NESV/Fenway Sports Group: Owners of LFC

Can't understand why people think that Luis will be offloaded in the summer, Corbally mentioned Johnson could go to,wtf,
 whats the point in selling two of our best players when we are re-building,despite what has happened, Suarez will still be here next season as will Johnno,
 it's probably
right to say that FSG have rattled their sabre as regards the apologies, maybe a ultamatum was issued regarding Suarez even tho his apology was written for him and not his own words, Kenny was probably told to apologise for the good of the club or in other words saving the face of FSG,
whatever, lets all put this whole sorry saga behind us,
we have a final in a couple of weeks,when we win it the whole mood will change,
even tho it is so painful to back down and being made to look guilty,we all know the real truth, and just like the major catastrophies we have experienced before, we have to move on and start rebuilding our reputation,

i know that you die hard born and bred scousers will be hurting more than the wools amongst us, and in normal circumstances i would stand by your side, but this is the new way of football, this is how FSG  want to run the club, and like it or not it's just the way it is, we need them as much they need us, there is only one way to go here,and that is forward,

all media outlets imo, are f***in scum, their as scummy as the scum from ot, not sure if this is true maybe someone does, but does Kenny have to talk to any journo's either pre or post match? because i f***in wouldn't, not after all the sh*te they have spouted or printed, i say F**k the press, who needs their bullshit rags anyway, lets have a siege mentality towards these tw*ts.

              IKWT   YNWA

What I'm hearing is that the whole team will be let go and built over from scratch. We will be breaking the bank for Messi and Xavi and they will be forced to play all alone up front with only a goalkeeper to back them up.

Thinking being the less players we have the less chance one of them will say something racist or skip the handshake.

You heard it hear first.















This is all getting ridiculous at this point. The world is not going to end, LFC will live on. Faced tougher times in the past, that's for sure.

I personally think its an insult that FSG are mentioned in the same sentence as H&G.

How is it a myth? Kenny Dalglish have been praising the owners all summer regarding player transfers and Damien Comolli stated that the owners are ready to dip in their pocket to buy players. We might not be like Man City going on a spending spree, but NESV have indeed supported the Manager and the Director of Football in all the signings we have made in the summer.

This.


@ corballyred, I dont really understand your venom towards the FSG , can you explain why you appear to hate them so much?

I dont really understand your venom towards the FSG

They havent Sheikh Mansour'd us

Had a long answer but was wiped out by my phone. Basically dont think they have the finance to get us back to the top of the game. They have got a lot of good will without producing much. There net spend is extremely mediocre.  There cut cutting measures are worrying and where the F**k is the plans for the stadium and this Suarez farce has shown me exactly what they are about. Owners that care more about the brand then club are not for me. To me John Henry and co are trying to do every thing on that cheap and to be honest doesn't work in football

I wouldn't call it a "myth" as such, but they haven't spent as much out of pocket on transfer fees as the common perception holds. Some people think the club has spent £100 million.

Winter 2010-2011 Season

In

Luis Suarez: £22,800,000
Andy Carroll: £35,000,000

Total spent: £57,800,000

Out

Fernando Torres: £50,000,000
Ryan Babel: £5,800,000

Total received: £55,800,000

Net spend: + £2,000,000


Summer 2011-2012

In

Jordan Henderson: £16,000,000
Charlie Adam: £7,500,000
Doni: Free
Stewart Downing: £20,000,000
Jose Enrique: £5,500,000
Sebastian Coates: £7,000,000 (or 7.6m, depending on source)
Craig Bellamy: Free

Total spent: £56,000,000

Out

Paul Konchesky: £1,500,000
Milan Jovanovic: No one knows, but can't be much!
Nabil el Zhar: Released
Sotirios Kyrgiakos: Same as Jovanovic
Emiliano Insua:
Christian Poulsen: We probably paid them to take Poulsen
David N'Gog: £4,000,000
Phillip Degen: Released?
Raul Meireles: £12,000,000

Total received: £17,500,000 (but probably closer to around £20-22.5m total)

Net spend: + £38,000,000 (or possibly £36-33.5m)

So we're looking at a combined total net spend somewhere in the £40 million+ range, based only on transfer fees and not including players loaned out and the wage bill.  Which really isn't too bad. Wouldn't call it a "myth," but a lot of the money spent was recouped.


^^^ And feel free to correct any mistakes I've made!

