NESV/Fenway Sports Group: Owners of LFC

And, just for funsies, how was the previous 10+ years, without a title, any better? For me it was far worse, as that is when we should have been and could have easily afforded to revamp the clubs infrastructure, that's when we fell behind and that period is why we have been playing at catch up ever since.

F**k me you really need to get out more and find out what the club did between 2000 and 2006 if you don't think that is success then what is.
We have rebuilt the Kemlyn road Stand,the Kop and the Anfield Road end so development has been ongoing your on very soft ground if you want to defend the last 6 years efforts.

F**k me you really need to get out more and find out what the club did between 2000 and 2006 if you don't think that is success then what is.
We have rebuilt the Kemlyn road Stand,the Kop and the Anfield Road end so development has been ongoing your on very soft ground if you want to defend the last 6 years efforts.

They were just as bad Walt, these 10,000 extra seats should have been delivered two decades ago, we should be now looking at 10,000 more than that. We're not and that is certainly not, and they have their own failings, the current owners fault. And rebuilding is certainly not the same as expansion.

They were just as bad Walt, these 10,000 extra seats should have been delivered two decades ago, we should be now looking at 10,000 more than that. We're not and that is certainly not, and they have their own failings, the current owners fault. And rebuilding is certainly not the same as expansion.

You forgot the on-going battles the club had with two grannies trying to get shut of them just to get the kemlyn extension done.

Would you rather they asked for £9M Walt?

This sounds like a winge about nothing.

its all about the money isn't it that's the point if you think its whinging good for you but the way I see it FSG want us to be a top force in Europe but expect the club to finance this themselves the very reason Moores and Parry bailed out was the club could not finance itself to compete with Roman and later City.

They were just as bad Walt, these 10,000 extra seats should have been delivered two decades ago, we should be now looking at 10,000 more than that. We're not and that is certainly not, and they have their own failings, the current owners fault. And rebuilding is certainly not the same as expansion.

your right the loss of capacity in the Kop should have been planned for and we have missed those extra 10,000 fans voices. However Anfield unlike Goodison is a good modern Stadium short on capacity not quality. I don't know if you ever had the pleasure of going into the top seats in the Centenary Stand but you can barely make out who the players are and the new Stand is even higher I believe maybe some people like that.

I guess like most businesses - we purchase shares in the company to buy out the current owners. Then each year the club makes money they offer us who have shared a dividend. Which we all reject (in theory) and the money remains at the club as a surplus to be used for transfers ect.

If Liverpool shares were up for sale then people will buy them don't you think?

they are asking £90mil for naming rights wonder how they got that valuation it is certainly not because how the team have performed on their watch is it trading on the history of a club they haven't got a clue about

They value it depending on the overhead costs that was attributed to building the new stand and other expenses, not on the basis of how the team performed.

They value it depending on the overhead costs that was attributed to building the new stand and other expenses, not on the basis of how the team performed.

That's what they would wish to attain but the value is based on the product, our product being the name and history of the club, us the fans and selling all that to potential investors that want their name associated to that.

Performance is a key factor because it keep everything else in place.

Cambridge Utd could build a 100m stadium and plan to pay for it with naming rights.. But they wouldn't get it.

Fact is like with the recent ticket protest they need us to make this a marketable 'business' and for that to be a long term sustainability then success is required

It's all part of the same circle

90m is just a figure, if they could get 200m they would, and if the 'product' was successful they would have more chance

your right the loss of capacity in the Kop should have been planned for and we have missed those extra 10,000 fans voices. However Anfield unlike Goodison is a good modern Stadium short on capacity not quality. I don't know if you ever had the pleasure of going into the top seats in the Centenary Stand but you can barely make out who the players are and the new Stand is even higher I believe maybe some people like that.

I'd feel blessed to sit anywhere with any view to watch the Reds. Maybe folks need a little perspective and shouldn't take for granted that they get to so easily see the team they support.

Not to mention, I'm not sure how you would suggest they design a stadium where there are no long views yet there are enough seats to meet demand and increase capacity.

You can't have it both ways.

I'd feel blessed to sit anywhere with any view to watch the Reds. Maybe folks need a little perspective and shouldn't take for granted that they get to so easily see the team they support.

Not to mention, I'm not sure how you would suggest they design a stadium where there are no long views yet there are enough seats to meet demand and increase capacity.

You can't have it both ways.

