Page 15 of 64 FirstFirst ... 5891011121314151617181920212225 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 640

Thread: LFC Up for Sale?

  1. #141
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Teesside
    Posts
    15,324
    Quote Originally Posted by Insidious View Post
    Stadium upgrades aren't simple - Liverpool City Council play a part there.

    Think we'd all like to see a bit more cash invested - but how much? At what point does it become "if you can't beat them, join them?"

    I can't imagine victory feeling terribly good if it's been bought. We don't have to be paupers by any means but if new owners came in tomorrow and bought Mbappe for £300m and Bellingham for £150m and we went on to win the League I would find it seriously, seriously hollow.
    Rock and a hard place. Agree it would feel hollow if that's the route that was taken but the other option is falling away completely. Both are the extreme ends of the spectrum, somewhere in the middle is probably where we are now.
    In an ideal world we have the shrewd business and dealings of FSG with a bit/lot more cash to spend on players. Not sure its possible by balancing things, it would have to be by being economical with the balance sheet. In short, cheating like City and PSG.

  2. #142
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    in the past
    Posts
    7,281
    Quote Originally Posted by redebreck View Post
    FSG are business people.
    They are American.
    They're not that interested in "soccer" - Americans have American football and baseball way in front of soccer.
    Business people are interested in making profits.
    But during that period they have invested both on and off the pitch. The model has run it's course.
    "...and my inch is like a freight train, so I only use it in self defence"

  3. #143
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Joetan991 View Post
    The reason FSG did all this is to increase the value of the club, those assets are creating money and profit, but when the club need to invest on the players, where are they? If u compare the net spending in the league for the past 10 years, we are almost the lowest! If they still consider good owner, I have nothing to say, an Owner more focusing on expanding merchadise markets, ticket selling, profit. Again, if they invest partial of the 900m profit for the past 10 years, we have more trophies than u could even thought.

    We have trophies because of Klopp not FSG.
    And who hired Klopp?
    Did he hire himself?
    Who pays his salary, and who just recently gave him an extension?

    And who knew that we got Darwin Nunez on a free in the last transfer market?
    This is surprising to hear.
    Or Diaz in the window before that.

    Last I checked he (Nunez) was the most expensive player we've purchased in the FSG era, no?


    Should they have spent more?
    Probably.

    But part of the whole point in how they've set up the club is that the club spends what it makes and they don't have to put in money into the club (or, at least put in as little as possible beyond its earnings) - and that we live within our means as a business entity.

    So while you're complaining about them being focused on,...."expanding merchadise markets, ticket selling, profit"....just how do you imagine that those player transfers you want so badly, are funded under this business model that doesn't ladle the club with debt ala the Glazers?
    'I got told there's an English phrase, 'You don't win trophies with kids'. I didn't know that' ... - Jurgen Klopp
    Stone-Cold Savage!

  4. #144
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    516
    Such a quandary . Certainly as a ST holder for 25 + years I have seen a bit. Felt sorry for Moores who I felt was badly advised by that twat Parry. Then the total con of H&G. (Thought Rafa was brilliant in how he handled it) . The worries of foreclosure by Royal Bank of Scotland and the brilliant coming together of the fans at that point.
    Now…I would feel a total hypocrite to accept an oil state buying us, I would pass on my ST without doubt , I would still support the club but not financially. I would prefer….
    1. FSG to sell a proportion of their interest, thus making a huge profit and reducing their future risk, provided a chunk of that went to the transfer kitty.
    2. Outright sale , no expertise here but tend to favour the Indian interest.
    Lots to ponder.

  5. #145
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    34,613
    Sir Jim Ratcliffe, the richest man in Britain, has ruled out a Liverpool takeover bid in order to focus on his ambitions with Nice.

    It emerged on Monday that owner Fenway Sports Group (FSG) is willing to sell the Reds after 12 years at the helm. The sports investment company bought the club for £300million in 2010 and has witnessed the value of its asset skyrocket.

  6. #146
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    34,613
    The American owners have decided that they are willing to part ways with Liverpool in some form and will now look to cash in for a whopping £4billion, hiring investment companies Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley to conduct the sale of the Merseyside club, reports the Athletic.

    Reports began to emerge that Mumtalakat Holding Company, Bahrain’s sovereign wealth fund, could be one potential buyer for the Premier League club but those rumours have been shut down by Ben Jacobs.

    The CBS reporter has stated that Bahrain are not looking into buying Liverpool and have not expressed any interest, with the country having no plans to do so either in the near future.

  7. #147
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,018
    The more I think about this the more nervous I get.
    New owners could be anything from the glazers to being owned by an abhorrent foreign state, or a Mike Ashey type figure.
    It is perilous. We already had Hicks and Gillette which almost killed our club.
    Despite people on here saying stuff like they want FSG out, I would say be careful what you wish for.
    FSG built the main stand extension, are doing the same at the anfield road end. Pushed the boat out financially to get Virgil, Alison becker, Darwin Nunes. And most importantly signed Jurgen Klopp and will probably keep him for a period of almost ten years. Under their ownership we have won every trophy that its possible to win and have had more success than at any time in the last 30 years.
    They have made mistakes too but have been prepared to change in response to fans criticism.
    I hope they stay as majority share holders. Is that even still on the cards?

  8. #148
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Teesside
    Posts
    15,324
    The biggest concern for me would be that we get a Hollywood chairman/owner like Abramovich. Sack managers willy nilly and basically want it known that they're the star attraction at the club. He backed the club to the hilt financially but I would never want a revolving door like they had and will continue to have.
    It's a balancing act, what we'll gain in one way we'll likely lose in another.
    We really are ( as fans) in a rock and a hard place with this.

  9. #149
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    in the past
    Posts
    7,281
    Seems like that DIC "mob" are very interested. Oil money.
    "...and my inch is like a freight train, so I only use it in self defence"

  10. #150
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Teesside
    Posts
    15,324
    Quote Originally Posted by vin View Post
    Seems like that DIC "mob" are very interested. Oil money.
    Yeah looks genuine.
    Little cartoon faced baddie might actually own LFC. What a horrid little fuck he is.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •