Under-investment

[fiordearg]

2019-20 only Minamino.
2020-21 Jota, Thiago, the injured Greek, two cheap defenders.
I'm sure my post is not 100% accurate but you get the idea...

[stevie harkness]

We spent more last summer than I expected

[fiordearg]

Over two seasons it's very modest.

[justme]

We got at least 40 million back in transfers.. Ie Lovren/Brewster and Hoever. The Thiago deal is over 4 years. we pay 5 million a year for him.

[miller0863]

Not since the days of Nottingham Forest has a team with such a low net spend (in relative terms) won the Champions League (European Cup)

[Steveo]

Yep and look how long they stayed at the top.

A provincial club that rose to the top on the back of a once in a lifetime manager Clough.

[justme]

Theres a slight difference in stature of club though Steveo. I believe im right. we have only finished outside the top 6 once in the last 50+ years. We need to invest to compete for number 1.Not top 6,. we get that without usually trying.

[Joetan991]

can not expect too much for American businessman, they invest the club for profit. Different situation completely with Man City and Chelsea owners.

[ianlfc]

I'd be amazed if they didn't put their hands in their pockets this summer, the natives are getting restless and Jurgen needs to be kept happy. There's only so many times you can pull the rabbit out off the hat before There's nothing there.

[RedNoodle]

I'd be amazed if they didn't put their hands in their pockets this summer, the natives are getting restless and Jurgen needs to be kept happy. There's only so many times you can pull the rabbit out off the hat before There's nothing there.

Prepare to be amazed.

[Steveo]

Theres a slight difference in stature of club though Steveo. I believe im right. we have only finished outside the top 6 once in the last 50+ years. We need to invest to compete for number 1.Not top 6,. we get that without usually trying.

I know - you are preaching to the converted

[ianlfc]

Prepare to be amazed.

The thing is when they did invest in the team with the best,ie Ali and Virgil we won the lot which brings in more money than they could've dreamed of. They need to trust Edwards and Jurgen on player recruitment.

[RedNoodle]

The thing is when they did invest in the team with the best,ie Ali and Virgil we won the lot which brings in more money than they could've dreamed of. They need to trust Edwards and Jurgen on player recruitment.

'They' didn't 'invest'. They bought those two players with the Coutinho money. Other than that 'they' have 'invested' next to sod all in the team/squad, hence why we have a five year net spend of LESS than £20m per season. That is beyond pathetic, more so when you consider that we are the fifth richest club in the world.

[sydenham red]

Bit harsh on fsg to be fair, i cant think of another club thats been in the premier league last 3 seasons that has spent anything noteworthy upgrading their ground or training complex except spurs ( who are prob fkd now fimancially and cant afford to pay maureen off).
When and only when the anny rd is finished will i believe their will be a decent xfer kitty to spend yr on yr. And thats around the time jurgen is supposed to be handing over the reins

[Steveo]

The thing is when they did invest in the team with the best,ie Ali and Virgil we won the lot which brings in more money than they could've dreamed of. They need to trust Edwards and Jurgen on player recruitment.

We sold Coutinho to fund that Ian. That isn’t really investment.

The fact that our only top of the bar signings came as a result of a huge sale speaks volumes.

[RedNoodle]

Bit harsh on fsg to be fair, i cant think of another club thats been in the premier league last 3 seasons that has spent anything noteworthy upgrading their ground or training complex except spurs ( who are prob fkd now fimancially and cant afford to pay maureen off).
When and only when the anny rd is finished will i believe their will be a decent xfer kitty to spend yr on yr. And thats around the time jurgen is supposed to be handing over the reins

The money spent on the stadium and training ground are not 'sunk costs'. When they finally sell up they will almost certainly get back more than what those initial investments cost.

[Kev0909]

They've ruined our chance of carrying on at the top, and winning stuff, and being the dominate team for a while, absolutely fucked it.

Thanks for what you've done but fuck you for what you aint

[LEGS]

They've ruined our chance of carrying on at the top, and winning stuff, and being the dominate team for a while, absolutely fucked it.

Thanks for what you've done but fuck you for what you aint

I think whilst the likes of City owners are around we ain’t winning title after title.

Nobody has won back to back title since they arrived other than them.

It’s ok twats like Neville/Evra/Keane saying we won three on the spin etc yeah when you were the ones spending all the money you never came up against rCity or a club with the money these have.

The pricks never EVER talk about CL funny that.

[Kev0909]

Most annoying thing for me is we only needed a player or 2...not asking them for 100's of millions

[sydenham red]

The money spent on the stadium and training ground are not 'sunk costs'. When they finally sell up they will almost certainly get back more than what those initial investments cost.

Of course, but they havent sold up and they have paid the construction companies what they owed. The academy and new stands will pay for themselves over a long period and we will have the 60,000 seater without the debt that arsenal did or spurs do have. Nothing is guaranteed in top.level sport but a period of continued CL campaigns and high league finishes more than helps the total.income.
What they cant have imagined is empty grounds or unforeseen injuries to 3 key players in 1 season.plus the zrro contribution of keita,oxlade and shaquiri who.cost £100M and a shitload in wages.

Maybe if var hadnt stiffed us and acouple of our players had more imagination to crack the low block we'd be top.of the league and sitting pretty.

Fine margins....

[LEGS]

The money spent on the stadium and training ground are not 'sunk costs'. When they finally sell up they will almost certainly get back more than what those initial investments cost.

yeah they probably will do Noods.

With the way the world is nobody knows what is going to happen in the next few years they are cautious we know this and they always have been, they not throw money about.

We need to face it City are the team likely to win the most titles we cannot spend what they can Pep is a good manager but when you can keep throwing £50m on defenders it’s not exactly difficult is it

[RedNoodle]

yeah they probably will do Noods.

With the way the world is nobody knows what is going to happen in the next few years they are cautious we know this and they always have been, they not throw money about.

We need to face it City are the team likely to win the most titles we cannot spend what they can Pep is a good manager but when you can keep throwing £50m on defenders it’s not exactly difficult is it

Man City keep getting used as the example as to what level of spending is required, but that is not the case, nor has anybody I've come across suggested such a thing. All I and most other Reds want is for us to spend amounts commensurate with our standing in the world of football both on and off the pitch. In both regards we are in the top five clubs in the world, yet going by how much we 'spend' on the team/squad, you'd think we were a mid table PL club, not the reigning PL champions and six times winners of the EC/CL.

