Liverpool FC Forum

by **spud** » Sun Nov 07, 2004 10:12 pm

kindaconfused wrote:Perhaps we could talk about Granada after all they are one of the major shareholders in Liverpool, now spot the connection there and you can see an interesting dynamic?

Kinda,

I'm with you 110%. Unfortunately your concerns are viewed as negatives and fans get emotional, but you're right in more than one area.

I've been going on about finances for the last 5 years.

I note your quote ref the Granada Investment. Since you're well informed, you'll be aware that Granada invested in both Arsenal and Liverpool. They got a significantly bigger share in Liverpool for about 20% of what they paid Arsenal......why.......?

Because we are run at the top like a boys club. 3 years ago we were really close to getting into real trouble. The Board has no big company experience and gamble (like Risdale). Our performance commercially falls behind (by miles) that of our competition. Look at Arsenal, yes they've had some recent success but they're miles ahead of us commercially and have a smaller stadium. Do you think they're a much bigger club, look at their website, it's not held together by tape and string.

We have not marketed our overseas opportunity, never mind that, we don't maximise our domestic position. Rick sits next to some Eastern Prime Minister like a little boy embarrasing the club. David Dein at Arsenal is a professional businessman.

I could go on and on. The new ground will break us. Why is our new ground going to cost £70M and Arsenals c£360M. (no it's not just because it's in London) Because our's will be done on the cheap and look awful cause we want to call it Anfield. The Emirates will look and is miles ahead in terms of specification. Morgan is complaining about the quality of the ground already. Apparently its an Easy Jet of a stadium but people are blinded by a few fancy graphics.

Our record in the transfer market is appalling. We've paid top dollar and lost millions never selling anyone on for a major profit (apart from Fowler?). This is not all the managers fault - where the due diligence?

I do believe Rafa will improve things on the pitch and will raise the game BUT we need a shake up at the top.

WHERE DOES EVERYONE THINK THE MONEY IS COMING FROM IN JANUARY? (More debt and gambling on the team performing)

We have a reputation as being a soft touch and the Spice Boys maximised the gravy train. It's continued to run and unless we create a professional structure to manage this multi-million pound company we will not compete.

(ps - a fish rots from its head!)

by **JBG** » Sun Nov 07, 2004 10:54 pm

I don't think Moores takes money from the club, actually (to the best of my knowledge) he has made a number of donations to the club over the years.

The Moores family have always been patrons of both Liverpool and Everton since at least the 1950s.

The problem, as I see it, is that Moores lets his heart rule his head as he is a big Liverpool supporter, shown by his illogical support of Roy Evans and Gerard Houllier when the writing seemed to be on the wall for both men.

Rick Parry was brought in a few years ago in an attempt to modernise the club and bring in investment (he brokered the Granada deal). However, as the Moores family payed for their controlling share in the club, Moores isn't just going to give it away for nothing.

by **azriahmad** » Mon Nov 08, 2004 3:07 am

JBG, what you say about Moores is quite spot on.

He has been the there for Liverpool through thick and thin and must have been the man who raised the funds needed by his managers. If he is guilty of anything, it has been too loyal to his managers (Evans and Houllier) and sanctioning their need for funds to buy their recommended players in the hope of getting into the big leagues (CL etc) and becoming more successful commercial outfir in the process as well.

I don't believe that he is getting any financial benefit from Liverpool, in fact it may have been the opposite - he would have sunk in some of his own furtunes in the past and that being the case, may have received repayments from Liverpool when finances allow.

Why has he rejected Morgan's bids? 2 main reasons. One is that Morgan wants a board seat and with their histroy, this is not an attractive option. More importantly, Morgan wants all of the money to go into the club, without Moores getting anything for diluting his shareholding. If, like JBG said, Moores' family had to buy into becoming the largest shareholder in Liverpool and having devoted time and his own money into building Liverpool, would he as a sane person want to dilute his shareholding for nothing? It is unfair of us to critisize Moores for rejecting Morgan's bid without considering this angle.

On the management mistakes part, we can say our peice because as fans, we have the right to voice out against the fallacies that put Liverpool into trouble financially. Liverpool need new investments urgently, btu right now, we are in the CL and if we keep getting into the CL group stages every year without buying players foolishly, the extra revenue we make will help ease the overall financial position in the years to come without having to rely on new invesments.

