Liverpool Rumours Archive September 06 2011

• Login
• Register

Use our rumours form to send us liverpool transfer rumours.

06 Sep 2011 19:19:46
Blimey, is it 10 years since we did that Treble ?
That's scary.
The Real KB

Blimey, that is scary!

Wow was just looking at that the other day but now i only realize it was 10 years ago. We'll hit new hights soon hopefully!

Sorry i must be bit slow today but can some1 please say what was 10 years ago lol

The club will stay young and hit even bigger heights :-)

The rest of us just get 10 years older. Sometimes though that just take 1 game ;-)

@the 3rd poster; you forgot the season we won the League Cup, FA Cup & UEFA Cup?? What a run that was! Beat the mancs in the Charity Shield soon after, and beat Champions League winners Bayern in the Super Cup...

Don't think that's been done too many times before...

Ryan 'O

06 Sep 2011 17:32:54
By Next Summer :
OUTS:
Jones - Released
Skrtel - 7million
Aurelio - Contract Expired
Maxi - Free
Spearing - 2mil
Aqualiani - 5mil (MILAN)
Pacheco - Atletico Madrid

Skrtel will have 2 years left on his contract next summer, is young and tough, a full international and gives his all every time. If he were to be sold(which I hope not) he would surely fetch 10-15 mill. Not much point selling a PL experienced CB for 7M and buying a replacement for 15M IMO, who may not be much better. We need 4 CB's for this year and 5 if we are to play CL next year. If Agger can stay healthy and Coates eases in the squad between now and Christmas we'll be fine. RW is a bigger need and a future striker for next season or the 2nd half of this one is more important than selling a current team member. Let's see how KK will play Glen when he's fit too as that will be interesting. The Stoke game is very important regarding momentum and 3 points this weekend with be massive with the return of Stevie on the horizon.

Chi-Paul

There is so much time between now and Jan how you can even speculate who will leave never mind putting a value to it is ridiculous.
-Al-

Could u tell us every score for next year and the lotto numbers

Skrtel - will defo fetch us more than 7M if we do decide to sell. The proper price would be between 10 to 15M.

Spearing - will not be going anywhere.

Aquilani - 7M to Milan if the italian manages 20-25 starts for the milan club.

Pacheco - Would rather not come back to England even if Atletico decide not to keep him after the loan spell, so he is defo gone.

Not only will Spearing not be moving anywhere, 2mil is a ridiculous fee for him. He is a great prospect. Future replacement for Lucas

Agree with all except spearing

Spearing will never start another league game for Liverpool.

Huyton red

Oh and as for being future replacement for Lucas - there are 2 years between them and certainly won't be replacing him anytime soon

Lucas over Spearing any day!

Wot about joe cole?
spearing wont be sold either

Maxi on a free, u joking? and spearing shouldnt go anywhere, skrtel we should get 12M for, as long as we get 5M for aquilani im not bothered, not a fan tbh. LFCLegend

You are just guessing....

06 Sep 2011 16:32:44
I was told just before the end of the transfer window that we were preparing a bid for Nolan Roux. The same person has told me that we did make a bid for him late on deadline day and is now telling me that we will be going back in January. Can you tell me if any if this has any truth in it or am I being told a tall one? Thanks

Chris in Tamworth

06 Sep 2011 16:06:36
hello ED i am arvind from mauritius its the first time i am posting on this rumour and its an honor for me to have a talk with you!! well i wnt be long all i want to say wat if jwh have the naming right of the stadium with the quatari or prince faisal of saudi arabia i still think they would be interested if a good proposal is put foward wat are ur views ED {Ed002's Note - I am afraid that you it is most unlikely that the naming rights will involve either the Qataris or any Saudi Arabians.}

I think the world has had enough Middle East-Anglo American conflict....

Richards

Is it not cocacola who are the front runners?

Yes Coca Cola or Pepsi. Whilst Goodison will become the Dandelion and Burdock stadium.

06 Sep 2011 13:13:03
I am the person who posted about the new ground yesterday. Sorry the orginal post was not signed but I stand by my source.

