You Get What You Pay For!

I think the club is being left behind by Chelsea, City, United and Arsenal.

In recent times there was a massive step between Chelsea/City and the original big 3, United, Arsenal and Liverpool.

In the last two seasons Arsenal and United have significantly increased their player investment,
so much so that the latter has now the most expensively valued squad in the league.

Meanwhile Liverpool, who were a Suarez undervaluation away from having a more costly squad than Arsenal,
now trail by 100 million. Telling that the big money signings, ie the difference, has all been attacking players, except in the case of City. All values taken from Transfermarkt.

Manchester United - Market Value - €461 Million
Chelsea - Market Value - €444.75 Million
Manchester City - Market Value - €441.75 Million
Arsenal - Market Value - €411.30 Million
Liverpool - Market Value - €331.50 Million

What would make up that €100 Million difference in valuation?

United:
di Maria - €65 Million
Falcao - €55 Million (Loan Signing)
Mata - €40 Million

Arsenal:
Sanchez - €38 Million
Cazorla - €26 Million
Ozil - €45 Million

Chelsea:
Costa - €37 Million
Hazard - €48 Million
Willian - €30 Million
Fabregas - €40 Million
Oscar - €36 Million

City:
Aguero - €45 Million
Silva - €40 Million
Fernandinho - €40 Million
MANGALA - €40 Million for a Centre Back

Two of the Chelsea signings are players Liverpool backed away from because of the structure now in place at the club.

The gap is widening, and unless the club invests in some serious attacking players it will continue to do so.
Big players turn games, strike fear into teams, infect their own team with the right mentality.
Young players with potential don't.

If Liverpool is to have any hope of closing the gap to the financial Big 4 then it needs to start acting like it belongs there.

Is right Racer

Look what difference one truly world class star made to that side last season, look at that top four in financial terms, it's almost locked off unless you try to bridge the gap with real equal talent..

Maybe not the ones that they go for, but are you telling me that Atleti, Porto, Benfica pay more than we can and get some wonderful talents, that going to Russia is a more attractive proposition than playing here, you wouldn't have to pay what they get there but more than we pay now arguably

The world is vast, there are so many talents out there.. Willian came from the Russian league.. There is the French league to tap into..

Why are we f**king around with the Balotelli's at 16 million and damaged goods when we need to go out there like the likes of Atleti do and pay double that for genuine world class forwards.. If they move on reinvest as they have with another one.

Torres, Falcao, Aguero, Manduzic

We try to be clever at times to bridge that gap when maybe we just need to be bold to do it

Is right Racer

Look what difference one truly world class star made to that side last season, look at that top four in financial terms, it's almost locked off unless you try to bridge the gap with real equal talent..

Maybe not the ones that they go for, but are you telling me that Atleti, Porto, Benfica pay more than we can and get some wonderful talents, that going to Russia is a more attractive proposition than playing here, you wouldn't have to pay what they get there but more than we pay now arguably

The world is vast, there are so many talents out there.. Willian came from the Russian league.. There is the French league to tap into..

Why are we f**king around with the Balotelli's at 16 million and damaged goods when we need to go out there like the likes of Atleti do and pay double that for genuine world class forwards.. If they move on reinvest as they have with another one.

Torres, Falcao, Aguero, Manduzic

We try to be clever at times to bridge that gap when maybe we just need to be bold to do it

We've seen it with Chelsea.
Bridging the gap will cost, because Chelsea, Arsenal etc will try to snap up the talent.
Happened on Willian, Salah and Sanchez.
You've got to be prepared to outbid the other party to get the player you want sometimes.

I don't know why we haven't signed more players from Spain and Germany that are outside of the top 3 teams there.

Technically better player for the same money as Premier League overrated counterparts.

Even capitalise on quality players that are no longer wanted for a new manager,
like United have done with di Maria and Mata.

Unfortunately we have investment bankers as owners.  People who have made their money from buying low cost stocks and selling for a profit.  They don't play the high roller stakes, they're too risk averse.

