Liverpool FC Forum

[lakes10]

The problems



The new ground will cost more than what we know


If we dont make in into the CL THIS YEAR YEAR. (even if we do we must make it into the CL from the next 3 years)


No money for new players, there will be  NO " the owners better pay out and buy this player" when the fans own the club there will only be the money from the income of the club, and right now that just cover paying the bills and 30% to new players.


Fan's will not be able to sell their shares, only to pass them on for the same price.


The club will still need a BANK LOAN to build the the new ground, the 500mil will not cover it.

[JoeTerp]

I don't think the group would be dumb enough to buy the club without knowing that they had enough money to run the club and finance the stadium within a reasonable amount of time.

Also, it seems like the goal is to get 500 mil from 100,000 I am sure that many of the richer investors will be able to afford a LOT more than 5,000 pounds.  So either you get some of the richer owners to invest more and buy more shares or you find more new investors, not that difficult.  The only tricky thing is to figure out where you cap how much one person could own of the club, somewhere between 2-5 % I hope.  When you create more shares to sell then the current owners shares are now a lower percentage and the richer people would be able to reinvest again.

[lakes10]

Like I said earlier, what do the detractors have to benefit from shooting other people's ideas down and calling them stupid and saying that it will never happen?  You have nothing to gain so why not just say nothing?  Obviously no one is forcing you to buy shares, and if it does start to pick up momentum which IS POSSIBLE, FFS Havant & Waterlooville were 2-1 up at Anfield, you would be surprised at what actually IS poissible.  If you say nothing you cannot be wrong, if you speak out against it you are only left with the status quo which almost everyone is against, AND if it does go through and you speak out against it then you have some serious egg on your face.

The Logistical problems are NOT THAT HARD, FFS the model or multiple models are ALREADY laid out from other clubs. Just do a bit of research and do not just close your ears and scream HOW COULD YOU POSSIBLY MAKE CHOICES!?!?!?!?!?! ? ???  uhhhh an elected board would pick a chairman just like how every other company is run.  HOW could the club make money!?!?!?!?!?!? same way other clubs make money SALES and Selling stock.  A lot of these concepts are not too difficult and if you spend any amount of time actually thinking about solutions there are multiple ways to resolve them.

But no amount of shirt sales will offset the cost of a new stadium.

£300m (which is highly likely to increase) / 100,000 shareholders = £3000 each.

So what happens if, say, 1/3 of the initial 100,000 can't afford to pay up the extra money?

Ok but in that case how can we afford a new stadium anyway?? I'm confused by this. If 100,000 people own the club outright for £500 million then that must be better than 2 yanks who own about £100 million of the club with the rest already in loans. I don't understand the arguments against this.
We would simply loan less money at a cheaper rate than the yanks could as we will have tonnes more equity than they have.

If I'm missing something here then please enlighten me.

Basically the club will be run almost exactly like it is now except there will be an elected president and the club will be completely debt free, if they then decide to build a new stadium it will be much easier to get the money and crucially repay it.

no, a bank will see us as high risk (not trading history) we will only get a high intrest rate on any loans....if we can even get one.

[lakes10]

I don't think the group would be dumb enough to buy the club without knowing that they had enough money to run the club and finance the stadium within a reasonable amount of time.

Also, it seems like the goal is to get 500 mil from 100,000 I am sure that many of the richer investors will be able to afford a LOT more than 5,000 pounds.  So either you get some of the richer owners to invest more and buy more shares or you find more new investors, not that difficult.  The only tricky thing is to figure out where you cap how much one person could own of the club, somewhere between 2-5 % I hope.  When you create more shares to sell then the current owners shares are now a lower percentage and the richer people would be able to reinvest again.

no.

the way it is set out is not to give any investor more power than the next investor.

each investor can only have one share.

[Igor Zidane]

Like I said earlier, what do the detractors have to benefit from shooting other people's ideas down and calling them stupid and saying that it will never happen?  You have nothing to gain so why not just say nothing?  Obviously no one is forcing you to buy shares, and if it does start to pick up momentum which IS POSSIBLE, FFS Havant & Waterlooville were 2-1 up at Anfield, you would be surprised at what actually IS poissible.  If you say nothing you cannot be wrong, if you speak out against it you are only left with the status quo which almost everyone is against, AND if it does go through and you speak out against it then you have some serious egg on your face.