I notice some people are questioning what i put. Can you please clarify what you find hard to believe?

The owners wanted to redevelp anfield however for this to happen we would have to commision a enviromental report which would take months then submit a proposal which would have to be agreed in principal. We would then have to apply for compulsary purchase orders not only for properties that lay where were planning to develop but also all home effect by the "right to light" law. This on its own would take 12-18 months.

If (and thats a big if) all this is approved the home owners are entitled to appeal the desicion at planning level, if this appeal fails they can then appeal the desicion at parlimentary level, if this fails they can also appeal to brussels.

The residents would have a decent arguement to appeal. "They want to take our homes so people can watch football"

So after 3 years of legal fees and debates the ground development still wouldnt be garenteed and the club may still have to start the procees of applying for planning on the new ground all over again (as by this point exsisting permission would be well expired).

Before anyone says im wrong i would just like to point out Liverpool City Council are still working on developing edge lane due to challenges to the CPO's obtained to develope a VITAL TRANSPORT LINK yet you think it would be quicker for expanding a ground?

Truth is if they really do want to increase Anfields capacity it wont happen in the next five years by which time the new ground could be well up and running.

Sorry mate, no offence- your sources may be good, but we have no proof, and experience has shown that Macca's info is usually spot on.

Until he posts that the plan has changed, us punters can only assume that his info is still the most accurate.

Admittedly, his info has been overtaken by changes in events before, so its not impossible that you're right- but who would YOU believe mate? A man who has gotten 90% of stuff right and is known to be honest, or an anonymous one-off post?

You apologise for not signing your original post and then you don't sign this one!!
Kinda makes the apology seem insincere!
s1280

Strange how it never took Newcastle that long to turn the ground from 36k to 52k
Redste

Liverpool will move to a new stadium as their are 4 companies who want to sponsor the new stadium.

Agree with s1280. Why not give us your name so we can refer to you asd a reliable source (like Macca) for future rumours?

If you are confident of your post, you would want to remind us of it at a later point once your point has been vindicated surely?!

Thats why everyones skeptical mate. No name equals limited credibility (through experience).

Red Gart

A lot of knowledge in your post but if think they have been working on it for some time and now they have started to hit some of the problems you are talking about. They have probably gone in to talks about the new stadium but still believe that redeveloping is still the way to go.
They are my believes anyway. I agree with the above post with regards to maccas reputation... If you are right on this one then you will get a good reputation aswell.. Until then....

Myk

You are way wide off the mark to the point of delusion. Set out the financials cause there is no business plan that can sustain that level of investment under present conditions.

I did actually sign my original post.

I understand what your saying about Macca's accuracy however who would you rather believe him or the law? Not local rules not even English law. It's laws set out by the European union.

Huyton Red

Ps feel free to google the edge lane project also known as the Liverpool gateway.

Redste:
St James' Park isnt completely surrounded by terrace housing in a residential neighborhood.
Red Gart

Red Gart the original post was signed

Huyton Red

Redste I'd be lying if I said I knew anything about newcastles re-devolment all I can assume is like old trafford st james's park is not surrounded by terrace housing. Easy to develope on industrial land however anfield is surrounded by residential homes.

There is no business that can sustain that level of investment? What are you talking about? From a naming rights point of view or Liverpool point if view?

The ground would generate enough money to cover liverpools costs. Naming rights. Standard chartered can commit to £20m a year. Warrior can commit to £25m a year and emerate airlines can commit to a 10 year deal at arsenal. You telling me there are no companies with more investment money than these 3 and that these 3 are all gunna hit the wall? Back up wild claims please. Guessing your a toffee or a Manc.

By the way. Some of the houses are owned by evertonians. Would u sell up ya house and move on because they wanted to expand or would you fight it as long as possible?

Huyton red

Everyone pull your tounges out Macca's ass, if you don't agree with this Rumour, (key word being rumour) then don't agree. Don't rip into the poster, what he says is plausible. Macca can be wrong as well. Just take what they both say with a pinch of salt and see what actually happens when a decision is made. I remember macca saying Young and Benzema were Certs for Liverpool in the summer, keep that in mind when your waxing lyrical about him.