We can spend much, much more than we have/are without us becoming akin to a club like Man City.

[Kev0909]

Imagine if we sold origi and got someone who can actually score in 20-30m+ origi sale heck even watkins would of been good enough

Replacing lovren only would take 10-20m for a half decent CB (heck could of sold Wilson/Grujic) instead of loaning em out

both of these should of been done ages ago, yes now we have 2 new cbs... bit late

Should stop fucking about over saving 1 m here and there, and sold Wilson grujic origi and used the money for what i've just said, 20-30m investment from FSG..... WOW!!!! man city levels init

we're not fucking Oxfam

[LEGS]

Man City keep getting used as the example as to what level of spending is required, but that is not the case, nor has anybody I've come across suggested such a thing. All I and most other Reds want is for us to spend amounts commensurate with our standing in the world of football both on and off the pitch. In both regards we are in the top five clubs in the world, yet going by how much we 'spend' on the team/squad, you'd think we were a mid table PL club, not the reigning PL champions and six times winners of the EC/CL.

We can spend much, much more than we have/are without us becoming akin to a club like Man City.

Man City get used as like it or not they are number one.

You keep banging on about our squad not being good enough well the only way we get that is spending the type of money they have done.

You won’t get good/very good players happy to sit on a bench unless you pay them £100-150k a week we can’t sustain that.

Chelsea/City are the worse thing to happen to football as it scrambles people’s heads on what is and isn’t realistic.

You keep going on about top 5 it’s means shit if City spend more and keep winning the league we at best come second which last time I checked you get nothing for.

I’d rather the league was done properly like the MLS and nobody can outspend anyone then you have a proper competition.

[justme]

Teams are being fucked over with the pandemic.. the only teams that arent are Man-city and Chelsea.
they have a huge advantage over the rest of the footballing world..Every club in football is running at a huge loss.. some will be in massive financial mess. But Man-city will go out and spend what ever they want in the summer.
I think we need to compete with the top signings.. Be it Haaland or someone with the same ability.

[Taksin]

We sold Coutinho to fund that Ian. That isn’t really investment.



We sold Coutinho because he forced his way out of the club

[RedNoodle]

Man City get used as like it or not they are number one.

You keep banging on about our squad not being good enough well the only way we get that is spending the type of money they have done.

You won’t get good/very good players happy to sit on a bench unless you pay them £100-150k a week we can’t sustain that.

Chelsea/City are the worse thing to happen to football as it scrambles people’s heads on what is and isn’t realistic.

You keep going on about top 5 it’s means shit if City spend more and keep winning the league we at best come second which last time I checked you get nothing for.

I’d rather the league was done properly like the MLS and nobody can outspend anyone then you have a proper competition.

Man City often get used as the only other alternative to our current approach. This is done to try and shut down any rational/logical discussion on the issue, just as is the case with a fair few other issues currently plaguing the wider world e.g. if you don't think or go along with X it definitely means you are Y.

It's not a case of either/or, there is plenty of scope between our current approach, and that taken by the likes of Man City. We don't need a bench of 'superstars', but what we do need is a bench/squad with a decent amount of fit, reliable and decent-good quality players. As it is we have very few players who fit ANY of those categories, never mind all three. As a result the gap between our first XI and the rest of the squad is massive, as it has been for far, far too long. That is why we have continually failed to build on any success we've had over the last 30 years, and why the likes of both sets of Mancs and Chelsea have had sustained periods of success.

Until that changes we are going to be inconsistent as hell i.e. one or two good seasons followed by a few more mediocre (at best) seasons. That is only going to be made worse as and when Klopp leaves, something you are failing to take into account i.e. our lesser 'resources' (not according to 'official' figures) should be offset somewhat by having the best manager at the helm. That is why we have had a couple of outstanding seasons despite the disparity in resources. Now just imagine what could be possible if Klopp was given a bit more.

This isn't the MLS. The only way you'll compete is either by having more money than everyone else, one of, if not the best manager, or a combination of the two. I prefer that last approach, and irrespective of you willingness to dismiss this fact, us having the standing we do both on and off the pitch means we are one of a small number of clubs who can and should be taking that latter approach.

[Nineteenx]

Continual under investment and sentimentality in 2 or 3 cases and not shipping 2 or 3 out when their stock was a lot higher and building a far stronger squad is absolutely biting us in the arse this season and FSG have no-one but themselves to blame

[Crimson Dynasty]

Man City keep getting used as the example as to what level of spending is required, but that is not the case, nor has anybody I've come across suggested such a thing. All I and most other Reds want is for us to spend amounts commensurate with our standing in the world of football both on and off the pitch. In both regards we are in the top five clubs in the world, yet going by how much we 'spend' on the team/squad, you'd think we were a mid table PL club, not the reigning PL champions and six times winners of the EC/CL.

We can spend much, much more than we have/are without us becoming akin to a club like Man City.


Noods, "standing in the world of football" is not equal to nor commensurate with actual wealth.

You do know that, right?

Our so-called 'standing' as a global brand in the football world is built mostly on the reputation of our successful eras in the 70's and 80's during which periods we didn't actually capitalize on that dominance, off the field the way we could have.
Simply because nobody knew how to do that back then and the world (both sporting and wider) wasn't set-up for that at the time.

When the Mancs came along in the 90's under the Fergie era, as much as it pains me to admit it, they hired the right people who knew how to make the most of the success they were enjoying on the field, and built them to be the off-pitch financial brand that we know them to be.
They built the model that every other team now tries to emulate (the non-'Oil Money' teams that are mostly self-sustaining) - specifically those two powerhouses in Spain.

And which we, whether we want to admit it or not ourselves, are also hoping to emulate on some level now.

But it takes more than a decade of mostly continuous, if not uninterrupted success and dominance on the field (and a hell of a whole lot more than just "a global name in world football") alongside responsible custodianship off of it, to achieve that and we've barely had more than a couple of seasons (with the years before that being used by FSG to stabilize things off the field and put in place the things we need to be a sustainable model - like the Anfield expansion(s))


We CAN'T spend much more than we have.
We have neither the collateral to get the funding for it (again, your "name" and branding can only get you so far), nor I would hope, the recklessness or will to want to do so.
We barely even have the reputation for it now.
We're defending champions - but so were Leicester at one point - and of our 6 EC/ Champions' League wins, 4 came before most fans were even born and the one before the most recent one was over a decade ago when we were a few years prior to being close to going into administration.