The Logistical problems are NOT THAT HARD, FFS the model or multiple models are ALREADY laid out from other clubs. Just do a bit of research and do not just close your ears and scream HOW COULD YOU POSSIBLY MAKE CHOICES!?!?!?!?!?! ? ???  uhhhh an elected board would pick a chairman just like how every other company is run.  HOW could the club make money!?!?!?!?!?!? same way other clubs make money SALES and Selling stock.  A lot of these concepts are not too difficult and if you spend any amount of time actually thinking about solutions there are multiple ways to resolve them.

But no amount of shirt sales will offset the cost of a new stadium.

£300m (which is highly likely to increase) / 100,000 shareholders = £3000 each.

So what happens if, say, 1/3 of the initial 100,000 can't afford to pay up the extra money?

The stadium would pay for itself. Extra revenue from more seats and corporate boxes, sponsorship of the stadium . ie the emirates . Increased revenue from merchandising ie LFC the greatest team in the world ,owned by the greatest fans in the world . So an initial loan would have to be taken out for the stadium ,but with that being the only debt on the club ,it should be paid for easily. Imagine how the other clubs in England would look at us with envy . LFC owned by the fans.

[Igor Zidane]

I don't think the group would be dumb enough to buy the club without knowing that they had enough money to run the club and finance the stadium within a reasonable amount of time.

Also, it seems like the goal is to get 500 mil from 100,000 I am sure that many of the richer investors will be able to afford a LOT more than 5,000 pounds.  So either you get some of the richer owners to invest more and buy more shares or you find more new investors, not that difficult.  The only tricky thing is to figure out where you cap how much one person could own of the club, somewhere between 2-5 % I hope.  When you create more shares to sell then the current owners shares are now a lower percentage and the richer people would be able to reinvest again.

no.

the way it is set out is not to give any investor more power than the next investor.

each investor can only have one share.

Yes but members elected to the board to run the club can invest personal monies into the club. That's how it works in Barca and madrid.

[lakes10]

I don't think the group would be dumb enough to buy the club without knowing that they had enough money to run the club and finance the stadium within a reasonable amount of time.

Also, it seems like the goal is to get 500 mil from 100,000 I am sure that many of the richer investors will be able to afford a LOT more than 5,000 pounds.  So either you get some of the richer owners to invest more and buy more shares or you find more new investors, not that difficult.  The only tricky thing is to figure out where you cap how much one person could own of the club, somewhere between 2-5 % I hope.  When you create more shares to sell then the current owners shares are now a lower percentage and the richer people would be able to reinvest again.

no.

the way it is set out is not to give any investor more power than the next investor.

each investor can only have one share.

Yes but members elected to the board to run the club can invest personal monies into the club. That's how it works in Barca and madrid.

so again the members with the most money will have more power, can you see a membe that outs 10 mil into the club not being given a place on the board??

[NANNY RED]

Lakes just shut up and get you wallet out of storage

[NANNY RED]

remember it doesnt matter how much is collected, they can still refuse to sell.

such a waste of time and effort

great attitude peewee, well I've signed up to it, the full £5000 that is and I hope they get enough people. This is a great business model for a football club and as to how to finance extra things like the stadium it would be exactly how it is done now, with additional small loans if and when required, the difference being that the club itself wouldn't be indebted, in fact the club would have a massive wad of cash!! If they need more money then they could sell more shares, easy. I think its a superb business model and I can't see any reason why it couldn't work, in fact it DOES work in many clubs most notably Barcelona!!

BTW Great scheme to group together people who can't afford the full £5000 Ciggy 

Im proud of you Heimdell lad

[lakes10]

Lakes just shut up and get you wallet out of storage

you know what? i would be the first to  put money in if i had not worked in stock market, I have seen things like this go wrong year after year.

If we have on member that could put up 200mil on his own then i would be on board.

the thing is there is no back up money, if things get hard in the first year we would all need to sell the shares to a new owners to save the club.

that being, i will not be putting in. that being said i wish you all good luck and i hope you do save the club and i hope i end up with egg on my face and wishing i had put in.

[NANNY RED]

Lakes just shut up and get you wallet out of storage

you know what? i would be the first to  put money in if i had not worked in stock market, I have seen things like this go wrong year after year.

If we have on member that could put up 200mil on his own then i would be on board.

the thing is there is no back up money, if things get hard in the first year we would all need to sell the shares to a new owners to save the club.

that being, i will not be putting in. that being said i wish you all good luck and i hope you do save the club and i hope i end up with egg on my face and wishing i had put in.

Well with my share your barred from Anfield 

[Igor Zidane]

I don't think the group would be dumb enough to buy the club without knowing that they had enough money to run the club and finance the stadium within a reasonable amount of time.