Did Macca not also say no left back would be signed as we had enough cover? Oh and if post is dillutional I must point out arsenal got £100m for emerates and tesco were investing £130m in evertons ground in kirkby. Think we would get more investment than Everton.

To this guy:

'Everyone pull your tounges out Macca's ass, if you don't agree with this Rumour, (key word being rumour) then don't agree. Don't rip into the poster, what he says is plausible. Macca can be wrong as well. Just take what they both say with a pinch of salt and see what actually happens when a decision is made. I remember macca saying Young and Benzema were Certs for Liverpool in the summer, keep that in mind when your waxing lyrical about him'

I dont agree with slagging the guy off, but the reply button was put here exactly so we COULD reply to rumours like this and say what we think.

And before you slag off macca, remember what he actually said was they were both serious targets in Jan, and we were going after Young still.

Macca can't put a pen in the player's hand and get him to sign. People change their minds, as has been said. Or other clubs can hijack things, as with Young.

But what we do know is he only tells what he thinks is genuine, and the number of people on here who do that is minute.

Nobody has their tongues up his arse- we just appreciate the very few decent and honest guys who share some genuine info that we can trust.

So if he says that the current plan is to stay at Anfield, that's good enough for me. It doesn't mean it'll deffo happen, but its the best indication we have so far.

Sonds logical/feasable to me

( and please post this Eds, you seem to never post anything remotely anti-macca these days )
Aidan J {Ed002's Note - Why do you need to write such foul posts? Does your mother know such thoughts are running around in side of your head? They are never going to get posted. I really don't understand the constant stream of abuse aimed at the Editors and Macca. Folks make a real effort to bring some information and all we get for it is cretins like you who want to write the most disgusting posts and then expect us to post them.}

The Emirates was in London and redevelopment of old Highbury site was massive part of the project. Our redevelopment and area regeneration cannot pull back huge cash. Anfield is not London in terms of property investment. If you are waiting for Coke or Apple or Honda or Microsoft to underwrite a stadium to the tune of £350m as the world financial markets contract and race toward a second deeper recession then you are INSANE. Tell me how your business plan works? Henry and FSG know the time to rebuild has passed and the only logical sustainable way forward is staggered expansion to a realistic 60k. Macca will be proven right on this. You need to watch the news and listen to what John Henry tweets about global finance. The largest governments and multinationals are creaming themselves at the prospect of a second huge downturn, building Tom Hicks dream stadium in Stanley park is probably not top of the agenda.

GET REAL

I was told that they would issue a compulsory purchase order for the properties around the ground..

Also Ed please don't feel you have to screen peoples responses from me..

Aidan J i will look forward to reading your unedited posts..

Cheers

Macca {Ed002's Note - I would not normally bother and appreciate you can stick up for yourself. Young Aiden sadly spews forth the unacceptable and foul stuff. He will be doing it elsewhere from now.}

Me get real?

First of all as part of the planning permission for the new ground the current anfield site has to be redeveloped as a retail and office plaza so it's value is irrealivent.

The ground original development was due to cost £350m but as a result of the finicancial crisis construction cost have dropped by 20% throw in a £20m contingency that's £300m

I never said any of the companies named are involved just used them as examples of how business are still thriving despite current climate.

Finally why would they be underwriting any stadium? Naming rights are simply sponsorship deals. Are you truely trying to claim the week after united announce a £40m deal to sponsor their training kit no companies are gunna offer sponsorship deals?

Your the 1 who needs to get real mate. The offers are already on the table. It's just a matter of time now. The only thing I can't confirm is the name of the sponsor or the exact date it will be signed as,as with player nothing is concluded until deals are signed however the deal will be worth a minimum of £200m over 10 years.

Time will prove me right and you as the Manc you are. Put your name to your comments as I have and people will see who is the fool

Huyton red

Macca I appreciate you have been told they would issue CPO's but as I stated there is a lot of red tape to be fought threw to get to that point. I'm also sure that if the council want to approve it they would have indicated that already. As Knowsley council did for everton and tesco's kirkby site.

