NESV/Fenway Sports Group: Owners of LFC

Questions I'd like honest answers too.

Are Liverpool Football Club bankrolling The Boston Red Sox?

Where is our Money?

Where are our Owners?

IMO, We are not bankrolling the Red Sox. For the first few years money has been,one way or the other, taken from FSGs other assets then loaned to us, as off April 2012 they had lent us £70 million.

 IMO, Right now we are paying this money back. The money we are paying back is going to pay FSGs debts

 As for our owners ? they are watching baseball

 

Re: NESV/Fenway Sports Group: New Owners of LFC
« Reply #10909 on: Today at 06:40:23 PM »
Quote (selected)
Quote from: RedPuppy on Today at 08:36:19 AM

But what was this £70m loan paid for, includes £50m worth of stadium debt which we were told all acquisition debt was paid off. So in essence this could have just been creative accounting to take £50m out of the club with just a £50m oversight.

Nobody is that dumb to believe that £50m was just an oversight. How much interest we're paying is open to debate because this is an easily hidden number when bounced between different companies.

IMO, We are not bankrolling the Red Sox. For the first few years money has been,one way or the other, taken from FSGs other assets then loaned to us, as off April 2012 they had lent us £70 million.

 IMO, Right now we are paying this money back. The money we are paying back is going to pay FSGs debts

 As for our owners ? they are watching baseball

 

That is a very interesting point, and one I had not considered.

If you are correct, and I suspect there is a possibility of it, as nothing else adds up, (like our books ), then when we have paid off those debts, I prey, and I never thought I'd say this, that they piss off.

I don't mind this scenario, but I wish people were honest. I can not abide people or establishments who lie.

If they lie, they they do not have my support. EVER.

But what was this £70m loan paid for, includes £50m worth of stadium debt which we were told all acquisition debt was paid off. So in essence this could have just been creative accounting to take £50m out of the club with just a £50m oversight.

Nobody is that dumb to believe that £50m was just an oversight. How much interest we're paying is open to debate because this is an easily hidden number when bounced between different companies.

I honestly don't believe that they are screwing the club for money, the reason we are not spending is because we are paying back the  loans

 The money loaned was extra money we needed. The first loan was for general expenses. The second loan was for debt left over from the H/G era.

 I do not like the owners, but I do not believe they are trying to screw us over 

I honestly don't believe that they are screwing the club for money, the reason we are not spending is because we are paying back the  loans

 The money loaned was extra money we needed. The first loan was for general expenses. The second loan was for debt left over from the H/G era.

 I do not like the owners, but I do not believe they are trying to screw us over 

If this is correct, then my take on this would be that they lied when they said that they had paid off the debt by buying the club, when in fact what they had done is buy the debt.

They bought the debt, and as they owned the club, then they could take the clubs profits to pay off the money they had loaned to the same club.

Robbing Peter to pay Paul, is no way to run a business.

If this is correct, then my take on this would be that they lied when they said that they had paid off the debt by buying the club, when in fact what they had done is buy the debt.

They bought the debt, and as they owned the club, then they could take the clubs profits to pay off the money they had loaned to the same club.

Robbing Peter to pay Paul, is no way to run a business.

   
That does sound very reminiscent of some former owners who also came from the US of A.

   
That does sound very reminiscent of some former owners who also came from the US of A.

I think it's quite different TBH, where as H&G borrowed from the banks at crazy rates of interest, they had to borrow more to keep things going and as history shows, they lost.

FSG own us, and have possibly lent us money, so we would be in debt to the owners. Thus, there is no 3^rd party to hold the club to ransom.

If we could not pay, they'd sell the assets to get the return they'd want.

I think it's quite different TBH, where as H&G borrowed from the banks at crazy rates of interest, they had to borrow more to keep things going and as history shows, they lost.

FSG own us, and have possibly lent us money, so we would be in debt to the owners. Thus, there is no 3^rd party to hold the club to ransom.

If we could not pay, they'd sell the assets to get the return they'd want.