I think Liverpool fans have to get some sense of humility, reality and perspective when it comes to our situation.

Do you want to be a club in debt? Because that's what it would take to achieve the spending levels you're craving.
Or do you want to be part of a responsibly managed club that's sustainable enough, so that even if they do decide to sell up, we won't be in a worse off situation?

Because the only other alternative to those two is being the moneybags toy of an Oil baron somewhere in the Middle East or Russia.
And there aren't many of those going around that would be acceptable to most LFC fans.


FSG wanted to furlough staff when the pandemic initially hit - something that they were already paying into like all other tax-paying entities - but they got slammed by fans and many in the press and the punditry class and ex-players as doing something that wasn't "the Liverpool way" (whatever the hell that means).
Not realizing at the time that by forcing them to turn back on that decision would impact their ability to buy new players or reinforce the squad like they had wanted to.

I thought it was stupid at the time (the complaints by fans, not the decision by FSG, which I understood where it was coming from, even if I may not have agreed completely), but now the same people who were slamming me for pointing it out are complaining about the clubs inability to buy new players or compete in mad prices for new players.
Clearly most of these people have never run businesses.

You can't have it both ways.

[Steveo]

We sold Coutinho because he forced his way out of the club

Good job he did right...?

[CCTV]

Noods, "standing in the world of football" is not equal to nor commensurate with actual wealth.

You do know that, right?

Our so-called 'standing' as a global brand in the football world is built mostly on the reputation of our successful eras in the 70's and 80's during which periods we didn't actually capitalize on that dominance, off the field the way we could have.
Simply because nobody knew how to do that back then and the world (both sporting and wider) wasn't set-up for that at the time.

When the Mancs came along in the 90's under the Fergie era, as much as it pains me to admit it, they hired the right people who knew how to make the most of the success they were enjoying on the field, and built them to be the off-pitch financial brand that we know them to be.
They built the model that every other team now tries to emulate (the non-'Oil Money' teams that are mostly self-sustaining) - specifically those two powerhouses in Spain.

And which we, whether we want to admit it or not ourselves, are also hoping to emulate on some level now.

But it takes more than a decade of mostly continuous, if not uninterrupted success and dominance on the field (and a hell of a whole lot more than just "a global name in world football") alongside responsible custodianship off of it, to achieve that and we've barely had more than a couple of seasons (with the years before that being used by FSG to stabilize things off the field and put in place the things we need to be a sustainable model - like the Anfield expansion(s))


We CAN'T spend much more than we have.
We have neither the collateral to get the funding for it (again, your "name" and branding can only get you so far), nor I would hope, the recklessness or will to want to do so.
We barely even have the reputation for it now.
We're defending champions - but so were Leicester at one point - and of our 6 EC/ Champions' League wins, 4 came before most fans were even born and the one before the most recent one was over a decade ago when we were a few years prior to being close to going into administration.

I think Liverpool fans have to get some sense of humility, reality and perspective when it comes to our situation.

Do you want to be a club in debt? Because that's what it would take to achieve the spending levels you're craving.
Or do you want to be part of a responsibly managed club that's sustainable enough, so that even if they do decide to sell up, we won't be in a worse off situation?

Because the only other alternative to those two is being the moneybags toy of an Oil baron somewhere in the Middle East or Russia.
And there aren't many of those going around that would be acceptable to most LFC fans.


FSG wanted to furlough staff when the pandemic initially hit - something that they were already paying into like all other tax-paying entities - but they got slammed by fans and many in the press and the punditry class and ex-players as doing something that wasn't "the Liverpool way" (whatever the hell that means).
Not realizing at the time that by forcing them to turn back on that decision would impact their ability to buy new players or reinforce the squad like they had wanted to.

I thought it was stupid at the time (the complaints by fans, not the decision by FSG, which I understood where it was coming from, even if I may not have agreed completely), but now the same people who were slamming me for pointing it out are complaining about the clubs inability to buy new players or compete in mad prices for new players.
Clearly most of these people have never run businesses.

You can't have it both ways.

I do think noods underscores the actual cost of wages for players and back up players. Iirc this came up for example with back up keepers and how much they tend to cost per week in wages, or simply the amount of wages someone like adrian would take home here and improving on him. Kelleher looks a decent prospect and a cheap option. I'd settle for him and alisson.

But I do also think there are a few on here too that really don't appreciate where the club is today.
Fsg have already turned the club around, iirc last Forbes report I read debt was 3% of the club's valuation and that debt included infrastructure. Which I believe relates to the main stand as the training facility has been put through the books, again iirc.
We're not a heavily indebted club, the future of football finances look rather secure in so much as even in a covid era the business is rather secure compared with others.

We have the most brand friendly manager, iconic supporters and the latest Nike deal set to leave us ahead of United on shirt sponsorship.
Signing Mbappe I'd venture is a deal that would develop the commercial and brand strength of lfc. Yet people go on like we couldn't afford him and his wages, when signing him would reap many rewards in terms of sponsorships.
Not the only reason, but ronny going to Juventus and messi staying at barca will have had an impact on their standings in financial terms. Barca still have their commercial cash cow.

The club needs to be in a strong position when their current Nike deal is up for renewal. Keep adding stadium capacity where they can and stay at the top of the game. At present adding stadium capacity might not be the priority. Staying top of the football is more pertinent.

I and 19 also thought it was stupid re the furlough criticism. They pay their taxes and were entitled to apply for the scheme.

People seem to have this tendency to see the state as a new God substitute or something akin and wanted to be on the side of the state versus their own football teams.

Last year our cl exit will have cost us more than covid.
This year our Nike deal is projected to offset much of our gates receipt losses and I believe the pl group has gotten on top of the extra tv games and will have offset each pl teams matchday losses by an increase in tv revenue from these extra games.

Even the echo had a piece about it during the summer, typically I find the echo to be a very pro-lfc and pro-fsg paper but they had said we'd have big spending power again in summer 2021 as a result of the Nike deal and the pl getting on top of the new extra games to be broadcast over a more spread out schedule. Allowing each game to garner more viewers than they'd have done before, consider the amount of games that used to be played at 3 PM on a Saturday - you could only watch one.