However this is not that simple as the edge lane and kirkby development have proved even if they council wants it it won't defiantly happen even if they approve it or in the edge lane case - development was due to be complete for the 2008 capital of culture but due to objections to CPO's still isn't complete. Can you see the blue noses in the houses really just accepting a CPO or dragging it out as long as possible?

Huyton red - not my opinion it's the law.

I do wonder, given that Europe is almost certainly going into recession, and perhaps the rest of the world as well, whether it makes business sense for anyone to spend 300m or so on a football stadium - or find financing for it, given that banks are now in serious difficulties. For that reason, alone, the shiny new stadium idea may be dead. Just my 2 cents.

Huyton Red,

Retail and office plaza at Anfield site? Clearly you dont know the local area. So FSG are gonna spend £300m for what?
Explain your business plan it is laughable, if you can show me the economic sense in building a stadium that will not be consistenly full and not offer a even a medium term return.

Im not a Manc, your statement has at least stimulated discussion. Im sorry if my post seemed agressive and time will tell who was right.

However I would say Maccas post is at least in line with FSG policy and within the realistic probabilty. You may wish for a new mega stadium but the cost would be LFCs stable economic future.

Your idea? NEVER GONNA HAPPEN

Get Real

Yes I'm a season ticket holder so know the area very well. Not sure why the council insisted on the plaza in that area but they did as they see it as part of the regeneration of the area.

The £300m is simply the construction cost of the ground. I agree that spending £300m would not be a viable option for the new ground on it's own however as I explained a large chunk of the cost will be covered by naming rights - sponsorship.

The fact is emirate airlines sponsored arsenal to the tune of £100m. I'm sure you'd agree that considering we get £20m a year for our kit we would be looking at a considerable bit more than £100m.

This is why the announcement has/ is taken so long to make they needed to make sure the naming rights would cover the bulk of the costs. Leaving the club to find at most £100m (hopefully less depending on sponsorship deal).

There are 35,000 people on the waiting list for season tickets. Say only half would actually take them. That's still an additional 17,500 to add to the 45,000 that go every week. Thats 62,500 Factor in that more people go to a new ground 65,000 is a reasonable figure.

United and arsenal make £1.5m a game more than Liverpool in match day revenue. Again being conservative say liverpools match day revenue would increase by £1m per game. Counting cups and Europe (either European comp) Liverpool play 30 home games a year. That would be an extra £30m a year for a £100m investment.

The ground would pay for itself in less than 4 years thats not including other spin offs such as conserts and a "emerates cup" style tournament.

Let's not forget the value of fsg's investment. Liverpool at anfield would be worth a lot less than liverpool at Stanley park.

This is a rough guide to the business plan and logic behind the planned stadium. As all business investments can only be made on forecasts of cash-flow.

It is all dependent on a big sponsorship deal however the offers are now on the table making the project a reality.

Have to agree with Huyton Red if a Sponsor could be found that would fund the majority of the costs then it would make more sense. To say the Stadium would not be full is laughable to get tickets to watch any game never mind against one of our top rivals is near impossible. Yes they need to improve the transport links but a 65,000 seater would easily be filled most games.

Macca,

Don't rise to it mate. There are plenty of us who genuinely appreciate the info you bring to the site. Ed002 is right, nobody with genuine interest in our great club needs to suffer some of the bile that a person like that wants to spew out from his tiny mind.
As for the stadium, I agree that your info makes zense

All I can add to this discussion is that a friend of mine owns a buy to let property near the ground, and the vultures are already circling in anticipation of compulsory purchase orders. A local property developer has offered him almost double the current market value for his home, because they consider it an investment. They were selling for about £40k but he was offered £70k. It's a speculative gamble because they seem to think that because the redeveloped houses near Granton Road are going for £130k, that will be closer to the CPO price. However, if they don't redevelop, he'll have made more than the current value. Anyway, my mate won't sell because he'll happily wait for a CPO, and doesn't want any property developer potentially trying to hold the club to ransom. But trust me, this happened a couple of months back.

