Liverpool record revenue but £19M loss for 2015-16

FSG stooges on the back foot tonight.

Like I said, enjoy your conspiracy theories.
If nothing else they give me a good laugh at the naivety of it all.

You quoting about conspiracy theories is classically ironic!

Times I wish H&G were still in charge.

You're right, administration would have been more fun than this

You're right, administration would have been more fun than this

Would of been a lot of fun, plus we need a cull on the amount of freaks that call themselves Liverpool fans. This would of sorted the wheat from the chaff!!

Building trophy cabinets.

Brasso!!

Building trophy cabinets.

Good one, but what about the question I asked.
Where have they cut back.
I'm genuinely interested to hear realistic thoughts on this.

Good one, but what about the question I asked.
Where have they cut back.
I'm genuinely interested to hear realistic thoughts on this.

Wages (relative to turnover and our rivals) and transfer NET spend.

Where have they cut back.

Maybe cut back isn't the right question...maybe "how have they kept up (with our rivals)" is a  better question?

Wages (relative to turnover and our rivals) and transfer NET spend.

.....and quality strikers, wide men, defenders and 'keepers.

Maybe cut back isn't the right question...maybe "how have they kept up (with our rivals)" is a  better question?

It may not be the correct enquiry but the perceived cut backs ensure that we don't keep up with our rivals.

Wages (relative to turnover and our rivals) and transfer NET spend.

Nope, wages have gone up, to say they've gone down relative to turnover is disingenuous spin.
Fact is, our top players are getting paid more.

And then we come to the old tired, worn out, net spend argument.
Any manager building his own squad will sell players to make room for his own.
The problem is we're now on our 3rd manager doing the same thing.

Maybe cut back isn't the right question...maybe "how have they kept up (with our rivals)" is a  better question?

Yep, that probably is the better question.
We've caught up somewhat with off field activities, but changing managers so often has meant no continuity on the pitch, where we need it most.

Having said that, it took Klopp 3 seasons to get his squad together at his last 2 clubs.
Here's hoping he can knock some time off that.

Nope, wages have gone up, to say they've gone down relative to turnover is disingenuous spin.
Fact is, our top players are getting paid more.

And then we come to the old tired, worn out, net spend argument.
Any manager building his own squad will sell players to make room for his own.
The problem is we're now on our 3rd manager doing the same thing.

" Wages have gone up " and they have, it's called inflation. So has beer, cigarettes, houses, bread etc etc. That's why I put in "relative to turnover and our rivals" because that's the only sensible way you can look at such things. If you go down the "no it's quite simple, they've gone up and that's it" route, then you may as well say that as we managed to sign Kenny Dalglish for 440K then we proved that that's all you need to spend in order to get a top player, and that's therefore our limit.

As I said in a previous post when John Barnes was getting paid 10K per week (playing for us) he was the highest paid player in British football. The important point about now compared to then isn't that we now pay everyone in the squad more than 10K per week, it's that lots of our rivals (or who we'd like to think of as our rivals anyway) pay significantly more money in wages than we do, and than we previously used to as a percentage of our turnover.

As far as NET spend is concerned, how many teams out of the top six have had a positive NET spend over a combined period of three windows before? Precisely.

" Wages have gone up " and they have, it's called inflation. So has beer, cigarettes, houses, bread etc etc. That's why I put in "relative to turnover and our rivals" because that's the only sensible way you can look at such things. If you go down the "no it's quite simple, they've gone up and that's it" route, then you may as well say that as we managed to sign Kenny Dalglish for 440K then we proved that that's all you need to spend in order to get a top player, and that's therefore our limit.

As I said in a previous post when John Barnes was getting paid 10K per week (playing for us) he was the highest paid player in British football. The important point about now compared to then isn't that we now pay everyone in the squad more than 10K per week, it's that lots of our rivals (or who we'd like to think of as our rivals anyway) pay significantly more money in wages than we do, and than we previously used to as a percentage of our turnover.

As far as NET spend is concerned, how many teams out of the top six have had a positive NET spend over a combined period of three windows before? Precisely.

Got F**k all to do with inflation 'Mick, which has been pretty much static for a decade, only rising slightly recently, which pretty much kills that argument.

We're now spending more than we have ever done on wages, and yet people persist with the myth that we're "trimming the wage bill".
If you want to try and spin that into a negative, carry on, but I think we both know it's bullshit.

NET spend, is more about context than you want to admit.
The fact we got £15m for Ibe says it all.

