Liverpool FC Forum

[ycsatbjywtbiastkamb]

Can’t blame Newcastle, it just business. It was business when they forced one of their best players and fans favourite out because we put in a ridiculous bid. They are just offering around actual market value. If they are willing to give us 15million now with no loan deals involved we should seriously consider accepting and just move on. That fact we were mugs 18 months ago isn’t Newcastle’s problem. We’re going to make a big loss on him one way or another.

This is pretty much how I see it, Eagle! I don't what Comolli was thinking when he put that bid in, but I just hope it was the last straw that broke the camel's back in regards to our reckless spending over the years which has seen us overpaying for players or signing players who aren't good enough to be here. I like Andy Carroll and wished he would become a success here, but it appears Rodgers doesn't want him here and he doesn't want stick around where he's not wanted, so I would look to offload him as soon as possible. £12m is better than nothing and I doubt we'll get much more for him in all honesty.

Please include KD in this.  This was comolli and Kenny together!

The club want more than £12m.  I cant see any club paying more then that so I fully expect Carroll to stay and spend 99% of games on the bench.

kenny dalglish was only interim manager when carroll and suarez signed, he`d only been in the job 2 or 3 weeks when they arrived at the club.
could you honestly see the owners saying to a temporary manager `here`s £50m go nuts`?
at that stage the plan was for kenny to do the job in the short term and for someone else to take over the reigns at the end of the season.
he may have been asked for his opinion but i dont think he was the one calling the shots.
he probably had more of a say when downing, hendo, enrique and adam arrived the following summer but even then there`s newspaper articles from the time where comoli is bragging that the likes of hendo and downing were signed because the ticked all the boxes re moneyball.
doesnt sound like kennys modus opperandi in the transfer market that.

[parchpea]

Dalglish should have been on top of it though even if it was Comollis job
to do the deal.

You only have to hear Comolli interviewed to understand he couldnt do
a job at Farmfoods let alone Liverpool FC and Dagger should have seen
that.

Anyway both will regret that moment I guarnatee that and I still think
Carroll will go before the window shuts.

[celtic-red!]

If KD just allowed a £35m player come in without his backing then that is simply terrible management.  Who in their right mid would do this?

I dont believe for one mintue he never wanted Carroll or Suarez.

He wanted them both and gave comolli full backing with the money paid for them.  He lost his job as him and comolli were both in it together!

I think KD would have been sacked when Comolli was, the only reason he wasnt was because we were still in the FA cup.

No player was signed behind KD back!

[ycsatbjywtbiastkamb]

If KD just allowed a £35m player come in without his backing then that is simply terrible management.  Who in their right mid would do this?

I dont believe for one mintue he never wanted Carroll or Suarez.

He wanted them both and gave comolli full backing with the money paid for them.  He lost his job as him and comolli were both in it together!

I think KD would have been sacked when Comolli was, the only reason he wasnt was because we were still in the FA cup.

No player was signed behind KD back!

he was the temporary manager! he`d only just got off that cruise liner when carroll and suarez were signed.
when the owners first bought the club they harped on about bringing a new philosophy to english football in terms of player recruitment, they said they were surprised how transfers in england were based on `hunches` and judgement, not data etc. they couldnt believe someone would spend £20m+ on a player just because `he looked a good player`.
they appointed comoli after asking billy beane if he knew anyone involved in footy who was an advocate of stats based player recruitment.
do you think they`d go to all that bother and then let a temporary manager who had been in charge about 3 weeks decide who was coming in or out.
kenny probably got asked for his opinion (and lets not forget carroll was ripping the league to shreds at that point, he`d scored 11 league goals in 18 games, given every defence he`d played against nightmares (including ours) and played for england (where he was MoM against france) for someone who was 21 that was phenominal) but no way imo did he have the final say.
dont forget kenny had been out of management for a decade, out of the blue he got a chance to have his dream job back, after 2 weeks he isnt going to be laying the law down to the owners.

[The Good Yank]

So tired of hearing about the pricetag of Andy Carroll. 

Look at it this way.  We swapped a striker who had handed in a transfer request and had been out of form for a year and a half, for Andy Carroll plus 15 million.

[Eagle]

So tired of hearing about the pricetag of Andy Carroll. 

Look at it this way.  We swapped a striker who had handed in a transfer request and had been out of form for a year and a half, for Andy Carroll plus 15 million.

But that isn’t actually right is it. We could have just had the £50 million in our bank account. It would have been better to get ripped off in the summer with the right player after carefully selecting a replacement rather than get ripped off after hurriedly signing someone in two days when we only had a temporary manger in place and a DOF who had been in his job for 2 months. It was a major cockup.

[ycsatbjywtbiastkamb]

So tired of hearing about the pricetag of Andy Carroll. 

Look at it this way.  We swapped a striker who had handed in a transfer request and had been out of form for a year and a half, for Andy Carroll plus 15 million.

carroll is a very good player, he just wasnt worth £35m or anything like it.
on his day though he can give any defence in the world trouble, infact if you had someone who could consistently put in quality crosses (like say beckham) then he`d be almost impossible to stop. even john terry said when he`s on form he`s unplayable.
the transfer fee had nothing to do with carroll, comoli and LFC just hung a £35m millstone around his neck, thats not carrolls fault

[The Raven]

So tired of hearing about the pricetag of Andy Carroll. 

