NESV/Fenway Sports Group: Owners of LFC

If you believe Klopp then the "transfer committee" is irrelevant.

So Dave Fallows, Barry Hunter and Micheal Edwards are irrelevant

So Dave Fallows, Barry Hunter and Micheal Edwards are irrelevant

The manager does seem to have a script on all things FSG and rarely ad libs.

Oooh just seen on CNN about those racist red sox fans at Fenway!! 

How many managers under JWH&Co?
Even when the dosh has been available as in the case of the Suarez fee, potential and squad players were recruited.
As a double edged sword a perceived sell to buy policy has always been pursued to accommodate an unrealistic wage structure for a club of LFC's status.

What d'ya know, after 8 years under these charlatans we are as far off the Golden Sky as the previous illegal charlatans. 

A £17m average spend on transfers tells you all you want in regards to where the ambitions of FSG lie,

We hope this summer will see a massive change of policy or it could get ugly like what Skip referred to!!

YNWA

A £17m average spend on transfers tells you all you want in regards to where the ambitions of FSG lie,

We hope this summer will see a massive change of policy or it could get ugly like what Skip referred to!!

YNWA

We have hoped for 8 F***ing years mate that FSG will undergo a metamorphosis and emerge as saviours of LFC.
Instead of which we have endured 8 years of lies and broken promises.
JWH stood on the pitch at Anfield 8 years ago and promised to ''bring back the glory days''.
 FSG then admit to making mistakes.
 FSG infer they will learn from those mistakes.
 FSG makes noises about ''backing'' various managers.
 FSG make annual promises that money will be available for meeting the challenges LFC face.
And on and on.

Leopards, spots and liars spring to mind.

A £17m average spend on transfers tells you all you want in regards to where the ambitions of FSG lie,

We hope this summer will see a massive change of policy or it could get ugly like what Skip referred to!!

YNWA

Yet, if this is to believed, over the last five years we've actually had a higher net spend than Chelsea who have won the Premier League, FA Cup, League Cup, and European Cup in that time period. Similarly, Spurs have a net spend somewhere in the region of ten times less than ours yet consistently keep finishing above us in the league table. That suggests the problems at our club are far more complex than merely net spend.

The key difference when you look at all three clubs is our transfer policy compared to theirs. We keep trying to be too smart for our own good where as they keep it simple, go in and get their transfer business done and dusted. What I'm trying to say here is that net spend does not determine success, successful business practices do and that has been our achilles heal since they took over. Sanchez, Ali to name but two, testify to that.

Yet, if this is to believed, over the last five years we've actually had a higher net spend than Chelsea who have won the Premier League, FA Cup, League Cup, and European Cup in that time period. Similarly, Spurs have a net spend somewhere in the region of ten times less than ours yet consistently keep finishing above us in the league table. That suggests the problems at our club are far more complex than merely net spend.

The key difference when you look at all three clubs is our transfer policy compared to theirs. We keep trying to be too smart for our own good where as they keep it simple, go in and get their transfer business done and dusted. What I'm trying to say here is that net spend does not determine success, successful business practices do and that has been our achilles heal since they took over. Sanchez, Ali to name but two, testify to that.

So in essence you are laying the blame at the feet of the transfer committee.

So in essence you are laying the blame at the feet of the transfer committee.

No. The blame is squarely on the FSG execs who implemented the policies. I'm simply saying that it's not net spend that's the issue, it's the way we conduct business that is. If Net spend was the issue then surely neither Chelsea nor Spurs would be finishing above us each year.

No. The blame is squarely on the FSG execs who implemented the policies. I'm simply saying that it's not net spend that's the issue, it's the way we conduct business that is. If Net spend was the issue then surely neither Chelsea nor Spurs would be finishing above us each year.

It is indeed the way business is conducted, that particular aspect of procedure is not the manager's brief I'm sure you will agree.

The transfer committee are FSG appointments, are these the execs you refer to?

