25 Jul 2020 11:22:58
Hi there, I am curious the C.V. crisis has evidently transformed Liverpools spending plans. Despite this some of the other big prem league teams seem set to spend big anyway. Is this.
1. Fake news!, no-one is going to be spending much this window as everyone is feeling the pinch?
2. Liverpool are in a worse financial position than Man City, United Chelsea etc to absorb this hit.
3. Liverpool are being more sensible than the others?

{Ed002's Note - I have explained this on many occasions. Go and read the posts then your question will be answered.}

25 Jul 2020 12:35:51
I'll give you a hint mate, your answer is not 1 or 3.

25 Jul 2020 14:24:22
Wonder if we can afford a loan with option to buy? If so, who possibly?

25 Jul 2020 15:00:21
Have United not mortgaged/ rearranged some debt to free up spending money? I don't think they're in a better financial position than us, just more desperate to buy.

25 Jul 2020 15:24:41
I think teams like Spurs, Arsenal and Utd are taking risks as there’s no doubt income will be down due to this crisis but they need to spend or risk being more behind than they already are. We are fortunate that we don’t necessarily need to spend as we are the best team in the league anyway.
City and Chelsea don’t rely on football income to be able to spend as they are bankrolled by multi billionaires. Their income will be down but their owners will find a way to balance the books whilst spending what they need to compete.

{Ed001's Note - Chelsea and Man City do not spend their owners' money any more. The owners made initial large investments to create a profitable company that can pay for itself and in fact make profits. In City's case, you are confusing the City Group money being spent on improving City for the owner's money. By the way, Abu Dhabi are no longer the only owners and haven't been for a while.}

25 Jul 2020 18:45:15
Right oh Ed. There is no way on god’s green earth that these two clubs on their own can generate enough income to sustain the level of spending they both enjoy.
That’s the thing with with ultra wealthy people. They can make you believe what they want you to believe because they have very good people to cover their tracks and make it look legit.
Personally I don’t believe it. These two clubs simply don’t have the worldwide fan base to spend what they spend. They can’t even fill their own fairly modest sized stadiums most of the time.
I’m not criticising them by the way if they can get away with it then fair play but I in no way believe that they legitimately earn the income they say they do.

{Ed001's Note - you clearly do not understand. For starters City Group has a number of clubs that are profitable that contribute. There is far more to making money than just fans in seats. It is nothing to do with ultra wealthy people, you are just ignorant and now making snide accusations against clubs that you have no knowledge whatsoever about. It is pathetic and embarrassing and needs to stop. If Liverpool had only been better about their commercial activities, we would also be in good shape, but we were run by morons until recently. Now we are ten years behind the curve and playing catch up without the huge initial investment to push us along quickly.}

25 Jul 2020 19:03:52
Morons as in Moores, Hicks and Gillette Tris?

{Ed001's Note - yes mate. To be honest even before then the club was run in such an amateur way it is a miracle we could compete, let alone dominate. We were already well behind by the time Moores came in.}

25 Jul 2020 19:18:12
It does rather help Chelsea and City that they had well over £1 billion investment by their owners that has not been carried forward as a debt?
And let’s not question the source of that investment either.

26 Jul 2020 02:03:31
Bang on juicer.

26 Jul 2020 10:48:21
Commercial operations need interest from the general public to make money. There’s no point a German yogurt company sponsoring Southend for example because no one in Germany will see the advertising.

The more fans you have worldwide the more you are shown on TV, talked about, shirts worn etc. worldwide. The more people see you world wide the more you can charge for sponsorships etc. Seems like basic economics to me.

City and Chelsea don’t have that global fan base and exposure that say a Man Utd, Barcelona or Madrid have yet they can still compete with those clubs financially.
Oh and they just happen to have owners with limitless amounts of money.

26 Jul 2020 10:12:16
Thanks for the info, Ed01. It is that initial investment in these clubs that fast-tracked them to being what they are today as in, self-sustaining and solvent business entities. LFC NEVER had that hence, we are being run well but differently as in, living within our means.

{Ed001's Note - that is the key you are putting forward, Liverpool have never had that massive investment to transform the club. If we weren't such a massive club globally, in terms of fanbase etc, we would probably have disappeared into the lower leagues during Moores' time.}

26 Jul 2020 11:49:34
That made me shiver ed01.

{Ed001's Note - worrying thought but very possible at the time.}