AM

I'm not here to bash Macca although our sources disagree. Just thought I'd share the info I was given along with facts to back it up. I believe Macca has been told council members have promised to aurothise CPO's but in reality even if they want to it's not that simple plus do we really believe everything politicians say?

I do not claim to have any insights to what will happen, not do I know local Liverpool politics...but as a life long Liverpool fan living in the northeast of the US for the 17 years (and now also a Red Sox fan), our owners considered all viable options before ultimately deciding to refurbish Fenway Park rather than move. They drew heavily from fans opinions/views so I would recommend anyone with a clear view on what you would like to see happen, share your thoughts with the new supporters committee. The owners have proven they will listen.
rjb

Rjb The new owners are here to make money. Their not fans so it's not for the love of the club. Luckily their not like the last shower who simply increase turnover off the pitch. FSG realize that success on the pitch creates greater financial rewards whilst also acknowledging the fact they need to keep the fans happy. In the short time they have been at the club they have given the playing staff a complete overhaul for a net investment of £35m whilst knocking £30m a year off interest payments and the same off the wage bill. From next season we will get an extra £25m a season from the kit manufacturer thanks in no small part to their American connection. Ayre is the best man for the job when it comes to increasing commercial revenues as he as already proved at Liverpool.

The next logical thing to sort out is the stadium. FSG have always favored redevelopment and made it clear from the start. This was a purly finical decession despite making noises about atmosphere etc.

They have never encountered the planing problems before. In the US if you get the decision you get it. Not Eu to overrule no where near as much red tape and plenty of land to play with. Truth is they want to maximize there investment as quickly as possible. Spending £100m redeveloping to add 15,000 seat is obviously more appealing than £300m but it sponsorship deals make up the difference than the new ground is obvious choice.

People make real money on football clubs when they sell up not whilst running it. The new ground would add at least £200m to the value of the club therefore the value of FSG's investment.

Sorry that should say extra £17m for kit. £25m a year off Warrior Sports. The biggest kit deal in England to accompany the biggest sponsorship deal.

I totally agree in terms of them being in it to make money..again just look at what they have done with the Red Sox in terms of revenue generation. But also equally what they have done in spending much more to help generate this additional revenue. Red Sox only trail the Yankees in terms of annual spend. I'm not sure where you are a resident but if you have ever tried to build a commercial development in the US you will know it takes 12-18 months minimum to get to a green light. My point simply is that they are very shrewd businessman that understand happy fans make life much easier for the owners...something G&H never understood. Their business model is sound. They have also proven to be focused on the long term and winning over the longer term so a continued/increased focus on the academy and buying young developing talent. The flip side of that of course is that we are unlikely in the future to see many players start with the club and retire with the club as they are ruthless when it comes to moving on players who are approaching the twilight of their careers. The level of professionalism all throughout the club has also increased...from a commercial side...through to coaching and management with SC and KK.
rjb

AM what have you been smoking? Do you not think if properties in the area of the planned development were for sale Liverpool would not buy them? In addition would a developer not buy the houses up for £40k rather than offer your mate £70k?

Or is that just me applying business logic? Finally the whole point of a Compulasry Purchase Order CPO is it allows the developer to purchase properties and land at a realistic price rather than being held to randsom by someone threatening to supper a project. The properties will all be valued and a compensation figure added. I.e a few grand over market value. Trust me I had a CPO issued on a rental property a few years back.

The problem is people appeal CPO's which inturn delays projects. If your mate has been offered an extra £30k it's because the redevelopment of the anfield site with the plaza will add value to the property. However the new stadium will be built.

Additionally the only properties you can get anywhere near the area are 60-70k or an auction property which tend to sell for about £50k. I looked into buying a rental property in the area so I basically had parking near the ground making me money rather than costing me money.

Huyton Red.

Rjb

You can only judge the new owners on what they have done with liverpool so far and their track record in terms of other sports teams.

I agree with you 100% with regard to everything you say about generating funds via aggressive spending. Something they have already done at Liverpool. As for being ruffless with players again this is backed up by the nature of the last window where players deemed surplus to requirements were sold or released.

