Trending Topics

      Next match: LFC v Spurs [Premier League] Sun 5th May @ 4:30 pm
      Anfield

      Today is the 30th of April and on this date LFC's match record is P26 W15 D5 L6

      The money will be there, but not for rafa

      Read 2244 times
      0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
      YNWABairn
      • Forum Emlyn Hughes
      • ****
      • Started Topic

      • 835 posts |
      • Anti Modern Football
      The money will be there, but not for rafa
      May 18, 2010 02:06:58 pm
      http://www.footylatest.com/liverpool-to-receive-30-million-in-transfer-funds-but-not-benitez/14258

      Liverpool to receive £30 Million in transfer funds but not BenitezLiverpool owners George Gillett and Tom Hicks have agreed to inject more funds in to Liverpool FC in order to purchase new players but on condition that manager Rafa Benitez is not allowed to spend it. The American owners have realised that to sustain the value of Liverpool and to attract potential investors that they will need to keep the club competitive and that means bringing in fresh blood at Anfield.

      As things stand investors have been put off by the high price of Liverpool as set down by Hicks and Gillett and uncertainty over the clubs future financial status in the absence of Champions League football. To avoid the club losing even more value the Chairman Martin Broughton has told the Yanks that they will need to spend some money or risk seeing their investment lose even more value.

      The American’s as a pair no longer trust the judgment of manager Rafa Benitez and they have agreed to stump up some extra cash as long as the Spaniard is not the one to spend it, though they have agreed that any funds raised from sales the manager can keep.

      This is much needed news for the suffering Anfield faithful, they have had a disastrous season and confidence in Benitez is at an all time low and the p[prospect of no decent new signings coming in and the likes of Tottenham and Man City strengthening their squads risked seeing the Merseysiders pushed permanently out of the top four and the Americans at long last seem to have realised this.

      Once the new funding has been confirmed and Benitez’s future has been sorted the club can then settle down and concentrate in rebuilding not just the team but also confidence in time for next season.

      Could at long last be some light at the end of the tunnel for Liverpool fans.

      Who the hell is going to decide which players we sign then? :mad:
      « Last Edit: May 18, 2010 02:16:10 pm by YNWABairn »
      corballyred
      • Banned
      • *****

      • 17,707 posts | 307 
      Re: The money will be there, but not for rafa
      Reply #1: May 18, 2010 02:10:34 pm
      Where did you get this from.
      Reprobate
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 11,055 posts | 436 
      • Avatar by Kitster29@Deviantart.com
      Re: The money will be there, but not for rafa
      Reply #2: May 18, 2010 02:10:44 pm
      Where is this quoted from?

      F**k ups like this....
      and the p[prospect of no decent new signings
      ... lead me to believe that it is not quoted from a respectable source.

      What do they mean, 'inject more funds'??
      SM
      • Forum Legend - Fagan
      • *****

      • 3,583 posts | 400 
      Re: The money will be there, but not for rafa
      Reply #3: May 18, 2010 02:12:43 pm
      I am sure this has been posted before on here.
      SpionKop88
      • Forum Emlyn Hughes
      • ****

      • 783 posts | 11 
      • We see things they'll NEVER see!!!
      Re: The money will be there, but not for rafa
      Reply #4: May 18, 2010 02:15:48 pm
      Who the hell is going to decide which players we sign then? :mad:

      Sammy Lee or The Players?
      YNWABairn
      • Forum Emlyn Hughes
      • ****
      • Started Topic

      • 835 posts |
      • Anti Modern Football
      Re: The money will be there, but not for rafa
      Reply #5: May 18, 2010 02:17:38 pm
      Sorry lads, source is there now :)
      RedLFCBlood
      • Guest
      Re: The money will be there, but not for rafa
      Reply #6: May 18, 2010 02:18:16 pm
      It's ok Folks, Purslow has got footy manager 2010 on and he's currently tying up deals for real Madrids unwanted playing staff. ;D
      bmorelfc
      • Forum Matt Busby
      • **

      • 126 posts |
      Re: The money will be there, but not for rafa
      Reply #7: May 18, 2010 02:29:25 pm
      Wow these fools suck ... Wish H & G fell off a cliff !
      CRK
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 13,604 posts | 361 
      • JFT96 YNWA
      Re: The money will be there, but not for rafa
      Reply #8: May 18, 2010 02:33:09 pm
      Bullshit. Again.

