22 Aug 2015 22:45:09
Ed 1 if your about what's your take on the owners compared to moore and hicks and gilette? I know moores was a leech and a lot of blame is on him for decline of lfc but everyone moaned about h&g for almost bankrupting the club were i think benitez had a lot to do with it too and everyone loves him still, now fsg are piling up the debt spending obscene money on avg players employ a manager out of his depth so would just be interesting to hear your thoughts? i'm not wanting a hate campaign against fsg etc like a lot of lfc fans have done but people seem to forget h&g did a lot of good creating new revenue streams when they took over etc
{Ed001's Note - both sets of American owners are a mixed bag, both are good and bad in so many ways, at least both have good intentions, unlike Moores who was just like Mike Ashley at Newcastle United and only interested in making money out of the club. It really needs a lot more than a quick reply here to answer this properly but I will give a quick sketch:
Hicks and Gillet:
Good intentions but didn't have the money to cope with the global economy crash and so were extended beyond their means.
Rafa was constantly bickering with them and wanting more and more money to spend, which they obviously couldn't afford.
They did start the rebuild of the commercial arm of the club, which was just a couple of people in a room above a pub when they took over.
The biggest mistake they made was allowing Rafa almost free rein to do what he liked, due to his backing from the fans, which meant huge sums leaving the club in the transfer market. People talk about how he made a profit, but he lost the club many millions each transfer window through huge signing fees, paying up contracts, agent fees etc.
What Rafa created, with their backing, was a very similar situation to the one Aston Villa and Sunderland have been in recently. A popular manager, in O'Neill, buying average players on huge wages and then getting stuck with them for far too long. Sadly it seems FSG are just repeating the mistake.
H&G wanted to create a club that won things but didn't have a clue what they were doing and left us in a financial mess, while they were not intending to do that, their time as owners has to be judged as a failure.
FSG:
Bought the club for a decent price because of the mess, and continued to improve the financial mess. Basically though, there is very little about them any different from the previous owners other than deeper pockets, which has enabled them to do the things H&G wanted to do but couldn't get the money together for, such as the stadium.
The main problem as I see it with FSG is the failure to plan effectively for the future and try and work to their plan. They planned to work with a DoF and Head Coach, but ended up with a manager instead. They aimed to produce players from the academy and buy younger players that can improve in order to create a team to challenge for trophies on a lower budget. Instead the recruitment turns into a shambles with no clear structure or planning to it. Rather than re-evaluating and fixing the issue by going back to their initial plan, they try to put a sticking plaster over the problem by putting a committee in place to do the transfers.
There is no thought or plan behind what they are doing, when there is no one is actually bothering to follow it. The idea of living within the club's means has been thrown out of the window as they chase glory, adding debt to a club which already has to spend outwith its means for the stadium expansion.
Someone at FSG needs to step back and look at the shambles it is turning into and look at how far they have gone away from the path they started on and head back towards it, or we are going to end up in a similar situation to H&G. The Premier League is a financial juggernaut but it won't last forever and the club need to be prepared, right now we are in trouble if the club's income stops growing year on year.}
23 Aug 2015 09:27:36
For me the problem with FSG is not that they overspend but how little they got back for overspending in terms of trophies and progress. I will not go on again about keeping BR this summer when it appears as if Klopps was happy to come but this was just one example of the fact they just don't have the understanding of how football in this level works + the ruthlessness and the willingness to take quick decisions (without waiting to some kind of 'Review' in the summer as if this is some kind of sophisticated accounting problem which needs an expert to investigate it and go over the books).
When you look at what Abramovich or City owners achieved for their money in terms of trophies and what FSG did, you just get the feeling they are in the wrong business.
23 Aug 2015 09:55:48
Best name ever. lol
23 Aug 2015 10:37:02
Well put ed.
I would just like to pull you on one thing though.
The owners spending.
1/ would they have spent this much last year and this year if they hadn't of had the Suarez & Sterling money. Wouldn't it if been like the previous summers in the 30/40 mil category.
2/ do you want the title and do you believe that thete was a better chance of achieving that and top 4 over the past few years with primarily promoting youth?
3/ how much are Liverpool allowed to spend or can afford to spend because no matter what it is its always too much and there's always moaning and complaining from certain people. This summer the club Brought in 49 million pounds and have committed 77 million out. I just don nt understand anything when the difference between that isn't even 30mil, yet you look at Aston villa, Stoke and there all commiting big money out yet we can't.
4/ if we want to income to keep growing and growing we have to get successful again a nd star finishing higher up the table and we have to spend to compete. Do you honestly ed think it would of been possible to achieve top 4 this year with just academy players and a couple of younger player signings??
5/ how much debt are wr actually in.