We just have to hope that as sucessful businessmen they realise that by devaluing the squad, they are damaging their asset.  They need to realise that without a sucessful team the only value left is the land that Anfield stands on. 

No point having a nice shiney new stand if it's empty JH.

Unfortunately we have investment bankers as owners.  People who have made their money from buying low cost stocks and selling for a profit.  They don't play the high roller stakes, they're too risk averse.

We just have to hope that as sucessful businessmen they realise that by devaluing the squad, they are damaging their asset.  They need to realise that without a sucessful team the only value left is the land that Anfield stands on. 

No point having a nice shiney new stand if it's empty JH.

Doesn't matter whether we're 1st or 8th. In either case we sell out the stadium. Would take a lot for Anfield not to be sold out consistently, due to the huge quantity of fans we have.

Doesn't matter whether we're 1st or 8th. In either case we sell out the stadium. Would take a lot for Anfield not to be sold out consistently, due to the huge quantity of fans we have.

It happened under Roy and they took decisive action by sacking him Tom.  If we have no quality on the pitch the fans won't pay to watch it.

If you look at what got us closest to competing in Europe recently (Rafa from Valencia) there is a template of finding people who competed against big clubs with a smaller budget and get them in place to do the same here. The current example of such a team/manager would be Atletico/Diego Simeone.

In that case, an owner who wanted to go out and compete would go after him and he would invariably bring some of his players with him. In the case of Simeone that would be Koke, Mandzukic, Tiago, Godin.

These things cost money though. If we had owners that were serious about taking on the elite and being successful on the pitch then we would see someone like Simeone and his key players arriving in the summer.

We don't have owners that want to challenge the elite.
We won't see a scenario like that unfold because it would cost anywhere between 60 - 100 million to implement.
We have Brendan and they are implementing a transfer strategy on him of investing in young players.

Brendan getting it in the neck from fans is purely fans not seeing the bigger picture.

If you look at what got us closest to competing in Europe recently (Rafa from Valencia) there is a template of finding people who competed against big clubs with a smaller budget and get them in place to do the same here. The current example of such a team/manager would be Atletico/Diego Simeone.

In that case, an owner who wanted to go out and compete would go after him and he would invariably bring some of his players with him. In the case of Simeone that would be Koke, Mandzukic, Tiago, Godin.

These things cost money though. If we had owners that were serious about taking on the elite and being successful on the pitch then we would see someone like Simeone and his key players arriving in the summer.

We don't have owners that want to challenge the elite.
We won't see a scenario like that unfold because it would cost anywhere between 60 - 100 million to implement.
We have Brendan and they are implementing a transfer strategy on him of investing in young players.

Brendan getting it in the neck from fans is purely fans not seeing the bigger picture.

The number crunchers have clearly shown them that the financial rewards don't outway the risks mate so they've decided to try it a different way, the way they've always done it, buy low and hope for the best. 

Maybe when they realise how much it's cost them if we don't get CL football next season they'll reassess but I'm not holding my breath.

The number crunchers have clearly shown them that the financial rewards don't outway the risks mate so they've decided to try it a different way, the way they've always done it, buy low and hope for the best. 

Maybe when they realise how much it's cost them if we don't get CL football next season they'll reassess but I'm not holding my breath.

I wont be holding my breath.

Money doesn't always speak. Yes it is good if you buy a proven player such as Ozil but you could spend 40 mil on a player like mangala who is sh*te or 12 million on sturridge who is class!

I personally think it's just a gamble and if you spend big it needs to be on someone who is proven quality.

Money doesn't always speak. Yes it is good if you buy a proven player such as Ozil but you could spend 40 mil on a player like mangala who is sh*te or 12 million on sturridge who is class!

I personally think it's just a gamble and if you spend big it needs to be on someone who is proven quality.

Most of the time it clearly does.

There is no correlation between the prices paid for players and success.

There is a correlation between wages paid to players and success.

In answer to the original post then yes more often than not but it's not a guarantee like anything in life.

There is no correlation between the prices paid for players and success.

There is a correlation between wages paid to players and success.

