NESV/Fenway Sports Group: Owners of LFC

£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.

look like the net spend will turn out to be a profitable transfer window once those two go for £10mil.

Cant ever having to discuss finance or net spend prior to 2007 now its our biggest debate.
FSG have really made Brendan suffer for mistakes made prior to his taking over.But why do FSG think that the fans cannot add up when it is so obvious( and I said it a while ago) we are being prepared for sale.

Cant ever having to discuss finance or net spend prior to 2007 now its our biggest debate.
FSG have really made Brendan suffer for mistakes made prior to his taking over.But why do FSG think that the fans cannot add up when it is so obvious( and I said it a while ago) we are being prepared for sale.

I think we're just trying to be the first club to win the title with a yts team 

we are being prepared for sale.

Hope you are right

I'll readily admit that once they've finished with us; with little to no debt, and a very sensible wage structure, we'll be a very tantalising option for someone. But f! me it's like being dragged over broken glass watching us in transfer windows.

With so little money being spent, and so much energy being put into cost cutting, I just can't see them interested in making us world beaters again, nothing they do makes me believe that. So, logic would dictate that they are here for another reason, and that reason is hopefully to sell

I think we're just trying to be the first club to win the title with a yts team 

showing your age Debs "YTS".

I always end up depressed after being on here. I know FSG are trying to keep things close to their chests just like the old days the difference being we used to actually achieve things then at present we are still full speed in reverse.

showing your age Debs "YTS".

Yeah I remember them very well mate, we were winning everything in sight when they were around.

Yeah I remember them very well mate, we were winning everything in sight when they were around.

makes you wonder if having a very strong reserve team and a smaller first team squad isn't such a bad idea at least more of them would get regular football.The good old days reserves one week 1st team the next ah....... a lot of these players would not have got into the reserve team.

makes you wonder if having a very strong reserve team and a smaller first team squad isn't such a bad idea at least more of them would get regular football.The good old days reserves one week 1st team the next ah....... a lot of these players would not have got into the reserve team.

My dad always used to ask me "where do Liverpool keep getting these players from?  They come into the team, unheard of before but play like they've been in the team for years."

Ah those were the days!

Average players wages are the key determinant if how well the team will do.

With 88 million pounds spent annually on wages, Spurs finished a hairs breadth outside the Chanpios league two years running.

With a bigger net spend and 124 million annual wages we finished 8th and 7th.

How much more do people want us to spend to compete with the likes of Spurs or Arsenal to at least at in the top 4?

Do we really want a Russian or Arab oligarch throwing money at the club an using it as a toy?

Average players wages are the key determinant if how well the team will do.

With 88 million pounds spent annually on wages, Spurs finished a hairs breadth outside the Chanpios league two years running.

With a bigger net spend and 124 million annual wages we finished 8th and 7th.

How much more do people want us to spend to compete with the likes of Spurs or Arsenal to at least at in the top 4?

Do we really want a Russian or Arab oligarch throwing money at the club an using it as a toy?

No idea, but if we have a net spend of £124m and we finished 8th and 7th, then the buck still stops with whoever is in charge. And that's FSG.

Only now that the wages have been all but rectified, they now have to start spending cash on players. Which they aren't.

No idea, but if we have a net spend of £124m and we finished 8th and 7th, then the buck still stops with whoever is in charge. And that's FSG.

Only now that the wages have been all but rectified, they now have to start spending cash on players. Which they aren't.

Right - so if we are spending 36 million pounds a year on wages on players who are delivering performances way behind the likes of Arsenal or Spurs - what should FSG - who, as you rightly say are in charge, be doing about it and how long will the process take?

Right - so if we are spending 36 million pounds a year on wages on players who are delivering performances way behind the likes of Arsenal or Spurs - what should FSG - who, as you rightly say are in charge, be doing about it and how long will the process take?

Here Brendan, have £40m to spend on transfers this window, seeing as we've vastly reduced the wage structure. But be careful that you're not offering too much of a weekly wage this time around.