It is indeed the way business is conducted, that particular aspect of procedure is not the manager's brief I'm sure you will agree.

The transfer committee are FSG appointments, are these the execs you refer to?

'Transfer committee' is a ridiculous notion. We have no more a transfer committee than Chelsea or Arsenal or United do, that is to say, every club has a collection of people responsible for transfers, they just don't label it. It was an off the cuff comment made by Brendan Rodgers to explain why he didn't want to work under a Director of Football, latched onto by the press which rooted itself in the psyche of supporters. People really need to let that one go.

To be frank, our problems are complex and institutional and cannot be distilled to a single individual or policy, and to do so is an oversimplification of the problems we face. Everything from our timidity in the market, to the way we negotiate with agents, to our wage structure to our transfer policy to the way TV money is distributed, to TV companies messing about with fixtures post-release. Those problems are further exacerbated by the fact we're in the most competitive of all the big five leagues and we've still trying to overcome years of mismanagement that go further back than simply H&G. Some of the problems can easily be fixed. Others not so easily. All I am pointing out is that Net Spend is good business practice and does not determine success or lack thereof.

Whilst there is no single silver bullet that fixes everything, there are, to my mind, three simple steps FSG could take to alleviate some of the problems.

1. Be prepared to evaluate a player's worth by more than their potential resale value.
2. Be willing to pay high wages for players who have proven themselves at other clubs, rather than making them prove themselves at ours first.
3. Stop trying to be clever in the market and get business wrapped up quickly.

Do this and we don't have to worry about net spend because we'll have a higher calibre of player at the club. Too many transfer windows pass where we bring in inexperienced youth or substandard players. Too many times we try to be smart and lose out on players like Deli Ali and Alexis Sanchez and end up signing players like Mario Balotelli and Rickie Lambert. Our owners would turn their nose up at Ibrahimovic because he has no sell on value, but without him United would be looking at a mid-table finish this season rather than the chance to finish in the top four and thus secure Champions League football. Imagine what he could have done for us? Won us the title, maybe?

If, in the Summer, we sell Sakho, Sturridge and Moreno for a combined £85 million, and we bring in a Center back, a Striker and a left back for £85 million, then who cares that we've broken even so long as their replacements are a step up in terms of quality and/or reliability? So no, whilst we have a variety of problems at the club, Net Spend has never been one of them.

i agree. it feels like we try to buy 'yes men', or rather yes 'boys', young talented players who we can strictly keep on what we want, when we want, then sell them for what we want, when we want. but i don't mind it too much, yet, it's still very early days under klopp and this system could actually work out in the long run, i mean it's working out in the short term, despite missing some transfers.

'Transfer committee' is a ridiculous notion. We have no more a transfer committee than Chelsea or Arsenal or United do, that is to say, every club has a collection of people responsible for transfers, they just don't label it. It was an off the cuff comment made by Brendan Rodgers to explain why he didn't want to work under a Director of Football, latched onto by the press which rooted itself in the psyche of supporters. People really need to let that one go.

Rodgers was presented with a choice of a DOF or transfer committee for obvious reasons he opted for the latter, a group of individuals with no other remit than to scrutinise the viability of potential signings, ideally with no perceived agenda.
Their appointments by FSG however would suggest a pre-conceived modus operandi.
The clubs you indicate do have transfer committees and it is an accepted practice, as you admit in describing them as ''a collection of people responsible for transfers'', it is maybe not a tag some would use but transfer committee is a viable definition.

To be frank, our problems are complex and institutional and cannot be distilled to a single individual or policy, and to do so is an oversimplification of the problems we face. Everything from our timidity in the market, to the way we negotiate with agents, to our wage structure to our transfer policy to the way TV money is distributed, to TV companies messing about with fixtures post-release. Those problems are further exacerbated by the fact we're in the most competitive of all the big five leagues and we've still trying to overcome years of mismanagement that go further back than simply H&G. Some of the problems can easily be fixed. Others not so easily. All I am pointing out is that Net Spend is good business practice and does not determine success or lack thereof.