Surely both are relevant and vital ingredients in an eventual game plan.
As there is no guarantee of success there is patently no black and white ruling as to said game plan.
In other words one part of the success theory is as viable as another.
Your assertion is purely that.

Fernando Torres approved this message 

There is no correlation between the prices paid for players and success.

There is a correlation between wages paid to players and success.

Players who command big wages usually command big transfer fees as well so both go hand in hand.

The values are player valuations, not transfer values. There is a big difference.

What we paid for Lallana and Lovren is not the same as the player valuations on transfermarkt.

Players who command big wages usually command big transfer fees as well so both go hand in hand.

Usually.

Here's the thing, richer clubs can afford to pay big money to land a player and hope he works out.
Shevchenko, Torres etc
We can afford to buy a big name, but he has to work out, because a loss on a big transfer sets us back more than it does a richer club.

The values are player valuations, not transfer values. There is a big difference.

What we paid for Lallana and Lovren is not the same as the player valuations on transfermarkt.

A player is worth what someone is prepared to pay for his services.
Andy Carroll.

A player is worth what someone is prepared to pay for his services.
Andy Carroll.

The player worth is calculated on Transfermarkt.
That's where the figures I've used are from.

Never mind the histrionics.

The player worth is calculated on Transfermarkt.
That's where the figures I've used are from.

Never mind the histrionics.

I'd be wary about using a website to assess a players apparent worth.
Like I said, it depends on what a club is prepared to pay, and apparently BR thought that Lovren, Lallana etc were worth the amount we were asked to pay, which I assume is not the figure presented by the website.

The player worth is calculated on Transfermarkt.
That's where the figures I've used are from.

Never mind the histrionics.

I love Transfermarkt as an overall resource, but I don't really buy their figures on player evaluations. They value Suarez at €60m -- half of what they value Messi and Ronaldo at €120m. Sterling is €20m, Sturridge is €25m. The football market is definitely inflated, but there's some serious undervaluations on there.

Most interesting thing in common for you both is the suggestion that the source might not be perfect rather than my point might not be accurate.

Most interesting thing in common for you both is the suggestion that the source might not be perfect rather than my point might not be accurate.

Well yeah. It's not that I disagree with what you're saying, I was just commenting that the source has questionable numbers (e.g., Ozil's valuation at €45m, but Sturridge's at €25m). Like I said, I love Transfermarkt but their numbers can be dodgy.

Well yeah. It's not that I disagree with what you're saying, I was just commenting that the source has questionable numbers (e.g., Ozil's valuation at €45m, but Sturridge's at €25m). Like I said, I love Transfermarkt but their numbers can be dodgy.

Given Sturridge is out injured for long periods he might not actually be undervalued, given we got him for 12 Million.

Anyway this wasn't where I wanted the thread to go. More important is that we lack investment in world class players.

Given Sturridge is out injured for long periods he might not actually be undervalued, given we got him for 12 Million.

Anyway this wasn't where I wanted the thread to go. More important is that we lack investment in world class players.

Well, if you can tell me a time when we bought world renowned star players I'll agree with you.

OK, we sometimes bought the best of British, but that's hardly the same thing.

Well, if you can tell me a time when we bought world renowned star players I'll agree with you.

OK, we sometimes bought the best of British, but that's hardly the same thing.

Again, wasn't really the point.

Given Sturridge is out injured for long periods he might not actually be undervalued, given we got him for 12 Million.

Anyway this wasn't where I wanted the thread to go. More important is that we lack investment in world class players.

The figures for the players were last updated August 2014, so his injury has no part in their valuation. But I digress.

Yes, we don't invest enough in top quality players. Lately it seems it has more to do with not paying high enough wages than it is not paying transfer fees.

Transfermarkt are rarely right (in Liverpool's case, basically never) when it comes to getting the transfer fee right. Why trust them on getting the subjective valuation of a player right?

Also, as a website they notoriously undervalue liverpool players.

Transfermarkt are rarely right (in Liverpool's case, basically never) when it comes to getting the transfer fee right. Why trust them on getting the subjective valuation of a player right?