I'm all for offloading players like Downing (£90k/week?) and the like, but you have to spend to get places in this game - you cannot get away with that, unless you are happy to be a mid table team. I don't believe FSG are serious about getting quality in, be it long term or short term. If they are not prepared to buy players who will stand a good chance of getting us into the top four, they need to move on.

 I think since they came here we've constantly been in top 3 in terms of net spend. No complains over that. The support they've given the manager...again no complains. The work in stadium redevelopment has finally started. The only worry I have with them is the fear of trimming the wage bill too much.

Speculate to accumulate.
I'm surprised they've not heard the phrase.

Speculate to accumulate.
I'm surprised they've not heard the phrase.

Exactly

Speculate to accumulate.
I'm surprised they've not heard the phrase.

I'm surprised too, after all its how our current owners earned their crust and another reason why they purchased us.

These fuckers are accumulating but not speculating.

What good is reducing the wage bill if you're not getting anywhere?

Looks like they're content to swap those Anfield glory nights for 7th placed mediocrity

I've a good mind to send Henry an email and rick roll him!

Speculate to accumulate.
I'm surprised they've not heard the phrase.

They undoubtedly have heard of it Racer but their plan to accumulate from ourselves doesn't involve, nor necessitate them to speculate.  They will/already have accumulated without spending a darn penny.

They undoubtedly have heard of it Racer but their plan to accumulate from ourselves doesn't involve, nor necessitate them to speculate.  They will/already have accumulated without spending a darn penny.

They got us too cheap and are determined to carry on doing business in that manner,
which will never be enough to compete with Chelsea and City.

Or only hope of getting back NEAR the top is to hope one of them tires of the spending,
all the while United's empire collapses.

We are entirely dependant on the actions of those ahead of us rather than our own.

With 88 million pounds spent annually on wages, Spurs finished a hairs breadth outside the Chanpios league two years running.

Just to be clear for those (not Carlos) who don't know:

Our revenue income [2011/12] was some €55m [£48m] higher than Spurs. In that time, despite our absence from Europe, we recorded a £5.1m (3%) increase in revenue whilst Spurs revenue decreased by £19.3m (12%) mainly down to their failure to qualify for the Champions League.

Our "wage bill" (I'm not sure it relates only to players) in that period [2011/12] was £119m, some 63% of our total revenue... £188.7. Spurs "wage bill" was £90m, some 62.4% of their total revenue... £144.2m.

The reason Spurs came within a "hair's breadth" may have been down to many things - a better coach, maybe; better players, possibly; or maybe even better management of squad players but one thing is for certain... it had sweet F**k all to do with how "little" they spent on wages.

Just to be clear for those (not Carlos) who don't know:

Our revenue income [2011/12] was some €55m [£48m] higher than Spurs. In that time, despite our absence from Europe, we recorded a £5.1m (3%) increase in revenue whilst Spurs revenue decreased by £19.3m (12%) mainly down to their failure to qualify for the Champions League.

Our "wage bill" (I'm not sure it relates only to players) in that period [2011/12] was £119m, some 63% of our total revenue... £188.7. Spurs "wage bill" was £90m, some 62.4% of their total revenue... £144.2m.

The reason Spurs came within a "hair's breadth" may have been down to many things - a better coach, maybe; better players, possibly; or maybe even better management of squad players but one thing is for certain... it had sweet f**k all to do with how "little" they spent on wages.

Just been reading some figures from our last lot of accounts mate, we have some 400 staff on the payroll and only 50%-60% of our wage bill is actually spent on the 1st team.  So we're talking around £60m-£65m.

Not sure how other clubs fair but it is possible that the likes of spurs have a lot less staff so therefore spend a lot more than us on the players.

They got us too cheap and are determined to carry on doing business in that manner,
which will never be enough to compete with Chelsea and City.

Or only hope of getting back NEAR the top is to hope one of them tires of the spending,
all the while United's empire collapses.

We are entirely dependant on the actions of those ahead of us rather than our own.

It's a sad state of affairs when we have owners who nit pick about every last penny but they aren't even in control of our/their destiny mate.

Some businessmen they are!