If we get top4 in the league which is a massive must, we should get past Leipzig and if we could get past the quarters (probably more difficult) and into a semifinal of the CL we'll be well set for the summer transfer window.

If you want to get to the top of football finances you need to win titles, develop your commercial interests and brand. To do so requires the acquisition of a select few players who have that appeal. There are few players who tick the boxes imo.

Maybe Halaand whose a great goalscorer and certainly mbappe whose also a great goalscorer would first that criterion.

Halaands 3rd party ownership is an issue for us, as is agent mino raiola.

Mbappe hasn't got that third party ownership issue, doesn't have that agent, has a former teammate here and has flirted with us in terms of our performances and Klopp. His dad never played for city.

Been a shit season with no fans, our injuries a nightmare. We should be able to get back to where we were next season. Adding a commercial cash cow like mbappe would help the club grow and reach the top end of finances.

For me this is another you can't have it both ways issue, if you want to be top in terms of football and finances you need to add a top player or two with the massive commercial appeal. We've got a few class lads here, Virgil and Mo probably our 2 most valuable in this sense. Mbapoe would be a good way ahead of either of those 2.

[RedNoodle]

Noods, "standing in the world of football" is not equal to nor commensurate with actual wealth.

You do know that, right?

Our so-called 'standing' as a global brand in the football world is built mostly on the reputation of our successful eras in the 70's and 80's during which periods we didn't actually capitalize on that dominance, off the field the way we could have.
Simply because nobody knew how to do that back then and the world (both sporting and wider) wasn't set-up for that at the time.

When the Mancs came along in the 90's under the Fergie era, as much as it pains me to admit it, they hired the right people who knew how to make the most of the success they were enjoying on the field, and built them to be the off-pitch financial brand that we know them to be.
They built the model that every other team now tries to emulate (the non-'Oil Money' teams that are mostly self-sustaining) - specifically those two powerhouses in Spain.

And which we, whether we want to admit it or not ourselves, are also hoping to emulate on some level now.

But it takes more than a decade of mostly continuous, if not uninterrupted success and dominance on the field (and a hell of a whole lot more than just "a global name in world football") alongside responsible custodianship off of it, to achieve that and we've barely had more than a couple of seasons (with the years before that being used by FSG to stabilize things off the field and put in place the things we need to be a sustainable model - like the Anfield expansion(s))


We CAN'T spend much more than we have.
We have neither the collateral to get the funding for it (again, your "name" and branding can only get you so far), nor I would hope, the recklessness or will to want to do so.
We barely even have the reputation for it now.
We're defending champions - but so were Leicester at one point - and of our 6 EC/ Champions' League wins, 4 came before most fans were even born and the one before the most recent one was over a decade ago when we were a few years prior to being close to going into administration.

I think Liverpool fans have to get some sense of humility, reality and perspective when it comes to our situation.

Do you want to be a club in debt? Because that's what it would take to achieve the spending levels you're craving.
Or do you want to be part of a responsibly managed club that's sustainable enough, so that even if they do decide to sell up, we won't be in a worse off situation?

Because the only other alternative to those two is being the moneybags toy of an Oil baron somewhere in the Middle East or Russia.
And there aren't many of those going around that would be acceptable to most LFC fans.


FSG wanted to furlough staff when the pandemic initially hit - something that they were already paying into like all other tax-paying entities - but they got slammed by fans and many in the press and the punditry class and ex-players as doing something that wasn't "the Liverpool way" (whatever the hell that means).
Not realizing at the time that by forcing them to turn back on that decision would impact their ability to buy new players or reinforce the squad like they had wanted to.

I thought it was stupid at the time (the complaints by fans, not the decision by FSG, which I understood where it was coming from, even if I may not have agreed completely), but now the same people who were slamming me for pointing it out are complaining about the clubs inability to buy new players or compete in mad prices for new players.
Clearly most of these people have never run businesses.

You can't have it both ways.

Yet again you have purposely ignored at least one key point I have made in order to go on a massive long winded rant/argument for arguments sake, akin to trying to build a tower block on the foundations supplied by a frozen lake. For your 'benefit' I will repeat what I said in my initial post. Please at least try to take the point on board this time, and not just cherry pick anything which helps/doesn't destroy your baseless 'rants' at the cost of everything else.

I said:- "All I and most other Reds want is for us to spend amounts commensurate with our standing in the world of football both on and off the pitch".

Our financial status IS commensurate with our standing in world football. There are plenty of sources available that confirm this. The thing that ISN'T commensurate with BOTH our standing in world football (19 x league champions, 6 x EC/CL winners, one of top 5 most supported clubs in the world etc) AND our financial position is how much we spend on the acquisition of players. Yes we pay high wages for a few of our players, but a) a load of the contracts have recently been increased, never mind bonuses paid out for recent success, so of course our wage bill is going to be quite high, and b) a few of our higher earners wages are/have been more than offset by the fact that we paid little to nothing for them e.g. Milner. So anyone who starts bleating on about any of the above is at best being disingenuous in the extreme.

We have been closing the gap on Manchester United in terms of revenue, and if we don't fall of a cliff (which could happen unless 'we' do something about it asap) that gap will continue to close. If anyone based their opinion of both clubs based solely on what you've written, they'd think we were some mid table team who have delusions of grandeur, whilst the Red Mancs are some unstoppable juggernaut whose success has continued unabated since Fergie won the FA cup for the first time. Both of those things are very far from the truth, and yet again anyone who says/thinks otherwise is at best being very disingenuous.

Yet again you intentionally ignore another crucial point that both myself and others have made, so I'll yet again reiterate that point in the hope that you eventually take it on board. Nobody is asking us to start spending stupid amounts of money so that we end up in a situation similar to what Barcelona currently find themselves in. However there is a sizeable 'middle ground' where we can spend a fair bit more than we currently are (the 14th highest in the PL), but not so much that we end up risking our long term future through throwing stupid money at lots of very expensive players. As I've said many times before, so many people only deal in absolutes these days. If you're not at one end of the spectrum, you must be at the other end, with a diminishing number of those with sense acknowledging that there is a sizeable middle ground.

FSG wanted to furlough staff because it was going to save them even more money, not because they were/are some tiny business and not doing so could/would mean the difference between them surviving, or going to the wall, and in the process laying off a lot of staff. As with other 'reversals', the only reason they backtracked was because of the huge backlash they faced. If you think much, if any of that money would have been put towards playing staff, you're living in cloud cuckoo land, especially as that would have caused even more controversy than their initial decision to try and furlough staff.