The way I see it, Liverpool are desperate for new funds to compete with the big boys, but Liverpool are far from helpless if we can qualify for the CL group stages every year. We don't need to win the CL, because at this juncture, success in the CL may trigger big bonus payments which may actually cost more to the club than modest success in the CL.

by **kindaconfused** » Mon Nov 08, 2004 5:08 am

Guys

The days of being reliant on a big benefactor like Moores should be over we need to be run as a business if we are to keep up.

While this happens we are too reliant on one man!

by **The Canadian Red Army** » Mon Nov 08, 2004 5:41 am

do you want me to find what i posted on this topic the last time it came up
alot of you were in approval with what i said

by **azriahmad** » Mon Nov 08, 2004 5:53 am

I agree, as there is a limit to how much one individual can put into the club unless that individual owns a state-privatised monopoly which was obtained dubiously and at a snip like Abramovich. It is obvious that Moores has come to the end of his personal funds involvement limit by the fact that Liverpool are looking for new investors.

However, Morgan has to realise that being a wealthy fan does not give him the right to pound Moores into submission and dilute his personal shareholding for free when he has been supporting the club with his own funds when necessary in the past. There has to be a balance struck somewhere and if Morgan is a true fan, he should find that balance to make sure things work out instead of going on a public crusade against Moores (he should instead concentrate on making a palatable offer to Moores), which will not bring any positive benefits to the club but just create animosity between the main shareholders and the fans.

Is there an alternative? Sure there is. The fans can unite and form some sort of body which collects shares from those interested and use this funds raised to buy into Liverpool with a BALANCED deal for everybody - the club, Moores etc. and become a more effective voice in the running of Liverpool Football Club.

Morgan is not doing himself any favours by openly continuing his tirades against Moores if he is still interested in becoming a serious shareholder of Liverpool.

by **kindaconfused** » Mon Nov 08, 2004 6:14 am

azriahmad

Right behind you on the suggestion of fans buying shares as for the Morgane vs Moores scenario this is power in its rawest form.

When the club is in trouble then you come along with a miserly offer hoping for a bargain basement deal, but thats life I'm afraid.

My big concern is the fans in all of this as they don't have any say while others slug it out.

by **azriahmad** » Mon Nov 08, 2004 7:07 am

Kinda, I think if the fans group together and form some sort of organised body and make a palatable offer to Moores, I am sure he will listen and give it more of a genuine consideration than he would for Morgan.

The only problem is how to organise such a movement, to start and to move forward. Don't ask for the sky, ask of a board seat from an elected fan representative and by spreading the money to be raised amongst so many fans, I believe between the thousands who'd want to participate, a large sum can be raised. For instance, if there were a group of 20,000 fans involved, an investment of 1,000 pounds per head would yield 20 million pounds. We have the numbers, we need to be organised and organising such a big head count is one major headache.

by **kindaconfused** » Mon Nov 08, 2004 8:31 am

azriahmad

Something similar was done at Arsenal and the fans where promised in return season ticket priority but then Arsenal hiked up the prices on them.

In other words the fans gave them money and got nothing in return.

I've just found out about fans lobby groups along the line of a mutual organisation (similar set-up to a building society), will post the details if I get hold of them.

Found the link Football Supporters Trust

Have a look at let me know what you think?

by **Redrider** » Mon Nov 08, 2004 12:49 pm

There is absolutely no doubt that we are approaching the cross-roads for LFC. Make the right choice and we can go upward and onward, make the wrong choice and we could end up like other big names in decline.
Spud is absolutely correct that the business management of the club is inept, it is from another age. While the partriarchal principles employed by Moores are very laudable and probably run with complete integrity. In the world of today's high finance football we need to add a sharper edge.
Players and staff employed by LFC are entitled to feel secure in their employment and receive handsome pay-offs when they are 'made redundant'' however, we do need to protect ourselves from missuse of our asset values: MO, Mcmannaman and Real Madrid have heavily 'wiped our eye' in recent years. It seems to me that we also pay over the odds for players and give them contracts that make it impossible for us to dispose them without continuing to pay half their salaries etc. Unfortunately, I think we have been too generous in the past.
I am also extremely concerned about the new Stadium Expenditure, £120m for 60,000 seats is preposterous, the Millenium Stadium cost £75m for 80,000 seats. Yes, I know the argument, that more seats means more revenue, but spending £120m for an extra 15,000 seats is madness, it will take 15/20 years before we go into profit.
A cash injection from a new board member would be welcome and pump prime the purchase of a decent striker, but the real benefit to the club has got to be the addition of some umph! to our business affairs. I do not see this happening via well-meaning input from fan's, I believe we already have that from David Moores. We need to accelerate and move on !!

