03 Jul 2021 15:46:42
Hi Ed2,

Question on FSG. I was recently thinking about this. Our owners have never stepped away from spending on our infrastructure - Axa training ground, 2 stadium expansions etc. These by itself roughly cost 200 mil pounds.

However, when it comes to squad upgrades we have been more cautious with the money. It can be argued that choosing the other route and investing a lot more in the team can also produce significant asset valuation rise, albeit the risk of failed transfers.

Though that match day revenue increase is marginal from additional seats, but over time it will recoup the investment made and overall improves the asset valuation. Would you say that FSG are pretty risk averse in the way they run their sports businesses?

Do you know from your knowledge for a club like Liverpool what would be an alternate model that would also work knowing our finances. Cheers and thanks for all your work!

{Ed002's Note - The club is loss making and it will be worse this season. They live on a hand to mouth basis and have to look to selling aging players to rebuild. The model is poor.}

1.) 03 Jul 2021
03 Jul 2021 20:55:48
I don't know why you criticise our model Ed2 but always praise Chelsea's. Chelsea are only relevant because they have an owner who invested the money he made off the oil he stole from the Russian people in the days of bandit capitalism.

{Ed002's Note - I have not said anything about Chelsea but your ignorance is embarrassing - Chelsea fund purchases through sales.}

2.) 03 Jul 2021
03 Jul 2021 21:11:16
Ed002, what other model could the club could use to be stronger in the transfer market? What stretegies could they adopt and actions could the club take?

{Ed002's Note - Liverpool need to act responsibly and sell players to buy others and promote from within.}

3.) 03 Jul 2021
03 Jul 2021 21:29:56
Chelsea and City are only at they stage because their owners invested a billion plus each. A multi billionaire could make Newcastle self sustaining within 5 years and win titles but he would have to loan billions. Liverpool are winning titles with 2 hands tied behind their backs.

4.) 03 Jul 2021
03 Jul 2021 21:32:43
I agree with Ed 100%. The model used by fsg is not sustainable. Ed has explained over and over why that is. You may not like the answer but it is the truth. Just two examples:

1 we allow our manager to tap up which increases the cost of players and 2 we pay way too much in agent fees. We have to sell in order to buy. We also rely almost exclusively on gate receipts and sponsorship money.

We simply don’t have the money that City, Chelsea, and United have. That is our position. It has nothing to do with Ed’s like or dislike of Chelsea.

5.) 03 Jul 2021
03 Jul 2021 20:32:19
Had we not made profits the last few seasons before C.V.?

{Ed002's Note - The relevance of which is?}

6.) 03 Jul 2021
03 Jul 2021 20:52:09
Ed2. It’s been a few years now since you first informed us of this dangerous game of spending on projected future income. Now, I would have thought the global C.V. would at the very least made our owners reassess this business model. Is there any indication that we will move away from this model? I mean if they look at how the C.V. has impacted us in general and our spending this summer for example compared to some other clubs we are directly competing with. And before anyone says it. Yes, I’m aware we are not Man City or PSG and yes I’m aware the C.V. has impacted everyone but some more a lot more than others.

{Ed002's Note - The club need to balance the books like other clubs.}

7.) 03 Jul 2021
03 Jul 2021 21:57:00
But we've the best manager in the world though Stone!

8.) 03 Jul 2021
03 Jul 2021 22:18:28
It’s odd aswell because it’s the selling to buy which has got the club into such a good position on the pitch over the last few years. The sales of players like coutinho contributed towards the CL and prem win. It’s a tough decision but I do feel one of mane or salah should be moved on whilst they have some value. Fans don’t like it but got to trust the recruitment that has done ok thus far.

9.) 03 Jul 2021
03 Jul 2021 22:40:06
Jordz, let’s win the title next season and then sell a main player from a position of strength.

Alonso, what are you asking for? A team that is fighting for 6th? I had 10 plus years of watching that drivel.

10.) 03 Jul 2021
03 Jul 2021 22:53:15
Thanks Ed2 for your response.

I am just surprised if owners are using a hand to mouth approach to run their business, spending on training facilities and stadium should be a lower priority in comparison to filling squad gaps.

With this model, we will struggle to keep a very competitive first XI and bench at the same time in the following years unless a Barcelona situation keeps popping up and we continue to get value in the market when we buy.

My point is that it is baffling that having said all this we continue to see infrastructure spending to be sanctioned when we run so thin that at any point our squad never looks strong (mostly bench options) . Makes the poor model even worse in my opinion.

Do you think the emphasis on improving overall club facilities and infrastructure leans towards prepping for an exit strategy out of Liverpool for FSG or I am reading too much into it?

{Ed0666's Note - spending on infrastructure I would assume means the converse of short term thinking. And the Man United fans are up in arms about their stadium/training facilities being piss poor so let’s applaud FSG for doing this instead of persecuting them hey?

11.) 04 Jul 2021
04 Jul 2021 00:12:57
Ed0666, Firstly, to clear up something I think are owners are much better than what we had before. That doesn’t mean I cannot be critical of things. With all due respect, I think you misunderstood my point. I am not saying the owners are bad. Instead what I was trying to make sense is that if you have limited resources and run so close to the edge money spent should be prioritized that much more on things that need attention at your club. Our club revenues are hit and we are making even more losses, yet we are putting away money towards stadium expansion that brings in marginal increase in revenue year on year.

With our model, FSG diversifying the resources into building up LFC as an asset by improving infrastructure than having a competitive first XI along with a strong bench for the coming seasons is puzzling. How long back do we have to go to say we had a strong XI and a very competitive bench?

The model we operate it is absolutely critical to make sure we build on the platform that the recent success we had and maximize Klopp’s remaining contract. If that means investing into the squad via significant player sales (which we are not doing) / reallocating resources kept aside for other things (stadium) into the squad; we must do it. It is very important for LFC in this period considering our situation.

{Ed0666's Note - I’m not the biggest fans of the owners but I think it’s admirable that in a world wide pandemic where clubs are going bust, being asset stripped and not being able to pay employees we are building new stands a new training facility that is comparable to anything in the world and sizeable funds being committed to summer transfers. You have to understand Vary we aren’t Chelsea, Man United, City, PSG, we can’t afford to stockpile a superb 11 and a world class bench. I have no idea wether FSG are making the club look pretty to sell it.