I thought the club were working ok this, ed I love use but I can't deal with this anymore. I have been coming in this website for 3/4 years and I have never seen you or 2 say (there have been improvements etc) my questions being
Where's the debt at like I asked above.
How much do we lose each week now.
How much are we making each year.
What's the wage bill at?
I completey understand the problem everyone has with spending etc
But I kbow we have struggled recently with our spending but what chance do we have of getting in the top 4 and league if wr don't spend
Look at Tottenham they invested the 100mil, cooked up and have now stepped back a nd are going to try our approach, well are idea of buying young and growing.
But here's the rub do you realise how long that's going to take spurs and it can even go wrong. Thete miles of the pace and quality of there group isn't a patch on any.of the top 4 so that's another season they have to wait.
And Southampton aswel, though they could sell sell sell and invest smarty and cheap and watch them this year lol
How long are you prepared to wait? How kucj time will you give to people, or players and if your not successful when promoting youth then they leave for the clubs who are (sterling)
To best bet there is and the only chance we have is to spend to break into the tip 4 but as I asked well above I dint understand how
77 - 49 = 28 and we're calling that a lot and more Than LIVERPOOL football club can spend.
Neville is the only other one to actually allude to this 'the owners have invested etx well without last summer it was (30 mil, 20 mil, 50 mil and 0mil) even then thete was the 20 mil for Carroll, that is not champions league style investment.
And then when your dad sells your car but gives you the dosh it isn't the same as just getting the dosh now is it.
Thanks guys and girls
{Ed001's Note - sorry but you are clueless about finances clearly. This is pointless, you are talking about money that never came into the club and claiming they used that to finance the deals. This is why we don't talk finances as no one is able to understand that you don't get the full amount from a transfer fee. Your whole rant is just utter nonsensical bull.}
23 Aug 2015 10:44:48
They know too little about football to run a football club, that much is obvious.
Plus most advisors they have had seem to know just as little.
23 Aug 2015 10:49:50
Bwettysollocks? Obviously someone's been on the United page.
Try thinking up your own name. Bloody copy cat!! :)
23 Aug 2015 11:21:29
Hey betty lol thanks mate but i thought of this all by myself but good to see my dopplegangers a utd fan lol ed1 awesome reply thanks totally agree with u about both sets of american owners just hope fsg get it right this season or there could be a lot of soul searching for us lfc fans next season!!
23 Aug 2015 11:55:05
Top managers attract top players fsg seen happy with loads of mediocre ones and a inexperienced manager
23 Aug 2015 12:25:33
Net or gross what ever you call, we have been spending am awful lot in last 3 years with no success at all.
FSG are slowly realizing this fact. Any other manager with the given money under FSG would have won at least one PL title.
23 Aug 2015 13:02:45
If Fsg had made the "right" appointments since they have taken over i have no doubt that the club could have saved themselves a fortune on players. Its criminal! Money that could have been put to good use. I have no doubt about their "intentions" but they have clearly shown to have no clue about football. I would also question their advisors. How could they have got it so wrong so many times is beyond me. Really disappointing.
23 Aug 2015 15:38:49
I get that the sterling money isn't going to be paid in to the clubs bak straight away.
I also understand that sterling was due 5% and QPR 20%, we might of received about 10 million upfront and the rest might be paid over the next 3 years.
That's just a guess above btw I'm not saying anyone has said it.
My question is though did we pay out for all our buys straight away?
So 32.5 mil for example went straight out and into villas bank account ? Or have we paid a upfront fre and then the rest has been split over the next 3 ffp years ?
I just can't believe that the owners who ran financing firms or something in the money section (accounting maybe) prior to forming FSG sports venture, wouldn't have a clue how to handle the clubs finances.
but that's just me, I have extreme faith in FSG that's for sure 😊 were in good hands until I can be proved otherwise!!!
Thanks for the rapid and thorough reply above ed. Much appreciated. Keep up the good and informative work ðŸ˜
Love this site!
{Ed001's Note - you forget we have to pay up the contracts and the FA takes a levy, plus agents fees and taxes. We get nothing like the amounts you are talking about, irrelevant of how much we pay up front because we still have to pay for the previous year or two's transfers anyway.}
23 Aug 2015 22:49:53
We = every club
People just like to use net spend of transfer fees as a convenient ratio to judge transfer spending power / spending comparisons
It's the most commonly available set of figures thrown around in the public domain by the media and the clubs
All the additional costs involved in transfers are not in the public domain and No one is going to sit around and work out how much ink was used in the fax machine to complete a transfer
24 Aug 2015 03:27:10
Great post, Ed! With you on the net spend rubbish as well. Elam. People just use simple mathematics to come up with numbers they then use or used to make Rafa's TW record look good. Net spend is pointless and always has been