      Next.
      LFC-LCFC
      • Forum Legend - Fagan
      • *****

      • 3,766 posts | 128 
      • Adopted Scouser
      Re: The money will be there, but not for rafa
      Reply #9: May 18, 2010 03:04:44 pm
      £30m...wow...Man City will turn their shirts green with the envy of our spending power.

      Bullshit article, anyway and we all know why.
      Red Rob 60
      • Forum Ian St John
      • ***

      • 448 posts | 43 
      Re: The money will be there, but not for rafa
      Reply #10: May 18, 2010 03:14:20 pm
      Far more interesting than the PR spin from that treacherous b***ard Purslow is a reply to it from "Yanks Out" which is far better informed.



      Quote
      YANKS_OUT says:
      May 18, 2010 at 12:38 pm
      Please take a second to read this – credit to B_H_B of RAOTL for the original post:

      “While “senior sources” at the club (CP) try to facilitate a smear campaign against the manager, pretend everything is rosy at the club and briefs the press to headline the Rick Parry pay off on the day the club’s financials are tactically released on election results day; here’s what’s really going on at Liverpool Football Club:

      The figures released on Friday 8th May 2010 indicate that Liverpool FC is in net debt to the tune of £351m; an increase of £52m from last year’s figure.

      A total of £233.996m is owed to RBS, in addition to an inter-company loan of £144.441m owed to “Kop Cayman”; a company owned by Gillett and Hicks based in the Cayman Island for tax reasons; a company that have loaned Liverpool FC £144.441m at an interest rate of 10%. This is the “own money” that Gillett and Hicks claim to have put into the club. In reality, they’re just charging the club 10% interest for lending that money through an offshore limited liability company that they aren’t even personally liable for – Liverpool FC are.

      Liverpool FC are not paying the interest off on that £144.4m however. It is being charged as a “compound interest”, meaning the interest isn’t paid, but is instead “rolled up” to the grand total. For example, this year (if I’ve got this right):

      £144.4m @ 10% interest = £14.44m payable this year.

      Instead of paying that £14.44m, it is rolled onto the total making the outstanding debt owed to Kop Cayman £158.88m. The following year this is then charged at a further 10% interest:

      £158.88m @ 10% interest = £15.88m payable next year.

      Instead of paying that £15.88m, it is rolled onto the total making the outstanding debt owed to Kop Cayman £174.76m. The following year this is then charged at a further 10% interest:

      £174.76m @ 10% interest = £17.76m payable next year.

      Instead of paying that £17.76m, it is rolled onto the total making the outstanding debt owed to Kop Cayman £192.52m etc etc etc…

      The debt soon spirals out of control, as you can see; and don’t forget, this only concerns the £144.4m owed to Gillett and Hick’s Cayman Islands company – it doesn’t concern the huge £234m owed to RBS.

      The financial figures released last week are for the 2008/09 season.

      Those figures declare the club made a loss of around £52m for that year, due to the interest repayments on the loans and another £22m spent on the new ground; on what that was spent on we have no idea. There’s nothing to show for it anyway – and the total spend on the new ground now exceeds £50m. To put that into perspective – Sunderland managed to build the 48,000 seat Stadium of Light for a lot less than that. We have a few fences up at the back of the Anfield Road End!

      Anyway – we made a loss of £52m that year despite finishing 2nd in the league and reaching the latter stages of the Champions League. The accounts also declared a profit made on player transfers (despite Purslow telling us we don’t need to sell players to balance the books and service debt, and Rafa being accused of wasting millions on players – the accounts prove otherwise).

      What are next year’s figures (which will reflect the financial state we’re in today) going to look like with a 7th place league finish and an early elimination from the Champions League? We will also have an increased debt to service as explained above.

      Then what about the figures for the next financial year when there’s no Champions League money at all coming in?

      While the current owners are in place, we are going to continue to fall further and further into debt. We cannot meet the repayments on the loan as it stands now, and with our revenue due to fall with the lack of Champions League football, we’re on the brink of going into administration.