You keep saying "you can't have it both ways". You need to explain exactly what you mean by that. Nobody has said they 'want it both ways', by which you may well mean both spending lots of money, but also safeguarding the long term future of the club. In regards to this I'm going to say this once more. Nobody has said that we should gamble our long term future by spending vast sums of money, and certainly not spending way above our means. People just want us to spend an amount that is commensurate with BOTH our FINANCIAL and SPORTING status, not an amount commensurate with a MID TABLE PL club whose main/sole ambition is to stay in the PL.

[CCTV]

Noods, the club pays taxes and was entitled to draw from that furlough scheme.
The club then bowing to media, social media and public pressure withdrew from the scheme.

For me it's much like an insurance policy where the only difference between the two is that people seem to feel it was wrong for the club to withdraw from the state, even when they pay into it. Much like if they needed to claim off insurance having paid into a policy, and people crying about that being wrong.
But they've paid into the state and are like everyone else entitled to draw from the state where the state permits such actions.

Comes up a lot too about people drawing down their child benefit when they are big earners and as a result big tax contributors. That few quid drawn is said to be not needed, but those people are paying large amounts of tax relative to what they get back.

[CCTV]

What was it 200+ non playing staff with a £2500 per month cap. Half a million pound a month, 6 million a year.

[Kev0909]

Last 5 seasons fulham &everton & brighton&wolves&west ham and obviously the top "6" have have higher net?

Apparently according to this even shef Utd do.. (they've only spent 6m more than us mind)

Apart from this season 35m and 18/19 we made a profit from transfers over the last 5

I've said numerous of times can get away with it for so long, not putting money into the team but it'll hit eventually, and I believe it has done now... blown it to stay on top we need money going into the club, that doesn't mean 100's of millions but a top half level of transfer money spent would be nice...

Keep this up the only way is down... you'll see.. starting the season with 3 cb's and 2 of them is matip and Gomez is laughable, just to save a few quid? maybe if FSG are that tight, spend your little bit of charity money you give us for transfers on players that aren't inury prone, or don't pay wages+sign on fees for those free/cheap because they're always injured....???? left with a smaller squad and half injury prone

if we don't see much money given to klopp and the team in summer, I assume they'll look to sell soonish, and run away with big profits that some could of been put into the club, if they gave a shit

[RedNoodle]

Noods, the club pays taxes and was entitled to draw from that furlough scheme.
The club then bowing to media, social media and public pressure withdrew from the scheme.

For me it's much like an insurance policy where the only difference between the two is that people seem to feel it was wrong for the club to withdraw from the state, even when they pay into it. Much like if they needed to claim off insurance having paid into a policy, and people crying about that being wrong.
But they've paid into the state and are like everyone else entitled to draw from the state where the state permits such actions.

Comes up a lot too about people drawing down their child benefit when they are big earners and as a result big tax contributors. That few quid drawn is said to be not needed, but those people are paying large amounts of tax relative to what they get back.

The debate over whether the likes of FSG should have been able to take advantage of the furlough scheme is a sperate issue. My issue with FSG and the furlough scheme is in regards to those who keep trying to use it as some kind of definitive proof that we "don't have a pot to pee in". FSG tried to use the scheme to save money, not because it was essential to safeguard the long term future of the club, which would only have been the case if we had been in an already very precarious financial position.

Spurs also tried to furlough staff and reversed the decision. They did that despite trying to furlough 450 staff vs 200 for us, and that's also despite them also having a billion pound stadium to pay for. If we can't afford players based on the above and all the other things I mentioned, then Spurs must be on the verge of having to sell their entire first team squad.

[Crimson Dynasty]

Yet again you have purposely ignored at least one key point I have made in order to go on a massive long winded rant/argument for arguments sake, akin to trying to build a tower block on the foundations supplied by a frozen lake. For your 'benefit' I will repeat what I said in my initial post. Please at least try to take the point on board this time, and not just cherry pick anything which helps/doesn't destroy your baseless 'rants' at the cost of everything else.

I said:- "All I and most other Reds want is for us to spend amounts commensurate with our standing in the world of football both on and off the pitch".

Our financial status IS commensurate with our standing in world football. There are plenty of sources available that confirm this. The thing that ISN'T commensurate with BOTH our standing in world football (19 x league champions, 6 x EC/CL winners, one of top 5 most supported clubs in the world etc) AND our financial position is how much we spend on the acquisition of players.

I got what you said and I responded to it in literally the first thing I said (which you yourself then ironically ignored)
So I'll repeat it for your benefit.

"Standing in the World of Football" =/= (IS NOT EQUAL TO) "Spendable wealth".

Not matter how much you want it to be.

Just like "Reputation/status" =/= "Actual wealth"
It might help you to get a loan, but that's about it.

Consider the fact that of 18 of our 19 league championships that you're touting came over 30 years ago and 5 of our 6 Champions League/European Championships came over 15 years ago - with 4 of those coming 20 years before that.

That's the textbook definition of living off of one's own reputation rather than off of actual tangible achievements.

"Things I did a literal lifetime ago". Now pay me what I think I'm worth.

Even that on its own doesn't say much for that so-called "Standing in World Football" when the reality is that on a local Premier League) level, you're no better than Leicester or Blackburn who had Premier League title wins before we did and on the continental level we're only a little better than FC Porto (in that timeframe).


Also, being ".. one of top 5 most supported clubs in the world " means literally NOTHING in terms of our (current) financial standing considering the fact that the vast majority of those global fans don't (directly) pay a single cent towards the financial well-being of the club.
The fact of the matter is that the fans who attend matches at Anfield mean vastly more to the club (and indeed to FSG) than a kid wearing an LFC t-shirt in Jakarta or Djibouti, because only one of those two situations represents real actual money while the other represent a potential for a revenue stream that may never really exist at all.

It's great that we're a globally popular club, but so fucking what?

It all means nothing if you don't have the means to capitalize on it and until we got sponsorship and marketing partners like Nike (who actually DO have a global reach in terms of their ability to monetize a global fanbase), it was nothing more than "wealth" on paper rather than actual spend-able wealth.

"wealth on paper" doesn't buy you new players or pay wages.
Maybe it gets you loans and financing.