I don't recall any reference to net spend by myself and am fully aware of occasions that defy the 'throw money at the problem' solution.
The individuals overseeing transfers, avoiding the words transfer committee, if not discharging their duties efficiently and fairly would consequently present complex issues for the team and the club over the long term, issues that would paradoxically preclude success; FSG's influence cannot be denied and is damning.

Whilst there is no single silver bullet that fixes everything, there are, to my mind, three simple steps FSG could take to alleviate some of the problems.

1. Be prepared to evaluate a player's worth by more than their potential resale value.
2. Be willing to pay high wages for players who have proven themselves at other clubs, rather than making them prove themselves at ours first.
3. Stop trying to be clever in the market and get business wrapped up quickly.

Do this and we don't have to worry about net spend because we'll have a higher calibre of player at the club. Too many transfer windows pass where we bring in inexperienced youth or substandard players. Too many times we try to be smart and lose out on players like Deli Ali and Alexis Sanchez and end up signing players like Mario Balotelli and Rickie Lambert. Our owners would turn their nose up at Ibrahimovic because he has no sell on value, but without him United would be looking at a mid-table finish this season rather than the chance to finish in the top four and thus secure Champions League football. Imagine what he could have done for us? Won us the title, maybe?

Have you got JWH's mobile no.

If, in the Summer, we sell Sakho, Sturridge and Moreno for a combined £85 million, and we bring in a Center back, a Striker and a left back for £85 million, then who cares that we've broken even so long as their replacements are a step up in terms of quality and/or reliability? So no, whilst we have a variety of problems at the club, Net Spend has never been one of them.

It's wait and see time again.

We have hoped for 8 f**king years mate that FSG will undergo a metamorphosis and emerge as saviours of LFC.
Instead of which we have endured 8 years of lies and broken promises.
JWH stood on the pitch at Anfield 8 years ago and promised to ''bring back the glory days''.
 FSG then admit to making mistakes.
 FSG infer they will learn from those mistakes.
 FSG makes noises about ''backing'' various managers.
 FSG make annual promises that money will be available for meeting the challenges LFC face.
And on and on.

Leopards, spots and liars spring to mind.

100% in agreement.

Wow 8 years have passed and I thought it was only 5. That looks worst than what I thought.

They simply do not have the financial muscle to match the big boys.

Any long term plans for them? Not that I can see. Years gone by and we will be thereabouts trying to get into the top 4 every year, that's about it.

Ok, the first three years they were learning the trades that I can accept but I would expect the 4th year they would have a clear long term plan of what to do. But no, the policy did not change at all, just tweaking things here and there without really having any significant impact.

If they are smart they would have a budget of 70 mil for 2 world class players per year and another 30 mil for potential players and I'm sure with the revenue it is able to cushion the spending and by the 3rd year they would have 6 world class players and the backbone of the team would have been formed. With a bit of luck the academy players could come up with 1 or 2 players that would help. But no, players comes in and out of the club like a revolving door just because they are cheap and so called with potential and this is a clear sign of a failed policy.

Revenue may continue reduce while worldwide  fan base continues to dwindle and before long they would found out that the club has fallen so far behind that it would take a huge chunk of dosh from them to bring us back to where we were and by the time they sell they would have to sell the club at cheap and it would contra the earlier gains that they have made.



 

How many more seasons will it take for the penny to finally drop, FSG have had 8 to bring us the glorydom they promised way back then,
We all know that they cannot compete financially with the likes of Chavs, Citeh, Munts, Arse, but they can invest enough to bring in the top quality individuals we need both in terms of transfers and wages,

There's not much point arguing amongst ourselves whether or not you think FSG have been tight arses or are working within their remit,

This summer is the time to proper back Jürgen and give him what he wants,

I remember TPM the season prior to his departure many on here advocating he should be allowed to bring in who he wanted, so he could live or die by the sword,
I'm not saying we're at that stage with Jürgen but, for me have to give him the tools to help him bring the success we all know he's capable of,

And that means spending a sh*t load of money, a amount well in excess of what perhaps FSG were expecting to spend,

Forget what has gone before, or how much,  or even who, now is the time to act, now is the time to give all that you can, cos if we don't do it this summer when will they??