      Anyone with hopes of making any signings in the summer or any future transfer windows needs a reality check. We are going to be very lucky to be hold onto the players we’ve got, never mind being able to bring anybody else in.

      Gerrard and Torres don’t want to leave because they don’t like the manager (Purslow is feeding this story to the media to whip up the “Rafa Out campaign”); they want to leave as they know there is zero chance of any new players of any quality arriving at the club in its current state. They also know there’s zero chance of any top class manager coming to the club if Benitez decides to walk or is pushed; no manager worth his salt would come to work at the club under these conditions. They know the club is only going one way.

      Until Gillett and Hicks are removed from the club, we’re only going to decline. It really is as simple as that. Nothing else matters.

      And remember – these debts haven’t been accumulated through overspending in trying to buy success and compete like was the case at Portsmouth, Leeds and various other clubs – they are entirely generated through debt loaded onto the club just so Gillett and Hicks can own us and bleed us dry with expense claims, management fees, arrangement fees for every refinance deal and wasting over £50m of the club’s money on a non-existent new stadium.

      This isn’t the result of bad individual club management as Richard Scudamore of The Premier League claims; it is the result of a leveraged buyout that has loaded the cost of buying the club onto the club to repay. Something The Premier League, The FA, UEFA and FIFA should be doing everything in their power to prevent ever happening again.

      2007: £44m debt (£3m per year to service)
      2008: £350m debt (£36.5m per year to service)
      2009: £378m debt (£40m per year to service)
      2010: ???

      Those are the levels of debt on the club, with it being only £44m before Gillett and Hicks bought the club. Therefore the club’s profits were able to be invested back into the squad, allowing us to compete on the pitch. We’re now crippled by debts we cannot service, when that £40m leaving the club each year in interest repayments should be being spent on new players.

      £76.5m has left the club in interest repayments alone in the past 2 years – and in that time – the manager has not spent a single penny on new players. It’s been a sell to buy policy, with profits being made on transfers in the past few transfer windows as the books needed to be balanced; all while the clubs around us are spending to strengthen. How can we be expected to compete under those conditions?

      The debt is growing with every passing day. As a result of the lack of investment in the squad (as well as bad luck with injuries / poor decisions / players out of form etc), we’re paying the price on the field with declining performances which will therefore reduce the club’s revenue even further – giving us even less money to service increasing debts. A vicious circle. It’s unsustainable.

      Liverpool FC is paying £110,000 every single day in interest repayments to service a debt we should never have in the first place. That’s £110,000 a day of the club’s money that me and you generate, that we should be seeing spent on new players or developing the club; instead – we are standing back and watching the club being raped in front of our very eyes.

      YANKS OUT!
      hobbithead
      • Forum Emlyn Hughes
      • ****

      • 747 posts | -3 
      Re: The money will be there, but not for rafa
      Reply #11: May 18, 2010 03:15:32 pm
      Don't be too harsh on the story lads. It sound likes those two to a tea. Something like this methinks:

      (a senior source) says Hicks said 'Yes, there will be funds available in the summer. But, until we decide who should spend it, it will stay in the bank.'
      Roddenberry
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 16,568 posts | 1876 
      Re: The money will be there, but not for rafa
      Reply #12: May 18, 2010 03:32:48 pm
      http://www.footylatest.com/liverpool-to-receive-30-million-in-transfer-funds-but-not-benitez/14258

      Liverpool to receive £30 Million in transfer funds but not BenitezLiverpool owners George Gillett and Tom Hicks have agreed to inject more funds in to Liverpool FC in order to purchase new players but on condition that manager Rafa Benitez is not allowed to spend it.

      Case for constructive dismissal there.
      LFCexiled
      • Guest
      Re: The money will be there, but not for rafa
      Reply #13: May 18, 2010 04:00:59 pm
      Quote
      Liverpool FC is paying £110,000 every single day in interest repayments to service a debt we should never have in the first place. That’s £110,000 a day of the club’s money that me and you generate, that we should be seeing spent on new players or developing the club; instead – we are standing back and watching the club being raped in front of our very eyes.