Yes we pay high wages for a few of our players, but a) a load of the contracts have recently been increased, never mind bonuses paid out for recent success, so of course our wage bill is going to be quite high, and b) a few of our higher earners wages are/have been more than offset by the fact that we paid little to nothing for them e.g. Milner. So anyone who starts bleating on about any of the above is at best being disingenuous in the extreme.


And other than Milner, which other players in our squad (preferably starting 11) did we get on a 'free'?
(and who didn't come from the academy system)

You said "a few"
Okay then, name them.
"Higher wage earners"
I'll put the cut-off mark at 90,000 per week, which seems more than reasonable.

There's a reason why you only came up with just his name alone when you were making that example and that argument.

Try to see if you can figure out what it is.



We have been closing the gap on Manchester United in terms of revenue,....


No we haven't,
Certainly not before the last couple of years (5-7).
Not even close.

They still have a MASSIVE 15-25 year headstart over us in terms of their financial viability that we can never hope to match with just a few years of sporadic success on the field while not doing anything off it to stabilise those revenue streams.
Which is what FSG are trying to do especially with efforts like continuing their Anfield expansion plans and seeking better marketing partners with better deals.


.....and if we don't fall of a cliff (which could happen unless 'we' do something about it asap) that gap will continue to close. If anyone based their opinion of both clubs based solely on what you've written, they'd think we were some mid table team who have delusions of grandeur, whilst the Red Mancs are some unstoppable juggernaut whose success has continued unabated since Fergie won the FA cup for the first time. Both of those things are very far from the truth, and yet again anyone who says/thinks otherwise is at best being very disingenuous.


I hate to break it to you, but prior to the last couple of years of the Klopp era, we WERE a mid-table team that had had a few odd years of sporadic success and 'almost(but-not-quite)-success' - mostly in cup competitions, and essentially being a slightly richer man's version of Arsenal only good enough to just qualify for the CL but not much else (and even they had won the league a couple of those times during the Wenger era. Which is more than we could claim).

'Delusions of grandeur' was perfectly correct in describing most Liverpool fans with our "This is our year/Maybe next year" mantra that we became famous for being mocked by other clubs for year after year after year after year after year.....- ....as we lived on the fumes of our past glories from so long ago that the majority of people drinking that Kool-Aid weren't even alive to witness them.

That's exactly what a delusional person looks like from the outside.



Yet again you intentionally ignore another crucial point that both myself and others have made, so I'll yet again reiterate that point in the hope that you eventually take it on board. Nobody is asking us to start spending stupid amounts of money so that we end up in a situation similar to what Barcelona currently find themselves in. However there is a sizeable 'middle ground' where we can spend a fair bit more than we currently are (the 14th highest in the PL), but not so much that we end up risking our long term future through throwing stupid money at lots of very expensive players. As I've said many times before, so many people only deal in absolutes these days. If you're not at one end of the spectrum, you must be at the other end, with a diminishing number of those with sense acknowledging that there is a sizeable middle ground.


And what's that 'middle ground'?
What's the spending you'd have loved to see the club spend after a season in which they went over a third of the final end of it without any gate revenue and without Champion's League money while paying stafff full salary to keep running at full capacity with no money coming in - and on top of bringing in Jota, Thiago, and Tsimikas

Werner?
Ziyech?
Upemecano?

What young, promising but top prospect player would you have loved the club to bring in but who wouldn't have seen us reamed royally by the club selling him knowing that they too weren't getting any revenue coming in and these kinds of sales were their only means of making good money - and all fitting within our transfer policy/wage structure while not breaking the bank (read : incurring heavy debt)?

Remember that Chelsea were able to spend what they did because they didn't spend anything the 2 windows prior thanks to their ban. On top of their oil money.
City had Oil money.
The Mancs (United) were the Mancs.
And Leicester have a good recruitment policy.


FSG wanted to furlough staff because it was going to save them even more money, not because they were/are some tiny business and not doing so could/would mean the difference between them surviving, or going to the wall, and in the process laying off a lot of staff. As with other 'reversals', the only reason they backtracked was because of the huge backlash they faced. If you think much, if any of that money would have been put towards playing staff, you're living in cloud cuckoo land, especially as that would have caused even more controversy than their initial decision to try and furlough staff.


And if you truly believe there is no link between their decision to reverse the furloughing decision and the lack of funds to finance any major outright buys in the transfer window later on that summer (outside of the "clever" deals we made for Jota and Thiago) then you truly are delusional and emblematic of the type of Liverpool fan I talked about who have no clue how a business is run without falling into debt.

Earl(ier than expected) Champion's League exit + No gate receipts and revenue from Anfield for over a third of the season (thanks to the lockdown) + paying staff to keep the lights on while nothing was running (or open) during a lockdown.

Do the maths on that.


You keep saying "you can't have it both ways". You need to explain exactly what you mean by that. Nobody has said they 'want it both ways', by which you may well mean both spending lots of money, but also safeguarding the long term future of the club. In regards to this I'm going to say this once more. Nobody has said that we should gamble our long term future by spending vast sums of money, and certainly not spending way above our means. People just want us to spend an amount that is commensurate with BOTH our FINANCIAL and SPORTING status, not an amount commensurate with a MID TABLE PL club whose main/sole ambition is to stay in the PL.


Then it's YOU who needs to be more clear on what's "vast sums of money" actually means or what "spending way above our means" really is.

The club spend money and brought in players (Jota, Thiago, Tsimikas) during the past transfer window when the vast majority of clubs (not owned by oil barons or not named Manchester United) were understandably tight with their own wallets thanks to the pandemic.

Clearly that wasn't enough for you.

So what would be?

I'll repeat:

"Status" is NOT wealth.
"Reputation" is NOT wealth.
"Standing" is NOT wealth.

I'll keep repeating it again and again, for as long as it takes to hammer the point home or for as long as you keep baselessly perpetuating that nonsense.

At BEST, it's the perception (or more accurately, the delusion) of wealth.

It doesn't pay the bills.
It doesn't buy you players.
It certainly doesn't pay wages.

[RedNoodle]

Our financial standing IS commensurate with our standing within the world of football as a sport, so you continually saying otherwise is a load of disingenuous nonsense. For other clubs that may not be the case, but that is not who we are discussing, however if we were you would find that the fans of a few other clubs are also not happy with the same thing i.e. being one of the wealthiest, if not most successful and/or recognisable clubs in the world, but being reluctant to spend 'reasonable' sums on playing staff.