Also, it seems like the goal is to get 500 mil from 100,000 I am sure that many of the richer investors will be able to afford a LOT more than 5,000 pounds.  So either you get some of the richer owners to invest more and buy more shares or you find more new investors, not that difficult.  The only tricky thing is to figure out where you cap how much one person could own of the club, somewhere between 2-5 % I hope.  When you create more shares to sell then the current owners shares are now a lower percentage and the richer people would be able to reinvest again.

no.

the way it is set out is not to give any investor more power than the next investor.

each investor can only have one share.

Yes but members elected to the board to run the club can invest personal monies into the club. That's how it works in Barca and madrid.

so again the members with the most money will have more power, can you see a membe that outs 10 mil into the club not being given a place on the board??

They have to be voted on to the board democratically first . For arguements sake , if two members are running for president ,one pomises to invest £10 million and one promises to invest £15 million ,it's a good chance the second person will get voted in . If hoever he doesn;t deliver on his promises there's a good chance he'll get voted out come the next election.

[lakes10]

Lakes just shut up and get you wallet out of storage

you know what? i would be the first to  put money in if i had not worked in stock market, I have seen things like this go wrong year after year.

If we have on member that could put up 200mil on his own then i would be on board.

the thing is there is no back up money, if things get hard in the first year we would all need to sell the shares to a new owners to save the club.

that being, i will not be putting in. that being said i wish you all good luck and i hope you do save the club and i hope i end up with egg on my face and wishing i had put in.

Well with my share your barred from Anfield 

 

[lakes10]

I don't think the group would be dumb enough to buy the club without knowing that they had enough money to run the club and finance the stadium within a reasonable amount of time.

Also, it seems like the goal is to get 500 mil from 100,000 I am sure that many of the richer investors will be able to afford a LOT more than 5,000 pounds.  So either you get some of the richer owners to invest more and buy more shares or you find more new investors, not that difficult.  The only tricky thing is to figure out where you cap how much one person could own of the club, somewhere between 2-5 % I hope.  When you create more shares to sell then the current owners shares are now a lower percentage and the richer people would be able to reinvest again.

no.

the way it is set out is not to give any investor more power than the next investor.

each investor can only have one share.

Yes but members elected to the board to run the club can invest personal monies into the club. That's how it works in Barca and madrid.

so again the members with the most money will have more power, can you see a membe that outs 10 mil into the club not being given a place on the board??

They have to be voted on to the board democratically first . For arguements sake , if two members are running for president ,one pomises to invest £10 million and one promises to invest £15 million ,it's a good chance the second person will get voted in . If hoever he doesn;t deliver on his promises there's a good chance he'll get voted out come the next election.

so he gets voted out.....he will take his money with him.

as i say i have seen this before, sometimes it work, most of the time it dont.

it would be better if there was one member that could put up 50% to 60 % and the rest of the fans make the rest up,

[Igor Zidane]

I don't think the group would be dumb enough to buy the club without knowing that they had enough money to run the club and finance the stadium within a reasonable amount of time.

Also, it seems like the goal is to get 500 mil from 100,000 I am sure that many of the richer investors will be able to afford a LOT more than 5,000 pounds.  So either you get some of the richer owners to invest more and buy more shares or you find more new investors, not that difficult.  The only tricky thing is to figure out where you cap how much one person could own of the club, somewhere between 2-5 % I hope.  When you create more shares to sell then the current owners shares are now a lower percentage and the richer people would be able to reinvest again.

no.

the way it is set out is not to give any investor more power than the next investor.

each investor can only have one share.

Yes but members elected to the board to run the club can invest personal monies into the club. That's how it works in Barca and madrid.

so again the members with the most money will have more power, can you see a membe that outs 10 mil into the club not being given a place on the board??

They have to be voted on to the board democratically first . For arguements sake , if two members are running for president ,one pomises to invest £10 million and one promises to invest £15 million ,it's a good chance the second person will get voted in . If hoever he doesn;t deliver on his promises there's a good chance he'll get voted out come the next election.

so he gets voted out.....he will take his money with him.

as i say i have seen this before, sometimes it work, most of the time it dont.

it would be better if there was one member that could put up 50% to 60 % and the rest of the fans make the rest up,

He's only taking the money he should have invested in the first place , that's why he's getting voted out.
If you gonna have one member who owns 50 or 60% of the club ,you might aswell stick with G+H , it totally misses the point.