      Now i ain't no mathematician but if we weren't servicin that debt could'nt we afford to pay 7 top players £110,000 a week?
      bad boy bubby
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 14,564 posts | 3172 
      • @KaiserQueef
      Re: The money will be there, but not for rafa
      Reply #14: May 18, 2010 04:35:16 pm
      Far more interesting than the PR spin from that treacherous b***ard Purslow is a reply to it from "Yanks Out" which is far better informed.

      Great post RR. I've taken the liberty of reproducing it in the hope that more see it and understand the sh*t or club is in. It may even deserve it's own thread:

      Please take a second to read this – credit to B_H_B of RAOTL for the original post:

      “While “senior sources” at the club (CP) try to facilitate a smear campaign against the manager, pretend everything is rosy at the club and briefs the press to headline the Rick Parry pay off on the day the club’s financials are tactically released on election results day; here’s what’s really going on at Liverpool Football Club:

      The figures released on Friday 8th May 2010 indicate that Liverpool FC is in net debt to the tune of £351m; an increase of £52m from last year’s figure.

      A total of £233.996m is owed to RBS, in addition to an inter-company loan of £144.441m owed to “Kop Cayman”; a company owned by Gillett and Hicks based in the Cayman Island for tax reasons; a company that have loaned Liverpool FC £144.441m at an interest rate of 10%. This is the “own money” that Gillett and Hicks claim to have put into the club. In reality, they’re just charging the club 10% interest for lending that money through an offshore limited liability company that they aren’t even personally liable for – Liverpool FC are.

      Liverpool FC are not paying the interest off on that £144.4m however. It is being charged as a “compound interest”, meaning the interest isn’t paid, but is instead “rolled up” to the grand total. For example, this year (if I’ve got this right):

      £144.4m @ 10% interest = £14.44m payable this year.

      Instead of paying that £14.44m, it is rolled onto the total making the outstanding debt owed to Kop Cayman £158.88m. The following year this is then charged at a further 10% interest:

      £158.88m @ 10% interest = £15.88m payable next year.

      Instead of paying that £15.88m, it is rolled onto the total making the outstanding debt owed to Kop Cayman £174.76m. The following year this is then charged at a further 10% interest:

      £174.76m @ 10% interest = £17.76m payable next year.

      Instead of paying that £17.76m, it is rolled onto the total making the outstanding debt owed to Kop Cayman £192.52m etc etc etc…

      The debt soon spirals out of control, as you can see; and don’t forget, this only concerns the £144.4m owed to Gillett and Hick’s Cayman Islands company – it doesn’t concern the huge £234m owed to RBS.

      The financial figures released last week are for the 2008/09 season.

      Those figures declare the club made a loss of around £52m for that year, due to the interest repayments on the loans and another £22m spent on the new ground; on what that was spent on we have no idea. There’s nothing to show for it anyway – and the total spend on the new ground now exceeds £50m. To put that into perspective – Sunderland managed to build the 48,000 seat Stadium of Light for a lot less than that. We have a few fences up at the back of the Anfield Road End!

      Anyway – we made a loss of £52m that year despite finishing 2nd in the league and reaching the latter stages of the Champions League. The accounts also declared a profit made on player transfers (despite Purslow telling us we don’t need to sell players to balance the books and service debt, and Rafa being accused of wasting millions on players – the accounts prove otherwise).

      What are next year’s figures (which will reflect the financial state we’re in today) going to look like with a 7th place league finish and an early elimination from the Champions League? We will also have an increased debt to service as explained above.

      Then what about the figures for the next financial year when there’s no Champions League money at all coming in?

      While the current owners are in place, we are going to continue to fall further and further into debt. We cannot meet the repayments on the loan as it stands now, and with our revenue due to fall with the lack of Champions League football, we’re on the brink of going into administration.

      Anyone with hopes of making any signings in the summer or any future transfer windows needs a reality check. We are going to be very lucky to be hold onto the players we’ve got, never mind being able to bring anybody else in.

      Gerrard and Torres don’t want to leave because they don’t like the manager (Purslow is feeding this story to the media to whip up the “Rafa Out campaign”); they want to leave as they know there is zero chance of any new players of any quality arriving at the club in its current state. They also know there’s zero chance of any top class manager coming to the club if Benitez decides to walk or is pushed; no manager worth his salt would come to work at the club under these conditions. They know the club is only going one way.

