Liverpool FC Forum

[parchpea]

Pretty clear at this point that FSG have not bought the club for love
as they rarely attend games and its purely a medium to long term
fixer up to sell on and make money for their investors.

In contrast the Middle East group at City are very hands on and are
not only willing and able to invest huge sums in the team to be top
club for years to come but are also ensuring it is sustainable by building
a superb infrastructure.

The way they have moved City forward is beyond compare to the work
FSG have done here and there is no doubt who got the better deal.

The bigger question is why we were not able to attract that type of
investor here when Broughton was tasked with getting the money back
for RBS and perhaps the long term goal for FSG is to set that up during
their time here and cash in big.

[Reg]

When you say 'who got the better deal' ask yourself whether FSG or anyoone non-arab could AFFORD to do what they have done. What return on investment have they had financially (not cup wise?). What these guys and Abramovich have done is simply ecnomically non viable so therefore unrealistic to expect it.

[devaney]

These clubs with incredibly rich owners that couldn't care less about profit are simply buying success. That is not my idea of a meritocracy and anybody that thinks differently is seriously deluding themselves.Manchester United have and, it loathes me to say it, developed a very successful football club over the last 13 years. Timing worked in their favour with the arrival of Sky money and that cannot be dismissed. Yes they have a massive debt but the fact remains that if the Glazier family sold United they would probably walk away with more than £1b net and that is a success story. Arsenal have been financially very well managed but with limited success both at home and in Europe. Chelsea and Manchester City have manufactured balance sheets thanks to their owners.The trophies they have won have simply been bought. In fact given what they have spent they should have won more.

[parchpea]

We are too far behind to do it the old way now and the generations of fans worldwide
are wearing United colours rather than ours because we didnt make the right moves
many years ago whilst we had chance.

Thats aincient history now and we are too far behind to go that route so like everyone
else the only solution is massive investment from people who just want to play for fun
and dont care about the accounts whilst laughing at FFP.

Short of that its balancing books and moving people on to do it whilst scrapping about
the UEFA spots and dreaming of 4th.

[Benny The Noon]

These clubs with incredibly rich owners that couldn't care less about profit are simply buying success. That is not my idea of a meritocracy and anybody that thinks differently is seriously deluding themselves.Manchester United have and, it loathes me to say it, developed a very successful football club over the last 13 years. Timing worked in their favour with the arrival of Sky money and that cannot be dismissed. Yes they have a massive debt but the fact remains that if the Glazier family sold United they would probably walk away with more than £1b net and that is a success story. Arsenal have been financially very well managed but with limited success both at home and in Europe. Chelsea and Manchester City have manufactured balance sheets thanks to their owners.The trophies they have won have simply been bought. In fact given what they have spent they should have won more.

At least they have won titles even if they have bought the best players to do it.

We used to buy the best players throughout the 70's and 80's to get the best team to win the title.

It's just done on a grander scale now.

Ill have Chelsea's 3 Prem titles in the last decade over our None

[damjan193]

These clubs with incredibly rich owners that couldn't care less about profit are simply buying success. That is not my idea of a meritocracy and anybody that thinks differently is seriously deluding themselves.Manchester United have and, it loathes me to say it, developed a very successful football club over the last 13 years. Timing worked in their favour with the arrival of Sky money and that cannot be dismissed. Yes they have a massive debt but the fact remains that if the Glazier family sold United they would probably walk away with more than £1b net and that is a success story. Arsenal have been financially very well managed but with limited success both at home and in Europe. Chelsea and Manchester City have manufactured balance sheets thanks to their owners.The trophies they have won have simply been bought. In fact given what they have spent they should have won more.

At least they have won titles even if they have bought the best players to do it.

We used to buy the best players throughout the 70's and 80's to get the best team to win the title.

It's just done on a grander scale now.

Ill have Chelsea's 3 Prem titles in the last decade over our None

But would you also have their plastic fans and soulless team?

[Reg]

If the a-rabs buy Arsenal then we could end up being blocked out of the Champions League by big spenders:  Man Ure, Chelsea, City, Arsenal.  If thats the case then our income stream would be severely reduced and we'd have to revise the business plan accordingly with fewer class players and lower salaries. I didn't realise that Shrek is on 250 thou a week for example. If the CL is slammed shut then the only way forward is to go get an arab. Moores sold Liverpool because he couldn't finance a stadium, FSG might have to sell because they can't finance the squad.  We HAVE to build that stadium, without the extra income we're nothing.

I'm surprised no one picked up on this comment. 

[Benny The Noon]

These clubs with incredibly rich owners that couldn't care less about profit are simply buying success. That is not my idea of a meritocracy and anybody that thinks differently is seriously deluding themselves.Manchester United have and, it loathes me to say it, developed a very successful football club over the last 13 years. Timing worked in their favour with the arrival of Sky money and that cannot be dismissed. Yes they have a massive debt but the fact remains that if the Glazier family sold United they would probably walk away with more than £1b net and that is a success story. Arsenal have been financially very well managed but with limited success both at home and in Europe. Chelsea and Manchester City have manufactured balance sheets thanks to their owners.The trophies they have won have simply been bought. In fact given what they have spent they should have won more.

At least they have won titles even if they have bought the best players to do it.

We used to buy the best players throughout the 70's and 80's to get the best team to win the title.

It's just done on a grander scale now.

Ill have Chelsea's 3 Prem titles in the last decade over our None

But would you also have their plastic fans and soulless team?

We have plenty enough plastic fans anyway

And why is their teams soulless ?