Fact we spent less in the three transfer windows then hicks and Gillette. We have also knocked 30million off the wage bill. For me the transfer spend is closer to thirty than fourty. Unless there policy changes we havent a hope of winning a league with them as own ers we will like arsenal though be  a well run business. We will have a good brand as well

So we're looking at a combined total net spend somewhere in the £40 million+ range, based only on transfer fees and not including players loaned out.  Which really isn't too bad. Wouldn't call it a "myth," but a lot of the money spent was recouped.

It is probably something in the region of £30-40 million spent, as you say, but even all that isn't coming out of the owner's pockets.

The club generates money which has been reinvested into the transfers, as well as a hefty sum being saved on the wage bill from cutting out a fair amount of squad deadwood.

Looking at those figures, I doubt FSG have put any of their money into the transfers at all - but that is what they said they would do when they bought us, they haven't lied or let anybody down.

They want us to be self-sufficient, in compliance with the financial fair play rules.

However, I would have liked them to invest the £15 million extra of their own money allowed by the rules per season, during the first three-year monitoring period. This surely would not cripple them financially, and would give us the maximum boost before the owner investment per season amount is later reduced.

That being said, that money can be spent in one single window as per the rulings, should we want to, provided that we break even afterwards, so there is still time.

Asking them to spend more than that is ridiculous, as it would mean that in a couple of years, even if we did qualify regularly for the CL, we would be ineligible!

Financially, I'm still cautiously optimistic, why moan about them reducing club costs, when that means we have more to spend on players?

However, I am disappointed by their backstepping on Suarez's defence, and expect better from them in the future, to act in the Liverpool spirit of defending our own to the hilt, against all comers.

Fact we spent less in the three transfer windows then hicks and Gillette. We have also knocked 30million off the wage bill. For me the transfer spend is closer to thirty than fourty. Unless there policy changes we havent a hope of winning a league with them as own ers we will like arsenal though be  a well run business. We will have a good brand as well

My understanding is that the clubs value has also risen significantly negating any expenditure.
Say what you want about Chelsea and City but they have stumped up cash and its clear to me the club is to be run on a break even or profitable basis.

Fact we spent less in the three transfer windows then hicks and Gillette. We have also knocked 30million off the wage bill. For me the transfer spend is closer to thirty than fourty. Unless there policy changes we havent a hope of winning a league with them as own ers we will like arsenal though be  a well run business. We will have a good brand as well

Just a point of order here. H&G spent F**k ALL. They borrowed, borrowed, BORROWED.

It's an argument here that nobody is going to win. I understand what Cor and others want and maybe someday you will get it. Reality is that its not going to happen anytime soon no matter how many times you click your heels and make the wish.

In summation some supporters are not going to be happy no matter unless we have

Oil Tycoon:  Check
80k Stadium: Check
Rafa Manager: Check
100m transfer budget avalible/year: Check
At least one half of the Spanish national team: Check
Oil Tycoon giving fans back ownership with no strings attached but still putting in 50-100m/year just because they love the club: Check


If this was to happen I would be more than happy to cheer like everyone else

Hope it does happen

Not going to bi*ch and moan all day long if it doesn't

I've no qualms with FSG with the exception of the handling of the whole Suarez affair.

Some clarity has to come to forefront today that should also be taken into consideration.

The sponsors got involved.

So they had to act, that much is plainly simple.

Had they stuck two fingers up to Standard Chartered, it would have damaged our relationship with them and also harmed future potential sponsorship deals.

So I'm prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt in regards of hanging Kenny and Suarez out to dry as had Standard Chartered not got involved, it probably would not have happened.

Fact we spent less in the three transfer windows then hicks and Gillette. We have also knocked 30million off the wage bill.

You keep stating that mate but don't seem to highlight the fact the money Hicks & Gillete were spending was financed by debt. There is a monumental difference in spending money on transfers by means of debt in comparison with spending money generated by the club. The Cowboys were spending money we didn't have, FSG are investing money recouped by the club back in to the transfer kitty. Also, if we did shave £30 million off the wage bill, Im finding it difficult to distinguish how that is anything but good news? That subsequently enables us to spend more on transfers as opposed to wages unless Ive missed something.

FSG are an investment company, they are not here because they love the club and are ultimately not going to sit there and throw millions upon millions in to the transfer fund in the hope they become the Heroes who helped bring the Glory days back to Anfield. Whether people like it or not, they are here to run a business, football has moved on. We were on the verge of administration before they stepped in and unless there was a passionate, mulit-billionaire Liverpool supporter on the verge of a takeover Im unaware of, the likelihood of ownership people seem to be pining for is a very slim possibility.