      Until Gillett and Hicks are removed from the club, we’re only going to decline. It really is as simple as that. Nothing else matters.

      And remember – these debts haven’t been accumulated through overspending in trying to buy success and compete like was the case at Portsmouth, Leeds and various other clubs – they are entirely generated through debt loaded onto the club just so Gillett and Hicks can own us and bleed us dry with expense claims, management fees, arrangement fees for every refinance deal and wasting over £50m of the club’s money on a non-existent new stadium.

      This isn’t the result of bad individual club management as Richard Scudamore of The Premier League claims; it is the result of a leveraged buyout that has loaded the cost of buying the club onto the club to repay. Something The Premier League, The FA, UEFA and FIFA should be doing everything in their power to prevent ever happening again.

      2007: £44m debt (£3m per year to service)
      2008: £350m debt (£36.5m per year to service)
      2009: £378m debt (£40m per year to service)
      2010: ???

      Those are the levels of debt on the club, with it being only £44m before Gillett and Hicks bought the club. Therefore the club’s profits were able to be invested back into the squad, allowing us to compete on the pitch. We’re now crippled by debts we cannot service, when that £40m leaving the club each year in interest repayments should be being spent on new players.

      £76.5m has left the club in interest repayments alone in the past 2 years – and in that time – the manager has not spent a single penny on new players. It’s been a sell to buy policy, with profits being made on transfers in the past few transfer windows as the books needed to be balanced; all while the clubs around us are spending to strengthen. How can we be expected to compete under those conditions?

      The debt is growing with every passing day. As a result of the lack of investment in the squad (as well as bad luck with injuries / poor decisions / players out of form etc), we’re paying the price on the field with declining performances which will therefore reduce the club’s revenue even further – giving us even less money to service increasing debts. A vicious circle. It’s unsustainable.

      Liverpool FC is paying £110,000 every single day in interest repayments to service a debt we should never have in the first place. That’s £110,000 a day of the club’s money that me and you generate, that we should be seeing spent on new players or developing the club; instead – we are standing back and watching the club being raped in front of our very eyes.

      hobbithead
      • Forum Emlyn Hughes
      • ****

      • 747 posts | -3 
      Re: The money will be there, but not for rafa
      Reply #15: May 18, 2010 06:15:07 pm
      Agreed, this is something all fans should be addressing. If this debacle drags on until the start of the season. Maybe. it is time to start boycotting. Its the only thing these two muppets understand.
      macca8
      • Forum Legend - Dalglish
      • *****

      • 5,258 posts | 83 
      • If you can't love us, then fear us!
      Re: The money will be there, but not for rafa
      Reply #16: May 18, 2010 06:31:15 pm
      30 million? Are you kidding me? How much is a true quality player cost?
      crouchinho
      • Forum Legend - Shankly
      • ******

      • 42,508 posts | 2620 
      • TU TA LOUCO? FILHO DA PUTA!
      Re: The money will be there, but not for rafa
      Reply #17: May 18, 2010 06:37:28 pm
      30 million? Are you kidding me? How much is a true quality player cost?

      Be happy with 30m, mate. Be delighted. Because at this stage we'll be very F***ing lucky to get 3m to spend.
      corballyred
      • Banned
      • *****

      • 17,707 posts | 307 
      Re: The money will be there, but not for rafa
      Reply #18: May 18, 2010 06:43:59 pm
      £30 million I would be very interested to see how Hicks would get his money on £15 million he is close to being declared bankrupt in America would love to know where he is going to get that spare £15 million.
      MIRO
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 12,989 posts | 3124 
      • Trust The Universe
      Re: The money will be there, but not for rafa
      Reply #19: May 19, 2010 09:11:02 am

      Tea Lady or a Chimp?
      Obviously do better than buying the Keanes and Babels.
      JD
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 39,654 posts | 6949 
      Re: The money will be there, but not for rafa
      Reply #20: May 19, 2010 09:12:50 am
      Topic Locked.

      Speculative bullshit.

      Quick Reply