I quite like the seats at the top of the Kemlyn, I prefer halfway up, say top of the lower but as I've gotten older I prefer side on elevated for the view of the overall game.
It's high ish yeah but it's not a bad view at all, for actual view of the game at the back of The Kop is harder to see detail at the Annie rd end but I don't think there is a bad view personally apart from behind the pillars in the main, but the Kop has the atmosphere, better for a sing

Ideal for me now though is as near to the halfway line elevated

That's what they would wish to attain but the value is based on the product, our product being the name and history of the club, us the fans and selling all that to potential investors that want their name associated to that.

Performance is a key factor because it keep everything else in place.

Cambridge Utd could build a 100m stadium and plan to pay for it with naming rights.. But they wouldn't get it.

Fact is like with the recent ticket protest they need us to make this a marketable 'business' and for that to be a long term sustainability then success is required

It's all part of the same circle

90m is just a figure, if they could get 200m they would, and if the 'product' was successful they would have more chance

We have 3 interested parties, do you really think they care if we are successful on the pitch or not?

Main stand sponsors care about exposure and this depends on fan base. The more fans the club has the better the exposure.

We have 3 interested parties, do you really think they care if we are successful on the pitch or not?

Main stand sponsors care about exposure and this depends on fan base. The more fans the club has the better the exposure.

Of course yes. The more successful a club is the more exposure it gets from live TV games, newspaper, online etc etc, then therefore the more the company is seen or heard about.

Certainly in terms of amount you can get for the deal.

We are sold on our historic name and the 12th Man, the Liverpool family the fans..

Don't you think if we aren't successful then we run the risk of attracting the next generation? Certainly on a large scale? Beyond family ties?

Success is vital, reputation will only get you so far

£90m for 10 years is good business really considering in 2012 Arsenal sold their entire stadium name till 2028 with a five year shirt sponsor deal included for £150m.

What should happen (if they had any sense) is they should make part of the deal that the naming rights partner adds an extra £1m a year to subsidise all tickets for the new stand, good publicity that.

The club would then have to spend about the same to subsidise the rest of the stadium, fair play.

Good call

I have no issue with them selling the naming rights to the main by the way, it makes sense you get someone else to pay for it, all I meant is that the more successful you are is linked to how valuable that deal is.

Good call though on the tickets, I genuinely am getting disenchanted with the ticket pricing though, it's not just us at all, it's football as a whole and I really wish that someone and ideally us would lead the way in giving something back to the fans, the fans who don't earn what football rolls in but is there come what may because it's more than just a game to us and it's certainly not a business, but it's getting to the stage where proportionally to the average fans earnings it's becoming unaffordable, either forcing people out or putting them into debt and for those it's not easy to give it up.

When this new deal came in then a pot should be put aside for reductions on tickets, I'm not just complaining for me, for us but all fans, Arsenal - Spurs last season tickets around £120.. Utd fans last week having to pay £70 odd quid at some Danish sh*te who bucket up the price as its Utd but don't seem to think that the average man from Manchester isn't swimming in cash even if his club is.

Agents will be on the phone once this deal kicks in asking for pay rises for their players who already earn sh*t loads and I wish clubs would turn around to them as one and say no we've given it to the fans not to yous who already earn 150k a week.

The deals TV and the like give the clubs their incomes now, so give something back to the match goers who provide that vibrant atmosphere that helps you sell your product.. If you keep increasing it more and more will just stay at home to watch it because they can't afford to go and them the TV deals go backwards

For smart businessmen running these clubs they aren't half shortsighted

Of course yes. The more successful a club is the more exposure it gets from live TV games, newspaper, online etc etc, then therefore the more the company is seen or heard about.

Certainly in terms of amount you can get for the deal.

We are sold on our historic name and the 12th Man, the Liverpool family the fans..

Don't you think if we aren't successful then we run the risk of attracting the next generation? Certainly on a large scale? Beyond family ties?

Success is vital, reputation will only get you so far

success is our only way of measuring this club.or it at least should be

Of course yes. The more successful a club is the more exposure it gets from live TV games, newspaper, online etc etc, then therefore the more the company is seen or heard about.

Certainly in terms of amount you can get for the deal.

We are sold on our historic name and the 12th Man, the Liverpool family the fans..

Don't you think if we aren't successful then we run the risk of attracting the next generation? Certainly on a large scale? Beyond family ties?

Success is vital, reputation will only get you so far

Sponsorships aren't for a long term anyways, if it was for 20 or 30 odd years then yes. I don't know for how long the contract is but we will see

but for 10-12, there would be exposure enough.

£90m for 10 years is good business really considering in 2012 Arsenal sold their entire stadium name till 2028 with a five year shirt sponsor deal included for £150m.

What should happen (if they had any sense) is they should make part of the deal that the naming rights partner adds an extra £1m a year to subsidise all tickets for the new stand, good publicity that.