Would of been a lot of fun, plus we need a cull on the amount of freaks that call themselves Liverpool fans. This would of sorted the wheat from the chaff!!

You're definitely right on the cull front mate I must say

You're right, administration would have been more fun than this

Yeah!  this is death by a thousand cuts

Good one, but what about the question I asked.
Where have they cut back.
I'm genuinely interested to hear realistic thoughts on this.

Squad quality would be a point worth debating.

1 across...Company spin doctor, four letters... _wa_   ... anyone?

Squad quality would be a point worth debating.

A bit subjective though.

I mean, in November there was loads of people banging on about our "world class" players, and as usual, anyone who urged caution was shouted down, slated and abused.

So, where do you draw the line?
And on top of that, what about players that are simply irreplaceable?
Gerrard retired, it was impossible to replace him, so what's the solution there?

A bit subjective though.

I mean, in November there was loads of people banging on about our "world class" players, and as usual, anyone who urged caution was shouted down, slated and abused.

In November a lot of us were saying this is great, but their could be a sh*t storm brewing if we don't build upon our great start and invest in the squad.

It didn't seem right to me that we could continue scoring goals goals goals without a regular goal scorer.

It didn't sit right with me that Milner and Clyne would have to play every league game, or we would suffer a big dip in class with their replacements.

Similar to that with an injury to Lovren or Matip.

The bubble was always going to burst in my opinion. It's not being wise after the event, a few of us could see this coming.

I think Klopp got a little blinded being so close to the lads, I wouldn't expext Fenway being football no marks to be able to predict that, but from the outside it just didn't seem right.

The penny seems to have dropped with Klopp now however. The talk coming from him this week appears to be of a man who has realised some of this squad are poor to middling footballers.

It's a good sign, but it is too late for this season, but will we get the backing?

Not asking for 100s of millions, about a 30 million spend, on top of player sales could really transform this team.

If we post a transfer net profit again this Summer then a 4th to 7th place finish will be on the cards once more.

In November a lot of us were saying this is great, but their could be a sh*t storm brewing if we don't build upon our great start and invest in the squad.

It didn't seem right to me that we could continue scoring goals goals goals without a regular goal scorer.

It didn't sit right with me that Milner and Clyne would have to play every league game, or we would suffer a big dip in class with their replacements.

Similar to that with an injury to Lovren or Matip.

The bubble was always going to burst in my opinion. It's not being wise after the event, a few of us could see this coming.

I think Klopp got a little blinded being so close to the lads, I wouldn't expext Fenway being football no marks to be able to predict that, but from the outside it just didn't seem right.

The penny seems to have dropped with Klopp now however. The talk coming from him this week appears to be of a man who has realised some of this squad are poor to middling footballers.

It's a good sign, but it is too late for this season, but will we get the backing?

Not asking for 100s of millions, about a 30 million spend, on top of player sales could really transform this team.

If we post a transfer net profit again this Summer then a 4th to 7th place finish will be on the cards once more.

There's a couple of major problems at the club. First is that Klopp wants to continue developing players through coaching which is all very well except the Bundesliga teams play four league games less than us and Germany has one cup as opposed to our two, not to mention a mid-season break. You simply don't get the time in our league to develop exclusively through coaching which is why the successful teams buy in. It has its place but can't be solely relied on due to lack of time.

The second is the transfer strategy. I'm not  asking for major investment, I simply want them to stop hedging their bets on players and be prepared to go out and spend the money on one player. To put this in perspective, in 2012 we spent £48 million on five players where as Chelsea spent £38 million on Hazard and look at our respective fortunes since then. £40 mill the next season,  £117 the next year etc. So imagine how much better off we'd be now if we'd bought one or two world class players each season over the last four years. I don't see that as being unreasonable.

Yeah!  this is death by a thousand cuts

Not really. We've never really been in a better position since I've been born which was 26 years ago. We've always been of the quality we are now. If you took an average of our Premier League finishes I bet it would be 6th or 7th.

That's a hell of a lot better than not existing

Not really. We've never really been in a better position since I've been born which was 26 years ago. We've always been of the quality we are now.

What? Our average is 4th to 5th.

Never been in a better position? We've been regular top 4 finishers and regular trophy winners in your life time.

The position we are in now is in football terms, nowhere.

What else really matters? Financial league tables?

Not really. We've never really been in a better position since I've been born which was 26 years ago. We've always been of the quality we are now. If you took an average of our Premier League finishes I bet it would be 6th or 7th.

That's a hell of a lot better than not existing