Look at it this way.  We swapped a striker who had handed in a transfer request and had been out of form for a year and a half, for Andy Carroll plus 15 million.

But that isn’t actually right is it. We could have just had the £50 million in our bank account. It would have been better to get ripped off in the summer with the right player after carefully selecting a replacement rather than get ripped off after hurriedly signing someone in two days when we only had a temporary manger in place and a DOF who had been in his job for 2 months. It was a major cockup.

Spot on.

[SouthCoastShankly]

So tired of hearing about the pricetag of Andy Carroll. 

Look at it this way.  We swapped a striker who had handed in a transfer request and had been out of form for a year and a half, for Andy Carroll plus 15 million.

But that isn’t actually right is it. We could have just had the £50 million in our bank account. It would have been better to get ripped off in the summer with the right player after carefully selecting a replacement rather than get ripped off after hurriedly signing someone in two days when we only had a temporary manger in place and a DOF who had been in his job for 2 months. It was a major cockup.

If the money wasn't spent in January it would have been subject to capital gains tax at the end of the financial year. Up to 40% would have gone to the government, leaving half that to spend the following window.

[LFC2007]

If the money wasn't spent in January it would have been subject to capital gains tax at the end of the financial year. Up to 40% would have gone to the government, leaving half that to spend the following window.

The top rate of capital gains tax rate is -- and was at the time of teh Carroll/Torres deals -- 28%. That rate would have applied to the capital gain only, and not the whole £50m, irrespective of whether that money was then re-invested in the same tax year.

[SouthCoastShankly]

If the money wasn't spent in January it would have been subject to capital gains tax at the end of the financial year. Up to 40% would have gone to the government, leaving half that to spend the following window.

The top rate of capital gains tax rate is -- and was at the time of teh Carroll/Torres deals -- 28%. That rate would have applied to the capital gain only, and not the whole £50m, irrespective of whether that money was then re-invested in the same tax year.

Fair point, I wasn't sure of the exact rate for businesses. Thd tax could of been on all of the transfer fee if we were already in profit for the year. I can't answer exactly.

I do remember at the time there were reports of tax implications if we chose not spend it.

[ethanr]

Speaking of money tho, we now have Carroll's value added to the squad when it comes to FFP rules.  FFP kicked in the following transfer window, so if we end up selling Carroll for £15 million, then that's £15 million more we have to break even.

[SouthCoastShankly]

Speaking of money tho, we now have Carroll's value added to the squad when it comes to FFP rules.  FFP kicked in the following transfer window, so if we end up selling Carroll for £15 million, then that's £15 million more we have to break even.

The FIFA Fair Play rules only require break even accounts from 2017 onwards. Up to then the amount of debt posted by a club will slowly edge towards parity.

2011-2014 will allow a total of £40M loss across the period.
2014-2014 will allow a total of £26M loss across the period.

However, Uefa’s break-even calculation is not the same as a club’s financial accounts. Expenditure such as youth development, stadium infrastructure and community development does not count towards FFP. Depreciation on tangible fixed assets is also excluded.

There is room for clubs to manoeuvre in other areas. The entirety of a transfer fee does not automatically show up as an annual expense because clubs tend to amortise player acquisition costs over the length of their contracts. I.e. Spread the payments over multiple seasons.

If a club misses the financial targets they potentially will not be granted a UEFA licence and would not be able to participate in European competitions. There are some allowances, if a club does not meet the break-even rule but can prove their debt removal is on a positive trend then they possibly may be given leniency and granted a UEFA licence.

[ethanr]

Speaking of money tho, we now have Carroll's value added to the squad when it comes to FFP rules.  FFP kicked in the following transfer window, so if we end up selling Carroll for £15 million, then that's £15 million more we have to break even.

The FIFA Fair Play rules only require break even accounts from 2017 onwards. Up to then the amount of debt posted by a club will slowly edge towards parity.

2011-2014 will allow a total of £40M loss across the period.
2014-2014 will allow a total of £26M loss across the period.

However, Uefa’s break-even calculation is not the same as a club’s financial accounts. Expenditure such as youth development, stadium infrastructure and community development does not count towards FFP. Depreciation on tangible fixed assets is also excluded.

There is room for clubs to manoeuvre in other areas. The entirety of a transfer fee does not automatically show up as an annual expense because clubs tend to amortise player acquisition costs over the length of their contracts. I.e. Spread the payments over multiple seasons.

If a club misses the financial targets they potentially will not be granted a UEFA licence and would not be able to participate in European competitions. There are some allowances, if a club does not meet the break-even rule but can prove their debt removal is on a positive trend then they possibly may be given leniency and granted a UEFA licence.

So we are allowed a £40 million loss from 11-14?  But doesn't that disclude AC's fee?  So technically if we were to sell him for 15, then we could essentially lose 55 from other sources.  The fact we spent a lot last summer, and whatever we spend for the next few years could surely add up?

[andy_g]

Replica heroes are laid for a quote

could you expand on this idea a little for us, please?