The club would then have to spend about the same to subsidise the rest of the stadium, fair play.

just read this! 10 years is good

and subsidizing tickets is a good idea if the sponsor agrees on it.

Good call

I have no issue with them selling the naming rights to the main by the way, it makes sense you get someone else to pay for it, all I meant is that the more successful you are is linked to how valuable that deal is.

Good call though on the tickets, I genuinely am getting disenchanted with the ticket pricing though, it's not just us at all, it's football as a whole and I really wish that someone and ideally us would lead the way in giving something back to the fans, the fans who don't earn what football rolls in but is there come what may because it's more than just a game to us and it's certainly not a business, but it's getting to the stage where proportionally to the average fans earnings it's becoming unaffordable, either forcing people out or putting them into debt and for those it's not easy to give it up.

When this new deal came in then a pot should be put aside for reductions on tickets, I'm not just complaining for me, for us but all fans, Arsenal - Spurs last season tickets around £120.. Utd fans last week having to pay £70 odd quid at some Danish sh*te who bucket up the price as its Utd but don't seem to think that the average man from Manchester isn't swimming in cash even if his club is.

Agents will be on the phone once this deal kicks in asking for pay rises for their players who already earn sh*t loads and I wish clubs would turn around to them as one and say no we've given it to the fans not to yous who already earn 150k a week.

The deals TV and the like give the clubs their incomes now, so give something back to the match goers who provide that vibrant atmosphere that helps you sell your product.. If you keep increasing it more and more will just stay at home to watch it because they can't afford to go and them the TV deals go backwards

For smart businessmen running these clubs they aren't half shortsighted

It is a great idea for all sponsors to contribute to reducing ticket prices mate but they don't see it that way.  One of the proposals put forward by the Supporters Committee during the recent 13 month negotiations on ticketing was to have a separate "fans" sponsor who would subsidise the cost of tickets but as with all the suggestions it was ignored.

As for your last sentence, it's all about bums on seats.  That's the American way, fill the stadium for as much money as possible, doesn't matter if those fans never come back as there's plenty of other bums to take their place and fill those seats.

Somehow the noise, the colour and the passion of the " regular fans" has been lost as a valuable asset, except for marketing and PR purposes of course 

Good call

I have no issue with them selling the naming rights to the main by the way, it makes sense you get someone else to pay for it, all I meant is that the more successful you are is linked to how valuable that deal is.

For smart businessmen running these clubs they aren't half shortsighted

In the case of JWH&Co their commitment to the asset must be questioned before any optical issues are scrutinised.
Promoting a going concern and illustrating confidence in that business is a foothold on eventual success, if the owners were familiar or could be arsed familiarising themselves with the product and it's ingredients that would be a start.

As things stand appointed agents in various roles carry out instructions, the results of 5 years of obscure direction are there to be seen.
Hopefully somebody at an elevated level of administration sees the error of half-arsed commitment and the manager can go from strength to strength next season. 

I quite like the seats at the top of the Kemlyn, I prefer halfway up, say top of the lower but as I've gotten older I prefer side on elevated for the view of the overall game.
It's high ish yeah but it's not a bad view at all, for actual view of the game at the back of The Kop is harder to see detail at the Annie rd end but I don't think there is a bad view personally apart from behind the pillars in the main, but the Kop has the atmosphere, better for a sing

Ideal for me now though is as near to the halfway line elevated

are you talking about the old Kemlyn seats or the new Centenary seats at the top?. The roofline of the upper Centenary blocks out the main stand crowd .

your right the loss of capacity in the Kop should have been planned for and we have missed those extra 10,000 fans voices. However Anfield unlike Goodison is a good modern Stadium short on capacity not quality. I don't know if you ever had the pleasure of going into the top seats in the Centenary Stand but you can barely make out who the players are and the new Stand is even higher I believe maybe some people like that.

I have been at the back, I have had no issues with making out who the players are.

are you talking about the old Kemlyn seats or the new Centenary seats at the top?. The roofline of the upper Centenary blocks out the main stand crowd .

Sorry mate I still call it the Kemlyn but yeah the Centenary upper

I'm not really looking at the main stand crowd though when I'm up there, normally the green thing at the bottom 

Mate of mine has his season ticket pretty much half way line back row and we swap at times to get different views of the game, I've been up there 3 times this season, Carlisle, Villa and Swansea.

It's a good view to be honest

I have been at the back, I have had no issues with making out who the players are.

I would be massively surprised if you did.

I would be massively surprised if you did.

Be massively surprised then. Not my favourite seats, though I do like to be fairly high. I'd not be surprised if others had difficulty, as I know some have vision impairments, as noted by reading their posts in match day threads.