[LFC1990]

Tottenham will probably finish in the top 4 for the second year running without an Arab or Oil TYcoon styled investment. They sold one of their best players from last year in modric and replaced him with Sigurdsson, Dempsey.Vertonghen and Dembele 3 of the 4 i think we were linked with I know the 1st two havent really set the place alight but they bought smart.

Diame is Available for 3M Newcastle bought Sissoko for peanuts. Players are available for cheap prices you just need someone to do their job properly. Assaidi looked like he was going to be a steal but doesnt get much game time.

The owners have backed Dalglish heavily and backed Rodgers to the tune of over 45 million.

Borini Cost us  10 million could have gone elsewhere. Some of the players we could have got instead

It could have really got Sturridge at the start of the season.
Giroud cost Arsenal around 9 million.
Michu How much did swansea pay for him? 2M 
Loic Remy 8M to QPR

This isnt me blaming Rodgers for bad transfers. Im just stating what and who we could have got for around the same amount of money that has been given to us for transfers.

Look at the performances of Fernando Torres for Chelsea 50M they paid and for what?

[Benny The Noon]

How many titles have Spurs won.

Yes you can buy decent players for decent fees

World Class players go for big fees and they are the players that win teams titles

Oh and Diame isn't available for £3mil - that's a false rumour that West Ham have said isn't true

[LFC1990]

How many titles have Spurs won.

Yes you can buy decent players for decent fees

World Class players go for big fees and they are the players that win teams titles

Oh and Diame isn't available for £3mil - that's a false rumour that West Ham have said isn't true

Firstly Reg said that if Arsenal got an Arab in we would be pushed out of champions league qualification I was merely pointing out that tottenham look to have done it two years running (finishing above chelsea)

Secondly RVP world class ?? Cost arsenal 3 million ?

Apart from Van persie who in Manchester united is world class?

3rdly where is your link to say West ham said it was false.

[devaney]

What happens when all twenty Premiership teams have rich billionaire owners?

Not long ago United had the wealth and in fairness to the horrible kunts a lot of it was developed. They never simply went out and bought a team in the same soulless way as Man City and Chelsea by spending obscene amounts of money over a very short time scale. Now United,Chelsea,Man City,Barca,Real Madrid,Bayern Munich,PSG and even the likes of Anji all have the ability to chase after the very best players. The list is getting longer every season. The best players now have a lot more choice where to play and where to live. Life will become increasingly more difficult for the clubs with the new money who are paying ridiculous amounts of money in transfer fees and salaries.Look at Man City and Chelsea this season for example. Just what are they going to win? Swansea could end up having a better season in terms of trophies than these two utterly soulless clubs.   

Do the players really care? Tevez goes on a golf sabbatical and throws his dummy out when things aren't going quite his way. What do you think Bill Shankly would have done with Tevez? Balotelli is another bad example of the modern day footballer and it saddens me to say it but Fernando Torres attitude also stinks.Rooney and his agents almost hold United to ransom to get what they want and they succeeded.Ferguson has never recovered from that and his bitterness went some way to them losing against Real Madrid on Tuesday. If these are the sort of players and clubs that you want then lets go and find ourselves a rich billionaire but I still want to know what will happen when everybody has a rich billionaire?

[Reg]

I don't object ot spending 20 million on a player but I DO object to paying him 200,000+ a week.

Its a working mans' game and its lot touch with its roots.

[Benny The Noon]

How many titles have Spurs won.

Yes you can buy decent players for decent fees

World Class players go for big fees and they are the players that win teams titles

Oh and Diame isn't available for £3mil - that's a false rumour that West Ham have said isn't true

Firstly Reg said that if Arsenal got an Arab in we would be pushed out of champions league qualification I was merely pointing out that tottenham look to have done it two years running (finishing above chelsea)

Secondly RVP world class ?? Cost arsenal 3 million ?

Apart from Van persie who in Manchester united is world class?

3rdly where is your link to say West ham said it was false.

Chelsea will settle down and will be in the CL for the next decade etc

If Arsenal do get bought out then they will join them

Spurs are in because Arsenal have been poor since RvP left.

RvP wasn't world class when he was bought and has struggled until recent seasons and is now world class hence why he cost £24mil. At Man Utd players like Vidic , Evra , Ferdinand , Carrick and Rooney are at the top of the game.

As for Diame - Arsenal were told the release clause was £7mil

http://www.arsenalnews.co.uk/diame-rele ... nt/mobile/

[Benny The Noon]

What happens when all twenty Premiership teams have rich billionaire owners?

Not long ago United had the wealth and in fairness to the horrible kunts a lot of it was developed. They never simply went out and bought a team in the same soulless way as Man City and Chelsea by spending obscene amounts of money over a very short time scale. Now United,Chelsea,Man City,Barca,Real Madrid,Bayern Munich,PSG and even the likes of Anji all have the ability to chase after the very best players. The list is getting longer every season. The best players now have a lot more choice where to play and where to live. Life will become increasingly more difficult for the clubs with the new money who are paying ridiculous amounts of money in transfer fees and salaries.Look at Man City and Chelsea this season for example. Just what are they going to win? Swansea could end up having a better season in terms of trophies than these two utterly soulless clubs.   

Do the players really care? Tevez goes on a golf sabbatical and throws his dummy out when things aren't going quite his way. What do you think Bill Shankly would have done with Tevez? Balotelli is another bad example of the modern day footballer and it saddens me to say it but Fernando Torres attitude also stinks.Rooney and his agents almost hold United to ransom to get what they want and they succeeded.Ferguson has never recovered from that and his bitterness went some way to them losing against Real Madrid on Tuesday. If these are the sort of players and clubs that you want then lets go and find ourselves a rich billionaire but I still want to know what will happen when everybody has a rich billionaire?

Welcome to modern football.

Either jump on the bandwagon or get left behind.