LFC as opposed to other clubs you wouldn't piss on if they were on fire - that model is the one spoken of.
No, you said LFC has it's "own model" inferring that it has it's own way of doing business that is different from that of other clubs, so come on, enlighten us all.
LFC is an asset, that definition describes an entity that will operate at a profit.
LFC ceased to be an asset when Moores, your point of reference, sold out to the swindlers from the US of A.
An "asset" is not just something that operates at a profit.
1.
a useful and desirable thing or quality:
Organizational ability is an asset.
2.
a single item of ownership having exchange value.
3.
assets.
items of ownership convertible into cash; total resources of a person or business, as cash, notes and accounts receivable, securities, inventories, goodwill, fixtures, machinery, or real estate (opposed to liabilities ).
Accounting. the items detailed on a balance sheet, especially in relation to liabilities and capital.
all property available for the payment of debts, especially of a bankrupt or insolvent firm or person.
Law. property in the hands of an heir, executor, or administrator, that is sufficient to pay the debts or legacies of a deceased person.
So, as shown you are completely wrong,
yet again.What exactly is wrong in expecting the owner of a company to show confidence in said company and put some money behind it?
Why do you make personal comment and attempt to skew the subject matter from the team's indifferent footballing fortunes to the financial scheme of things, which are by way the vastly improved from the near bankrupt company JWH & Co inherited.
JWH & Co must regard LFC as a totally different proposition to any other asset in that he has stated he will not back the company with his own money, which part of that statement do you have trouble with ??
When has he not shown confidence?
He gave KK a huge amount of money which was pissed away, with you pulling your usual trick of trying to blame commoli for everything, when KK himself said that the transfers were down to him.
Then in your second paragraph you completely reverse what you said earlier in stating that LFC is no longer an asset after Moores sold it.
So, it ceased to be an asset on one hand (according to you) and now you want to completely change that and call it an asset again.
So from this we can assume that you are either talking out of your arse, or you don't know what an asset actually is.
According to you, Moores sold an asset which then became not an asset when h&g bought it, but then changed back to an asset when FSG came on the scene,
then at the same time you say that it was a viable asset that could stand on its own, but then say that FSG should be pumping their own money in (which they have in the form of interest free loans).
It's all completely contradictory, makes no sense and is really rather silly.