So C'mon FSG just f***in do it,  you won't miss out promise!!

YNWA

How many more seasons will it take for the penny to finally drop, FSG have had 8 to bring us the glorydom they promised way back then,
We all know that they cannot compete financially with the likes of Chavs, Citeh, Munts, Arse, but they can invest enough to bring in the top quality individuals we need both in terms of transfers and wages,

There's not much point arguing amongst ourselves whether or not you think FSG have been tight arses or are working within their remit,

This summer is the time to proper back Jürgen and give him what he wants,

I remember TPM the season prior to his departure many on here advocating he should be allowed to bring in who he wanted, so he could live or die by the sword,
I'm not saying we're at that stage with Jürgen but, for me have to give him the tools to help him bring the success we all know he's capable of,

And that means spending a sh*t load of money, a amount well in excess of what perhaps FSG were expecting to spend,

Forget what has gone before, or how much,  or even who, now is the time to act, now is the time to give all that you can, cos if we don't do it this summer when will they??

So C'mon FSG just f***in do it,  you won't miss out promise!!

YNWA

The promise as JWH stood on the Anfield turf was to bring back the glory to LFC.
That statement was later adjusted to ''success in the long term''.
It appears now that the ''long term'' mentioned is entirely defined by JWH&Co, if that premise does actually exist.

It also appears as has been said that JWH&Co are quite content to cream the asset that is LFC and refuse to ''give it all they can'' while the market value of the club is more than acceptable, their initial 'investment' is doing very well thank you.

I hope to F**k something does change and the owners do what is accepted practice by feeding an asset that repays handsomely - having said that I won't hold my F***ing breath.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2017/05/04/liverpool-plan-expand-anfield-beyond-60000/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2017/05/04/liverpool-plan-expand-anfield-beyond-60000/

Another ''cream'' project.

Another ''cream'' project.

Not sure what that means, but it looks like good progress to me.

Not sure what that means, but it looks like good progress to me.

I referred in an earlier post to JWH&Co creaming the asset that is LFC, expanding the stadium is a good example.
It enhances the market value of the club but does zilch to do what is really needed, upgrading/expanding the quality of the actual team.
As an afterthought would this be another loan or paid for directly from club resources I wonder.

The sight of an invigorated Anfield for the greater numbers of spectators it accommodates is not primarily what people pay ever rising admission prices for.
Patience is wearing thin and if the bullshit promises continue to be just that, said patience will be history.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2017/05/04/liverpool-plan-expand-anfield-beyond-60000/

It says they'll look into it, no commitment to doing it though 😕

It says they'll look into it, no commitment to doing it though 😕

Well it has to start somewhere. You can't just submit plans without a feasibility study.

It's amazing how jaded some have become that they can't see things like this for what they are...progress.

Has nothing to do with team put  on the field (which very well  may qualify for CL without some of our better talent due  to injuries). Klopp hasn't made a peep  about  not being backed, so I can only assume he's happy with the money he's had to spend.

Feasibility wise, the stand won't pay for itself due to a lack of corporate areas, so the money will need to come from elsewhere, naming rights or Chinese investment maybe, otherwise I can't see it happening.

Feasibility wise, the stand won't pay for itself due to a lack of corporate areas, so the money will need to come from elsewhere, naming rights or Chinese investment maybe, otherwise I can't see it happening.

FSG have admitted as much haven't they OR?

I'm not going to hammer them for developing the stadium no matter how its done as it's only a good thing for us.