[Steveo]

I think this list freely available at Transfermarkt tells the story of actual net spend the best.


https://i.ibb.co/LJnnJx7/Net-spend-last-5-years.png



Link below:

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/premier-league/fuenfjahresvergleich/wettbewerb/GB1

[Taksin]

Good job he did right...?

Who knows.. arguing from the hypothetical is always futile.

The question is does the manager get the signings he wants. I’m pretty sure the answer is yes.

Keita and Minamino haven’t worked out.
We’ve improved significantly on last years record breaking squad.
One of the problems seems to be he can’t pick a team without the established front three. That looks like the managers problem, not the owners.

If you want to blame the owners when things go wrong best of luck to you but it might not be what the actual problem is.

The squad is tired, badly hit by injury, we haven’t had our fans in the season, we’ve had a string of bad VAR decisions. Sometimes things don’t go your way. Getting the pitchforks out might just be a stupid reaction.

[Steveo]

@ Taksin.

That’s all good and well, we can all pontificate about what ifs and maybe... What is tangible and clear is that our NET spend only takes a massive rise the year following Coutinho’s exit.. It would take some stretch to try and separate the two events.

Look what happened almost instantly with that spend too.

https://i.ibb.co/LJnnJx7/Net-spend-last-5-years.png

[Steveo]

Profit made on transfers in 3 out of 5 seasons.

[RedNoodle]

@Steveo

Some people are always going to try to argue against facts and substantial evidence (no matter how much of each that is provided) by desperately trying to grasp at straws/hypothetical situations that lack any substance, namely because for some bizarre reason they have taken a very questionable and long standing stance on a subject , have nailed their colours to the mast, and as a result they are simply unwilling and/or unable to ever move away from such a position.

Klopp in his interviews has intimated that he's not 'in control of' nor 'totally happy' about our (not his) transfer dealings, yet some still think he is being fully backed and that he's getting everything/everyone he wants. I would not be surprised if these people maintained this view even if at some point Klopp revealed that he wasn't backed as fully as some think.

As the saying goes, "There are none so blind as those who will not see".

[ianlfc]

The 2 teams thats spent the most are sitting 1st and 2nd. And have a good chance along with Chelsea with the FA Cup .
We spent big and won the Champions league and the league.
The squad needs investment or we don't win. It's as simple as that.

[Taksin]

@ Taksin.

That’s all good and well, we can all pontificate about what ifs and maybe... What is tangible and clear is that our NET spend only takes a massive rise the year following Coutinho’s exit.. It would take some stretch to try and separate the two events.

Look what happened almost instantly with that spend too.


If I thought net spend was the secret to success I would agree with you. But I don't

That chart proves that my belief is true by the way. What's happened to Arsenal's over investment?

[Taksin]

You can keep flashing that chart every time we run into difficulties and then hide it away whenever we win the league or European Cup.

At some point you have to admit there is more to this than net spend and our success is in part due to excellent planning from the owners.

[Steveo]

So the success we have is due to a low NET spend..? You can cherry pick any club you like - Wolves or Villa for example but you chose to pick Arsenal.

The chart is the reality of what we have actually spent.

By your logic we shiuld credit Forrest’s owners for their success in the 80’s or United’s owners for their prolonged success entirely under one manager. Ditto Barca - Real - Bayern - fill in as appropriate...Or our continued success under Shankly - Paisley - Fagan and Kenny?

It’s clear we have different views on what is actually the cause of success. That’s fine but getting uppity and ignoring NET spend is a little like putting your fingers in your ears when someone tries to explain something.

[Taksin]

And by the way, if that's how we respond to a bump in the road, maybe we don't deserve decent owners.

The thing that has concerned me is that they sell the club because its more or less guaranteed to be sold to some idiot with too much money. If we're lucky it will be some sort of Arab nightmare who just throws ugly amounts of money at the transfer kitty and brings in whichever manager is flavour of the month. More likely it will be a consortium of some kind with infighting in the ownership structure, no track record or proper strategy, arguing about spending on marquee signings, sacking managers etc

The strategy of FSG has been meticulous, forward thinking, long term, based on intelligence and a recognition of quality in all aspects of the club.

They will be able to sell the club for a massive profit precisely because they have taken it from chaos to immaculately run in a relatively short space of time. I am in the minority of fans for seeing it that way it seems, but the market value is hard, cold value.

Those who want to believe running the club is about going into debt are really asking to have their cake and eat it.

[Steveo]

You are mistaking the punching power of Jurgen Klopp IMO.

FSG had us where Leicester City are now - perhaps not even there. Klopp has made a monumental difference. This isn’t really a debate at all. Massive change when he walked in. Beat thing the owners ever did. Be great if they could just give him more of what he had after Coutinho’s sale.

FSG are not bad - but they don’t seem willing to back the club to challenge the big hitters. Not really their fault - but just the way it looks to me and others.

Not sure why is gets your back up so much.

[Taksin]

So the success we have is due to a low NET spend..? You can cherry pick any club you like - Wolves or Villa for example but you chose to pick Arsenal.


I never sad that. I said net spend is obviously not the guarantee of success. Arsenal are the obvious example of a big club with more success than us in recent decades, with far greater INVESTMENT in players according to that chart, but they don't look like a club that is better run than ours or even undergoing better investment in players.

You can keep going back to Coutinho but ultimately he is fading in the story and the net spend is the wrong metric.

[Taksin]

I think that net spend chart is probably wrong by the way. CCTV may be able to help with that. I can't be bothered because I think we have a sound policy of investing in excellent players at this club, currently.

[Steveo]

Nobody EVER said NET spend was a guarantee of anything BUT it is clearly the most likely source

[Steveo]

I find it astounding that any fan of this club is willing to sit back and stay quiet while some of the players and even the manager ( best manager in the world by a mile ) take the blame for the “bump in road” yet come out to play when anyone questions the investment from the owners.

The players and manager have been outstanding over a 3 year period. They are shattered - they need a break but they can’t take one unless they are broken.

That is the point.

[miller0863]

If Barcelona had to sell Messi to fund buying Suarez, Coutinho etc would net spend be more relevant then do you think?

If City had had to sell De Bruyne and David Silva to bring in Mahrez and Sterling would it have been relevant then?

I could go on.


I’d suggest the answer is yes, so what everyone is saying when they say net spend is irrelevant they mean only where Liverpool are concerned.

