Liverpool FC Forum

by **supersub** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 11:25 am

The Thai deal has sunk without trace.........

Sadly Moores does want to do a deal with Steve Morgan because it would cost him personally.

We've got no money!

by **JBG** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 2:59 pm

I think Supersub is right.

As far as I know, Parry will only sanction a further spending of £3m-5m on players this summer and the club are disapointed that they cannot get transfer fees for some of the flops.

Unless we get some investment or Benitez works wonders and is fantastically successful next season, we'll be like Arsenal for the next couple of years as all funds will be diverted towards the new stadium and the bare minimum will be spent on players.

Parry is known to be seeking extra investment and he will probably bring some in at some stage, but until that happens there will be no Michael Ballacks, Ruben Barajas or Pablo Aimars at Liverpool, probably just another Josemi or two.

You never know though, maybe the team needs more Josemis!

by **ivor_the_injun** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 3:10 pm

I'm very keen to know what happened to the £30m "war chest" that was all over the papers a few months ago.

And obviously, the CL cash is reliant upon us having a good run in the CL. For us to have a good run in the CL, we need to have a better squad than we have now.

Even if we don't get transfer fees for some of the dead wood, having their wages off the books will be hugely beneficial, and can be factored into long term financial plans.

So in other words - get that chequebook out, Parry.

by **whylongball?** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 4:07 pm

i think with the current squad, we have the type of players to play the "valencia" way. A decent run in CL& strong challenge in EPL look possible . Also, all the players look to have improved quite a lot under Benitez.
Biscan and Diao would play and contribute more this season i think..

by **72-1090627431** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 8:26 pm

antz wrote:What is the current state of Liverpool FC Finances, with no signings so far and Steve Morgans offer being rejected. Also not to mention the shambles of the thai bids. Anyone who knows what the currebt state is let me know.

I doubt very much that Lfc are strapped for cash, as if they were that desperate for funds, they would have snatched Steve Morgans hand off for his 70 million, instead of turning it down flat. I think they would have tried to work out some sort of deal with him.

Anyway if they are building a new stadium where is that money coming from?

Believe me, LFC wouldnt had submitted a bid for the new ground unless they had substantial funds available to them.

I just think Benitez has to analyse the squad and thn when he identifies some purchases , the cheque book comes out.

by **115-1073096938** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:00 pm

Its a shame all your posts aren't that good.

by **72-1090627431** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 11:32 pm

Oh but they are! and you keep reading and replying to them!

by **115-1073096938** » Sun Aug 01, 2004 2:54 am

Lad, its gone beyond the point where i need to reply to make you look stupid. You do a good job of that on your own.

by **azriahmad** » Sun Aug 01, 2004 5:16 am

Quote (Hustlers Revenge @ July 31 2004,20:26)

I doubt very much that Lfc are strapped for cash, as if they were that desperate for funds, they would have snatched Steve Morgans hand off for his 70 million, instead of turning it down flat. I think they would have tried to work out some sort of deal with him.

Anyway if they are building a new stadium where is that money coming from?

Believe me, LFC wouldnt had submitted a bid for the new ground unless they had substantial funds available to them.

I just think Benitez has to analyse the squad and thn when he identifies some purchases , the cheque book comes out.

Building a new stadium can be financed via long-term instruments as a stadium, like any other buildings, are depreciated over a long term between 30 to 50 years. I think Liverpool will have to come out with something like 10% of the total cost in cash while the balance of 90% will be financed by some kind of long term mortgage financing like bonds against which the stadium and the land it is on will be mortgaged against the loan.

Liverpool is in relatively good financial health so building the stadium with a 15 or 20 or 25 year mortgage bonds should not be a problem.

However, the stark reality of things are that we are behind the likes of manure, arsenal and chelski in the financial standings as we have been missing the CL on several occassions since it became much more commercialised with a lot of TV money. Last year, manure made some 20 million pounds from the CL alone and clubs who win can rake in at least 30 million (more can be made if they have a good merchandising tie-ups) as compared to only 5 million for the UEFA champions. Furthermore, manure has some 67,000 capacity and Arsenal's David Dien has been quoted that this extra seating capacity yields some 1 million pounds more in gate collection from home games at Old Trafford as compared to Highbury.

Chelsea is in a different league as it can afford a bigger transfer kitty than even manure due to Abramovic's riches.

As much as we'd all like to believe otherwise, Liverpool is not that strong financially but not exactly skint either. So believe what Parry said that we can't compete with the Chelskis, Arsenals and the Manures financially at this moment in time.

by **Rafa** » Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:54 am

This is why I cannot understand why Liverpool are building a 60,000 seater stadium. If we are going to be paying it off over say 30 years then there shouldn't really b a problem if that stadium had an extra 10,000 seats?

We should be aiming for the biggest stadium, and yes we would fill it, that season ticket waiting list could dissapear couldn't it? You know the one, the one where my cousin waitin 14 years to get a season ticket and finally got it this year, yeah that one.

45,000 at Anfield now, then 70,000 surely 20,000 people are on that waiting list? Why can't they get their season tickets? leaving an extra 5,000 tickets to be purchased by visiting fans.

Or is the only reason we are not getting a stadium this size is because maybe the planning permission wouldn't be allowed? If that was the case then I think Liverpool should have moved somewhere else were it would be allowed.

Just my opinion.

by **72-1090627431** » Sun Aug 01, 2004 1:46 pm

Rafa wrote:This is why I cannot understand why Liverpool are building a 60,000 seater stadium. If we are going to be paying it off over say 30 years then there shouldn't really b a problem if that stadium had an extra 10,000 seats?

We should be aiming for the biggest stadium, and yes we would fill it, that season ticket waiting list could dissapear couldn't it? You know the one, the one where my cousin waitin 14 years to get a season ticket and finally got it this year, yeah that one.

45,000 at Anfield now, then 70,000 surely 20,000 people are on that waiting list? Why can't they get their season tickets? leaving an extra 5,000 tickets to be purchased by visiting fans.

Or is the only reason we are not getting a stadium this size is because maybe the planning permission wouldn't be allowed? If that was the case then I think Liverpool should have moved somewhere else were it would be allowed.

Just my opinion.

I think there are 15-20 thousand people of the waiting list, if the capacity goes up by only another 15,000 approx, then i doubt all of them wolud go to the season ticket waiting list.

Liverpool FC Forum

Liverpool fc finances

Who is online