by **kindaconfused** » Mon Nov 08, 2004 1:02 pm

I endorse the new stand cos the money will come from a separate budget and the sale of Anfield will generate income.

But lets get real this new stand is all about a monument/tribute to Moores, while it maybe still be called Anfield no doubt there will be a stand named after hime somewhere in it!

by **JBG** » Mon Nov 08, 2004 3:27 pm

I was a major critic of Moores last season but my primary problem with him is his managerial appointments and the purchases he sanctioned as chairman.

Moores has been very good in one sense as all through the 1990s our managers had plenty of money to spend. Graeme Souness had a fabulous budget to work with in 1991 and 1992, far more money than the other major contenders: Man UTD, Leeds and Arsenal, but this money was spent very badly.

When Roy Evans took over Moores again supported him financially, spending quite a lot of money on Babb, Scales, Kennedy, McAteer and Collymore, although at this stage Blackburn and Man UTD were able to match us in the transfer market and in some cases (Shearer and Keane) better us. Again money was spent badly yet Moores refused to accept that he was wrong with Evans and stood by him.

Appointing Houllier as joint manager was a disaster and wrote off 1998/99 for us, but appointing Houllier as sole manager proved to be the correct decision at the time. Again Moores supported Houllier with plenty of cash (although most of the funds were not released until the Granada investment), and while Man UTD had really passed us out financially (in terms of spending power) in the early to mid Houllier days, we were still spending around £20million a season on average on players in the Houllier days.

Things started to go bad for Houllier and Moores did the right thing initially by standing by him (its only fair that Houllier got backing in 2002/03) but when the problems remained in the autumn of 2003, the writing was on the wall for Houllier, yet Moores backed him for the remainder of the season.

Moores must be criticised for the mismanagement of the playing side in the 1990s. Had the correct managerial appointments been made in the early 1990s and the correct players signed (i.e. we bought the likes of Keane, Le Saux, Warhurst, Batty, Shearer, Bruce etc instead of Ruddock, Dicks, Stewart etc) then we would have went on to dominate the 1990s and not Man UTD (although they still had the golden generation of Giggs, Becks and Scholes).

I know thats easy to say in hindsight, but we held the initative in 1990 but took our eye off the ball and let things slip. Moores, as the ultimate man in charge, must be the person most to blame, as the buck stops with him.

Hopefully if and when Moores goes, his legacy will prove to be a new golden era under Benitez!!!!

by **69-1067957946** » Mon Nov 08, 2004 3:34 pm

From what I can tell Moores is a rich kid who is just living off his dad's money. Is this the sort of person who can drive our club to the very top.

Morgan is a self made man who won't be bullied or pushed around, but he seems a bit arragant and pounding Moores with critcism is not the way to go about his business. Also I don't think he has the financial clout to be chairman of a club the size of Liverpool.

One thing is for sure though, Moores 51% controlling stake is not healthy for the club and I think it is time he passed the power on to someone with a bit more drive and nouse.

by **JBG** » Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:29 pm

Ideally Egghead, as you said, we'd get in a self made man who loves the club but has serious cash behind him.

We need a new stadium and transfer funds of at least £30m a season to really compete. Getting that together would probably require an initial £150m investment from somewhere.........where the hell is that going to come from?

by **69-1067957946** » Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:48 pm

I wasn't to keen on the Thai investeors as they cleary had motives that were not primarly concerned with the well being of the club.

But I don't think you have to have huge investment to be successful. What we need is more prudent businessmen at the top that won't just splash cash unwisely.

Liverpool FC Forum

Who owns the club anyway?

Who is online