Not a direct comparison of course hence the word reminiscent mate the point of my comment being FSG. circumvent the phenomenon.
Company growth it goes without saying, is mfinimal under such practice.

I think not turning up yesterday to 'thank' Stevie for all his years of service (and to meet the Olympiacos owner) is quite shameful.  I also distrust the way they are trimming the wage bill - if they are trimming the wage bill, I can't see any big name signings coming in.

Worrying times.

£57m Tv money at current exchange rates $87m 

Somebody must pay the piper.

Sorry about the typos on my phone in the ozzy.

The wage cull continues with the prospect of two more players (Downing and Skrtyl) leaving both high wage earners.

The wage cull continues with the prospect of two more players (Downing and Skrtyl) leaving both high wage earners.

It won't be long before we have players playing for the dole,that should please the owners.

The wage cull continues with the prospect of two more players (Downing and Skrtyl) leaving both high wage earners.

£2m net spend on the back of the premier league's biggest ever TV deal and the clock is ticking, looks like we need to free up some room on the wage bill before we can spend any.

Zero hour contracts anyone? Seriously, what the absolute F**k are FSG doing!?

Spend money or sell up!

I started this thread, and the very fist post was...

It's official.

NESV are the official owners of Liverpool F.C.

Now it's well and truly game on! 

Now it's all...

Zero hour contracts anyone? Seriously, what the absolute F**k are FSG doing!?

Spend money or sell up!

How times have changed  I have to laugh otherwise I'd cry 

I'm not sure if it was picked up elsewhere but over the weekend Damian Commoli said that just before he left he told the owners that if they didn't sign more quality players then the better players that lfc had would look to leave, prophetic words indeed...

I'm not sure if it was picked up elsewhere but over the weekend Damian Commoli said that just before he left he told the owners that if they didn't sign more quality players then the better players that lfc had would look to leave, prophetic words indeed...

Yes, they're chucking the baby out with the bath water. Lose our quality players and we'll struggle to sign quality players to replace them. Whatever progress we've made over the last year will be wasted.
It is so depressing. We are supposed to be building, I thought that meant a title chasing side. Seems they're intent on building a solid mid table side.

Can't wait to see FSG leave.

Can't wait to see FSG leave.

You and me both

We can all take their party line on board about it being a long term plan of cost cutting to enable us to compete eventually, but I'm going with my gut instinct, and I smell a rat.

Wage cut by all means, but FFS how's about ploughing some coin to back the manager! In my book, FSG have about 26 or 27 days to convince me they are serious about being able to compete with anyone in the transfer market. If things stay like they are, they can get out, pronto.

You and me both

We can all take their party line on board about it being a long term plan of cost cutting to enable us to compete eventually, but I'm going with my gut instinct, and I smell a rat.

Wage cut by all means, but FFS how's about ploughing some coin to back the manager! In my book, FSG have about 26 or 27 days to convince me they are serious about being able to compete with anyone in the transfer market. If things stay like they are, they can get out, pronto.

I'm all or living within our means but these guys take the biscuit, we have slashed so much money and generated so much money only for the manager to be given a net spend of £2 million.

My gut tells me the shareholders/Investors are getting paid first fom the cash cow & once they have gotten back what's was paid for the club then Bingo! We're gonna be sold.

You and me both

We can all take their party line on board about it being a long term plan of cost cutting to enable us to compete eventually, but I'm going with my gut instinct, and I smell a rat.

Wage cut by all means, but FFS how's about ploughing some coin to back the manager! In my book, FSG have about 26 or 27 days to convince me they are serious about being able to compete with anyone in the transfer market. If things stay like they are, they can get out, pronto.

Ive said from Day One what will happen under FSG, there here to make money not lose it. There's no chance there in it for the long haul now, hence the stall on the Stadium issue. What they have done is steady the ship, got some good deals put in place i.e the Warrior sponsorship and made the club a whole lot more marketable/ sellable. If we really want to kick on to a league winning team where going to need owners who are willing to spend ridiculous amounts of money and that are in it for the long haul, the stadium issue is the key part.

Pastures new?
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/aug/03/john-henry-boston-globe-new-york-times