If people were hoping for a Mansour/Ambramovich type owner, capable of pouring millions upon millions in to the club without batting an eyelid, Im afraid they are also going to be left disappointed, they have money to burn, FSG don't. What they have done is put us back on a stable financial footing, improved our Worldwide appeal by means of Sponsorship and placed us in a good position in preparation for FFP rules (If & when they do become applicable).

I almost get the feeling people were waiting for FSG to make a slip up (I.E the Suarez incident) just so they could put the boot in regards to the transfer activity. The Suarez scenario was the first mistake they have made for me, in just over a year of ownership, that isn't bad going. Lest we not forget how bad a situation we were in the months prior to that. Many clubs would murder to have the owners we have.

Standard Chartered spoke only with Liverpool management not with parent company FSG.
Retweeted by Jen Chang

Not sure on the validty of that, or if it means anything to anyone.

Im not sure why the whole money issue is being dragged into it again, i am happy with their business model and the way they are running the club on that side.

I haven't been happy the way the club have handled the whole Suarez thing from minute one, it shouldnt have got as far as it did with sponsors geting involved. It has been poorly handled.

That being said its happened now and we have to move forward together. Its not a problem we acnt get over but hey these sites are here to put your views forward and that is mine.

Apart from this issue i have no problems with them.

I just wish we could turn the clock back and be clearer in the way we approached the Suarez episode. Then i think the last 48 hours could have been avoided.

Standard Chartered spoke only with Liverpool management not with parent company FSG.
Retweeted by Jen Chang

Not sure on the validty of that, or if it means anything to anyone.

If true i would guess they mean Ian Ayre..

I've no qualms with FSG with the exception of the handling of the whole Suarez affair.

Some clarity has to come to forefront today that should also be taken into consideration.

The sponsors got involved.

So they had to act, that much is plainly simple.

Had they stuck two fingers up to Standard Chartered, it would have damaged our relationship with them and also harmed future potential sponsorship deals.

So I'm prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt in regards of hanging Kenny and Suarez out to dry as had Standard Chartered not got involved, it probably would not have happened.

Sadly Daz, though some say we should not give a fck what our "image" is, it does matter. If we lost Standard Charter just how are we expecting to get a stadium partner for 150M?

The clubs image matters on a global scale, We are all so proud of how big the club in saying we are the biggest in the world...well sadly being in that category comes with responsibilities that others may not have or even care about.

I just wish we could turn the clock back and be clearer in the way we approached the Suarez episode. Then i think the last 48 hours could have been avoided.

Agreed mate, no one in the higher echolons of management have come out of this in a very good light, to me it appears they left Kenny to shoulder the responsibility of guiding us through this and as I said yesterday, Ayre is the CEO, he should have had our house in order and the club prepared properley and every angle covered all the way through this, he failed his first real test as CEO in my opinion.

There's a lot going on behind the scenes that we don't know about, especially with Standard Chartered getting involved now. Yesterday I was a bit disappointed with all of the apologies (Suarez should have sufficed) and leaving the King out to dry, but now that there's talk with sponsors and all that, I'm beginning to understand somewhat. Still feeling like there is something going on we don't know about - going as far back as the October game with United.

...
I just wish we could turn the clock back and be clearer in the way we approached the Suarez episode. Then i think the last 48 hours could have been avoided.

Agreed mate, no one in the higher echolons of management have come out of this in a very good light, to me it appears they left Kenny to shoulder the responsibility of guiding us through this and as I said yesterday, Ayre is the CEO, he should have had our house in order and the club prepared properley and every angle covered all the way through this, he failed his first real test as CEO in my opinion.

Ayre is good for getting business deals done. Of this, no one should have any real complaints about. But, I too feel he has failed in all of this, as has our lack of good PR. Does anyone else get the impression that we are actually a fairly poorly run club at times?

Forget which owner said it but i remember one of them saying if your in football to make money you are in the wrong business.  Fsg will find that out in time. Stick to my opinion we will not win a league with Fsg in charge no matter who is manager. Only 2clubs to break into top 4 in last few years are spurs and city who both invested heavily in the playing side. We are yet to see that from Fsg iand do people really think we will see it in summer if we dont get champions league. People can continue to believe the media spin about them providing 110 million it ain't true it is a myth.

People can continue to believe the media spin about them providing 110 million it ain't true it is a myth.

I for one know full well how much they have spent since they took over and I might be alone here but I don't necessarily see it as a bad thing that they aren't splashing millions of pounds on players.

