom of the premier league for owner investment

Then you have others who think investing is blasphemy

You’re again missing the point, most likely purposely

To answer your question, if owners invest 20m per season, it is not a sign of a poorly run club, if the club can run within its means, but that does not allow them to remain competitive. The owners can and should invest if they wish to compete

You’re acting as if people are saying owners should fund the club to survive when the point is to INVEST in the club to remain competitive among the elite. A lot is also not being asked for

Your reasoning for covid, attempting to buy the name Liverpool and the super league are simply excuses. It’s poor business behaviour exposed, sorry, not getting away from that.

There is no reason they could not invest in the club instead of leveraging to build the stadium which has hurt our player purchases which is clear to see

Ultimately, there is no excuse for us being almost bottom of the premier league for owner investment. No amount of excuses to deflect from that can change that, it shows that level of commitment and their approach  to the club and how they see it

The answer is no

Now my question, do you think it’s acceptable for us to be near the bottom of owner investment?

Do you think asking owners to investment 15-20m per season in a multi billion dollar asset that is constantly increasing is out of the ordinary or ridiculous to ask ?

I expect you to twist it again and your responses shows your manipulation as you did before

20m per season ? Why do they need to invest £20mil per season ?

Have we not been competitive amongst the elite then ?  3Cl finals winning one , 1PL and 2 runners up , plus 2 domestic trophies and the CWC in the last 6 seasons ?!? If that not competing amongst the elite what is !! Only one team domestically and one team in CL has done better

It’s laughable that people are using a “owners investment” table as a some guide to how well a club is run

The club is self sufficient- why do you and others struggle with understanding that concept- a club that is self sufficient will have very low owner investment- that’s the whole point 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️

Sorry but which player did we miss out on because we couldn’t afford him due to loan repayments


The club is self sufficient , why is anyone surprised that owner investment is low when it’s been the model since they bought us - did you forget how the club runs ?

I don’t think anyone says we don’t spend, it’s simply stating the owners don’t invest which is holding us back, we are near the bottom of the premier league for owner investment

Then you have others who think investing is blasphemy

Well maybe not you mate, but actually a lot of people a lot of the time say we don't spend. I just read in another thread someone saying we never spend over 50m when we did just that last year (for a player that spent most of the season on the bench btw, which only goes on to show how transfer fees are a funny business)

I'm not in the owner investment camp, especially if the point people are trying to make is that we're rich. Surely it's not 20m a year that will make or break the team.

What held us back the most in the last few years was competing with a club clearly rigging the rules, as well as not performing particularly well in finals

I’m gonna leave it at there as it’s clear the defence force is fortified more so than Kremlin

Let’s agree to disagree, you completely with me and myself with you

Well maybe not you mate, but actually a lot of people a lot of the time say we don't spend. I just read in another thread someone saying we never spend over 50m when we did just that last year (for a player that spent most of the season on the bench btw, which only goes on to show how transfer fees are a funny business)

I'm not in the owner investment camp, especially if the point people are trying to make is that we're rich. Surely it's not 20m a year that will make or break the team.

What held us back the most in the last few years was competing with a club clearly rigging the rules, as well as not performing particularly well in finals

20m was a random number but last season for example showed how lack of funding can hurt. But a little funding can be the difference in buying a next generation player for example and continuously being ahead of the curve to remain challenging at the top which is where I truly believe we have been left behind at due to a lack of investment

That is the reason even the owners were looking for investment as they know it’s needed

To be the best in the league, unless you pull miracles, investment is needed in my opinion

We are only good as last season and we are not good enough for the cl spots right now, a clear investment and recruitment strategy could have prevented it I feel

Absolutely no doubt about it the FSG propaganda machine has convinced some that spending levels of what we were doing more than a decade ago is real investment 🤣🤣.

but last season for example showed how lack of funding can hurt.

Looked like a lot of funding hurt Chelsea a whole lot more though.

Looked like a lot of funding hurt Chelsea a whole lot more though.

seemed to be good for City though.

Half this thread seems to have been schooled at the church of Corballyred aka the Donald Trump of Liverpool twitter aka blowhard 2.0, aka nobhead

seemed to be good for City though.

And was sh*t for Everton.

What's the point we're making? That it only matters when teams who have more successful seasons than us is because of money but we can overlook those who spent more and performed worse.

That used to be the old excuse for Rafa when Chelsea or United would win the League and not us. But we gloss over when clubs spent a bomb and failed. Take Spurs 07/08 as an example of the highest spenders in the season and finished 11th, even City that year were the fourth highest spenders at the start of their spending spree and still finished 9th.

But yeah, let's just stick to arguments that suit our own agendas and not ones that work throughout the football world.

Looked like a lot of funding hurt Chelsea a whole lot more though.

Yup, you’re correct. let’s continue spending less than championship clubs in terms of net

seemed to be good for City though.

Same city that made a profit in the transfer windows last season

Yup, you’re correct. let’s continue spending less than championship clubs in terms of net

Well the alternative is to do a Chelsea and spend over half a billion to drop from 3rd to 12th. And it seems like you and a few others wouldn't give a toss if we did finish 12th as long as we spent that half a billion.

As a genuine question though because I don't know - what Championship club was our net spend of £50 million less than?

Yup, you’re correct. let’s continue spending less than championship clubs in terms of net

Spending less than championship clubs ?

We spent £140mll last season.  Net around £70mil. We broke our transfer record. You act like we aren’t spending money

Well the alternative is to do a Chelsea and spend over half a billion to drop from 3rd to 12th. And it seems like you and a few others wouldn't give a toss if we did finish 12th as long as we spent that half a billion.

As a genuine question though because I don't know - what Championship club was our net spend of £50 million less than?

Who’s asking to spend half a billion ?

Look at the figures as to when the owners came in not one season as it can give a skewed look.

I’d like an owner who’s only goal is not to increase our value whilst investing as little as possible but that’s just me

Spending less than championship clubs ?

We spent £140mll last season.  Net around £70mil. We broke our transfer record. You act like we aren’t spending money

You’re again deflecting and trying to do a trump

Since 2017 the owners have invested 0, infact they have taken out around 40m

Edit was my own error which you pounced on, I meant investment

You’re again deflecting and trying to do a trump

Since 2017 the owners have invested 0, infact they have taken out around 40m

What’s that got to do with net spend against championship clubs 🤷‍♂️

By the same token, why do we make out as if we don't spend when we have the second biggest wage bill in the Premier League?

And if we are rich, then why focus on the need of owner investment?

It’s was then. Certainly isn’t now.

Firmino, Ox, Keita, Milner, Arthur, Carvalho, Ramsey - Out

Mac Allister - In

A lot of work still to do this summer.
3/4 of last summer’s signings out the door.