It's good enough for Swiss Ramble to use for some of their analysis,
so it's good enough for me.

Raise a point about how our rivals have moved ahead by investing in proven attacking talent.
Watch as everybody focuses on transfermarkt and choose to ignore the F***ing point.

Thing is Racer other clubs get what they pay for we don't. We've spent over £200M (gross) since June 2012 and can anybody honestly, hand on heart, tell me that we're any better now than we were then?

It's good enough for Swiss Ramble to use for some of their analysis,
so it's good enough for me.

Raise a point about how our rivals have moved ahead by investing in proven attacking talent.
Watch as everybody focuses on transfermarkt and choose to ignore the f**king point.

Yet they are typically substantially off the CIES reports' valuations, a vastly more reputable (and indeed accurate) source - they have a margin of error of 7.5%

Yet they are typically substantially off the CIES reports' valuations, a vastly more reputable (and indeed accurate) source - they have a margin of error of 7.5%

If somebody wants to put those figures up or give me the link that would be great.
Otherwise....

Thing is Racer other clubs get what they pay for we don't. We've spent over £200M (gross) since June 2012 and can anybody honestly, hand on heart, tell me that we're any better now than we were then?

Well here's another way of looking at it:

1. Man City: £233m 2012 - 2013
2. Man United: £183m wage bill. 2014 - £215m
3. Chelsea: £179m wage bill. 2012 - 2013
4. Arsenal: £154m wage bill. 2014 -  £180m
5. Liverpool: £132m wage bill.

Figures taken from deloitte and telegraph.
The gap is widening.



They're last season's figures.
We've since offloaded Suarez and Agger.
United and Arsenal have dramatically increased theirs.

If somebody wants to put those figures up or give me the link that would be great.
Otherwise....

Google mate.
http://www.football-observatory.com/IMG/pdf/ar2014_excerpt.pdf

Well here's another way of looking at it:

1. Man City: £233m 2012 - 2013
2. Man United: £183m wage bill. 2014 - £215m
3. Chelsea: £179m wage bill. 2012 - 2013
4. Arsenal: £154m wage bill. 2014 -  £180m
5. Liverpool: £132m wage bill.

Figures taken from deloitte and telegraph.
The gap is widening.



They're last season's figures.
We've since offloaded Suarez and Agger.
United and Arsenal have dramatically increased theirs.

Unfortunately we're in a self perpetuating problem and have been for more than a decade. Our refusal to invest in high quality players and player wages has lead to a decrease in quality of the players playing for LFC which in turn has lead to a decline in our success and so a decline in our revenues which has lead to a lack of money to invest in high quality players. At some point we have to take a risk like United have, gamble on finishing in a particular league position and invest money accordingly. Continue as we are and we will continue to decline both on and off field.

Google mate.
http://www.football-observatory.com/IMG/pdf/ar2014_excerpt.pdf

"A third player could break the record for the highest transfer fee ever spent: Luis
Suárez (€ 107 million)."

Bargain for Barca, and would fill the rather large hole in our team value/wages.
Hmm.

You get what you pay for.

Suarez was the 3rd most valuable player in the world.
We let him go for less than he was worth, we all know why.

100M + spent.

Our most valuable player now: Raheem Sterling.

You can't look at wages in isolation.
They have to be looked at as a percentage of turnover.
Even now, our wage bill isn't much below 70% of turnover.

You can't look at wages in isolation.
They have to be looked at as a percentage of turnover.
Even now, our wage bill isn't much below 70% of turnover.

Which further demonstrates how unsuccessful our transfer business has been over the years. Here's the league's wages by club as a percentage of turnover during 2012-2013 season.



We actually spend more on wages as a percentage of turnover than Arsenal or United, and almost as much as Chelsea, all of whom have arguably better squads than we do (certainly Arsenal and Chelsea do) and all of whom have bought at least one already established world class player. It will be interesting to see last year's results when they're published.

Source: http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/may/01/premier-league-club-accounts-debt-wages