I've said before that in the long term it is better to have people in charge that are running the club sensibly and in line with what we earn as opposed to rich business man in for 5-10 years, spending millions and then f**king off when they get bored and leaving a mess.

I believe that we can get success running the club as it has been since FSG took over and too be honest much prefer this to an Abramovich or Sheikh Mansour type.

On FSG probably making Kenny and Luis apologise for what happened on Saturday I don't fully agree with those who see it as a totally bad thing. I may be wrong as I have said but it could be that they are looking after their investment but it could also be that they are interested in upholding the good name of the club and even if their motives are selfish initially it could be good in the long run to draw a line under this whole episode.

We as supporters of the club would like to think, rightly I might add, that we are a special club with a tradition of doing things properly and if it has taken some intervention from the owners to maintain this then it might not be such a bad thing.

I might be seeing this wrong but just how I'm feeling about it at the  minute

Hopefully help calm abit of the hysteria surrounding FSG at the moment and quash this suggestion that they have no backbone.

John W. Henry ready to lift Liverpool’s standard after Luis Suárez furore

By Rory Smith

Trying to enjoy a family vacation, John W. Henry watched the final, radioactive fallout from the Luis Suárez affair settle on Anfield from Fort Lauderdale, deep in America’s Sunshine State.
 
It is unlikely to have been a particularly restful holiday, such is the work that awaits him. Next week, Liverpool’s principal, principled owner will fly to Merseyside, where the storm clouds gather.
 
Contrary to a popular perception too easily guided by soap opera narrative, the arpeggio of apologies issued by Suárez, his club, and Kenny Dalglish, the manager, on Sunday afternoon was not orchestrated by Fenway Sports Group, Liverpool’s parent company.
 
There was no directive from Henry or his chairman, Tom Werner, that the Uruguayan’s failure to shake hands with Patrice Evra at Old Trafford was of such repugnant moral vacuity that contrition was compulsory. There was no kneejerk response to savage words in the New York Times, a former investor in FSG, and the Boston Globe, Henry’s local paper, demanding intervention in the closest thing the Barclays Premier League has to a pariah state.
 
Rather, Ian Ayre, Liverpool’s managing director, in consultation with Dalglish, established the direction the club would take and sought confirmation from his employers that they agreed with his blueprint. This was local self-determination in action. There was no American cultural imperialism.
 
That is not to accuse Henry of idleness, or absenteeism, a charge he and Werner have been desperate to avoid ever since replacing Tom Hicks and George Gillett Jr on a rather happier October day, exactly a year before Suárez turned his spiteful tongue on Evra. That the 62-year-old will be in England within the next seven days, indeed, is evidence of how things have changed. FSG will fight for its investment.
 
Henry’s first job is likely to be mollifying Standard Chartered, the club’s prime, £20 million-a-season shirt sponsor, unsurprisingly unhappy to find its brand, its logo, suddenly associated rather too readily with a player charged with issuing racist abuse. There is no suggestion as yet that the bank, which boasts 1,700 branches worldwide and considerable reach in the Far East, is reassessing its involvement with the club.
 
Henry, though, knows that assuring them such toxicity will not be a feature of their association with Liverpool in the future will soothe troubled minds.
 
Although Henry will also meet Richard Scudamore, the chief executive of the Premier League, in an attempt to smooth relations with the English game’s hierarchy, it is telling that it is when the brand is imperilled that he acts. An editorial in Massachusetts costs nothing; fear rising in the Orient could be expensive indeed.
 
FSG, like Dalglish, has no intention of selling Suárez; anyone with the briefest knowledge of football would know that the game’s moral compass tends to point in whichever direction leads to success, that clubs do not routinely sell their best players simply to dampen an outcry, no matter how serious the offence. Henry has been long enough in sport to know that another controversy will be stirred, another hellion conjured soon enough to distract attention.
 
But he has also been aware, from the moment Evra first levelled his charge at Suárez, at how poisonous such an allegation might be. For the player, of course, and for the club. But most of all for the brand. Such corporate jargon is anathema to fans, no more so than those on the Kop whose traditions are pinned to their jackets and daubed on to flags. But that is what Liverpool, and all of their competitors, have become: brands that require consumers, brands that stand and fall by their sponsors.
 
If Henry’s investment is to work, and Liverpool are to compete once more, he needs a club he can sell worldwide. Ideally, he needs a star player.
 
It seemed before October that Suárez could be that cornerstone. Now that is in doubt. Player, club and brand have been damaged. It is Henry who must begin to arrest the decline, to begin the Herculean task of wiping the slate clean. There is work to be done.