The only thing that plays on my mind is when you read through the list of investors in FSG there are a lot of people who have previously owned sports franchises (or large % of shares) in America. Although most have good records whilst being in charge they all seem to turn them round quickly selling on within 3-5 years.

Which for me would be an indication to why they wanted to redevelop anfield rather than opt for a new ground which would obviously be a much more long term project.

However as I have explained above over and over it doesn't look like redevelopment is a possibility any longer. If they are as good as they apear maybe having them stick around longer is a good thing.

˜We would love to expand Anfield, but there are enough local and regulatory issues to keep that avenue stalled for years with no assurances that once begun it would bear any fruit. If Anfield cannot be expanded a new stadium is a wonderful choice. But the fact is we already have 45,000 seats. If a new stadium is constructed with 60,000 seats you've spent an incredible sum of money to add just 15,000 seats. If the cost is £300m for an extra 15,000 seats, that doesn't make any sense at all.'

John W Henry

There will be no major redevelopment or new stadium. Only a small increase over the next years.
The club will audit the stadium and to work out a more efficient seating plan.

06 Sep 2011 11:41:54
Kenny still considering a bid for K.Honda in Jan. Sees him as ideal for the shape of the team as he can play wide or up front. Eds do u know if there was contact in the summer. {Ed001's Note - not as far as I am aware.}

Are you sure it is Kenny considering the player, or it is YOU who want Kenny to consider the player.

BooDaBooze

As a huge fan of Honda, and the Japanese game. It is worth noting Honda is out for 3 months on an injury. Doubt he is on the list at the time being, even if were talking January.

If kenny signed Honda, he would be a impact super sub player because of the positions he can fill

We have had are chance to sign him,dont think we will now

ste liverpool

I've heard Honda has a great ENGINE..............I'll get me coat.

06 Sep 2011 11:19:48
Liverpool are close to completing a formal relationship with Nacional that will give the Reds first call on their players.
TIZER RED

That's not what the Comolli article says.

Don't shoot the messenger mate
TIZER RED

06 Sep 2011 09:51:44
Liverpool to try for 3 players in January:

Gary Cahill (7mil) Skrtel to leave in the Summer for around the same price.

Danilo Pereira (4mil) Back up defensive midfielder.

M'Baye Niang (9mil) The club hopes he will be ready in a couple of years when Bellamy leaves. They are very similar players.

The players Liverpool will go for next summer will be very much dependent on whether they qualify for the Champions League.

Ehh gary cahil yes
moussa sissoko i would like
and eden hazard or just
EDEN HAZARD BRING HIM TO LIVERPOOL

U must be off your head if u think Cahill is only worth 7m!
The kops finest

Off his head?he wont even be worth 7 in jan,when he can leave for free in the summer.more like 5

ste liverpool

Club won't pay £9m for a 16/17 year-old as they like their stat-based approach. Way too much risk spending so much on someone so young from another country.

Niang is available on a free due to contract dispute. Why would we pay £9m for him?

06 Sep 2011 03:58:20
Hi eds a friend told me that just before the transfer window closed liverpool rufused a offer of 41 mill from the russian club who have been throwing the cash around for andy carroll ,of course they must have refused did you guys hear anything?. {Ed009's Note - I heard that it was rubbish.}

There isn't two clubs on this planet dumb enough to pay £35m+ for a donkey like Carroll ;)

Uncle Malcolm (aka Sydney!)

There isn't two people on this site dumb enough to reply to the posts of such a distinguished donkey like Uncle Malcolm (aka Sydney ;).

RHI

Veron, Babe, Hargreaves, Anderson Forlan, Kleberson what morons bought these idiots? Your too easy, and whats this ''also known as''? You're just a bitter little Manc with a loud mouth, nobody cares what your other name is! Grow up son!

MR EM

Replace isn't with aren't and you have learnt another thing from our page manc.
What's the weather like in London today?
Ultra Red

It's gotta be rubbish. We'd have sold him for that.