Ok.

[Taksin]

I find it astounding that any fan of this club is willing to sit back and stay quiet while some of the players and even the manager ( best manager in the world by a mile ) take the blame for the “bump in road” yet come out to play when anyone questions the investment from the owners.

The players and manager have been outstanding over a 3 year period. They are shattered - they need a break but they can’t take one unless they are broken.

That is the point.

I haven't blamed anyone.

The difference between my position and yours is that I think the owners deserve credit as much as the manager and players.

If you think we should have a B team as good as the A team you 1) are at odds with the manager's views and 2) are probably living in cloud cookoo land.

That is the implication from your last post. They are tired, they need a break. the reason is underinvestment by the owners. Not Klopp pushing them to burnout (media explanation), not injury crisis (this is not allowed as an excuse), not too many fixtures too close together (Klopp's complaint). No, we should have more players of the same calibre. Spend spend spend

Klopp himself has argued against that strategy. He doesn't want big names sitting on the bench getting depressed about not playing. He has his own ideas about what is needed to make a successful squad.

Sometimes things don't work out. Ferguson only won the title 13 times in 25 years of mostly asymmetric dominance. We have just come off the back of two seasons where we outperformed all his teams. And we are in the very strange and unknown waters of insane lockdowns, without an end in sight. The effects if this are unknown and will alter planning and investment as well as income.

Blaming the owners for the current lull, as if these things should obviously be avoided, is immature in my opinion.

[CCTV]

The debate over whether the likes of FSG should have been able to take advantage of the furlough scheme is a sperate issue. My issue with FSG and the furlough scheme is in regards to those who keep trying to use it as some kind of definitive proof that we "don't have a pot to pee in". FSG tried to use the scheme to save money, not because it was essential to safeguard the long term future of the club, which would only have been the case if we had been in an already very precarious financial position.

Spurs also tried to furlough staff and reversed the decision. They did that despite trying to furlough 450 staff vs 200 for us, and that's also despite them also having a billion pound stadium to pay for. If we can't afford players based on the above and all the other things I mentioned, then Spurs must be on the verge of having to sell their entire first team squad.

Well for me there is no reasonable debate about it. They were entitled to and obliged to draw down from the scheme.

[CCTV]

If Barcelona had to sell Messi to fund buying Suarez, Coutinho etc would net spend be more relevant then do you think?

If City had had to sell De Bruyne and David Silva to bring in Mahrez and Sterling would it have been relevant then?

I could go on.


I’d suggest the answer is yes, so what everyone is saying when they say net spend is irrelevant they mean only where Liverpool are concerned.

Ok.

So far it appears as though Klopp hasn't been forced to sell anyone.
Ings wanted football, Lovren too and lil Phil forced his way out. The rest were moved on by and large

People want to see players brought in and if we sell player for high resale figures we do well.

For me not spend is relevant as it measures your sales and purchases, which should leave you with an idea of how much money could conceivably be spent in the very near future.

For us:
We've seen Klopp backed and players brought in, a decent gross spend and not forced to keep working with what he's got.
Good.

Player sales have also been good and this has helped keep our net spend down. Selling players we permit to leave for good-great money cannot be sniffed at.

Net spend where it is, imo indicates the club has a fair bit of leeway with what it can spend.
So we should be able to see Klopp backed again in adding a top player like Alisson, VVD, Fabinho or Keita. Our 4 most expensive signings to date.

[Steveo]

I haven't blamed anyone.

The difference between my position and yours is that I think the owners deserve credit as much as the manager and players.

If you think we should have a B team as good as the A team you 1) are at odds with the manager's views and 2) are probably living in cloud cookoo land.

That is the implication from your last post. They are tired, they need a break. the reason is underinvestment by the owners. Not Klopp pushing them to burnout (media explanation), not injury crisis (this is not allowed as an excuse), not too many fixtures too close together (Klopp's complaint). No, we should have more players of the same calibre. Spend spend spend

Klopp himself has argued against that strategy. He doesn't want big names sitting on the bench getting depressed about not playing. He has his own ideas about what is needed to make a successful squad.

Sometimes things don't work out. Ferguson only won the title 13 times in 25 years of mostly asymmetric dominance. We have just come off the back of two seasons where we outperformed all his teams. And we are in the very strange and unknown waters of insane lockdowns, without an end in sight. The effects if this are unknown and will alter planning and investment as well as income.

Blaming the owners for the current lull, as if these things should obviously be avoided, is immature in my opinion.



I didn't say you did - read... I am saying that it is funny how you stayed silent while certain players or even the manager get the hairdyer treatment - YET come out to play at the mere posting of the NET spend.

And if you believe that Klopp would not have wanted to bring in more quality in 2019 or this summer OR again this January then either you know him personally OR can read very different signals from his statements than I can manage.

[ianlfc]

We'll see in the summer, as I exspect Haaland to become available and I would like to think we will complete with all the other big spending club to be in for him.
And If not then we'll be needing a new manager.

[miller0863]

Wasn’t saying that he has been forced to sell anyone, but what we all know is we have had to sell to buy. Without Coutinho going, VVD and Alisson don’t come in.

[Taksin]

I didn't say you did - read... I am saying that it is funny how you stayed silent while certain players or even the manager get the hairdyer treatment - YET come out to play at the mere posting of the NET spend.

And if you believe that Klopp would not have wanted to bring in more quality in 2019 or this summer OR again this January then either you know him personally OR can read very different signals from his statements than I can manage.

There’s no hairdryer treatment on a forum, just people talking sense or nonsense.

Hairdryer treatment actually does occur at the game and it does make a difference to the attitude of all parties.

If someone wants to start a thread about how Firmino is the cause of our problems I won’t have to defend him because many others will,

I’m a big fan of Firmino by the way

And I didn’t ‘come out’ at the mere mention of net spend. The thread is called underinvestment. It’s an unambiguous theory.

I picked you up on your spinning of the Coutinho story to support your view. What you said wasn’t true. The club didn’t want to sell him.

What they wanted was to invest in a team that won trophies. They succeeded and no one is grateful.

[skyebo]

If Salah goes in the summer, i would expect that money to go on replacements. What i wouldn't expect is for them to spend another couple of hundred million just to prove a point. And as for selling to buy, all clubs do it, even City. When they paid £50m for Sterling, i bet they had some outgoings too.

[Steveo]

@Taksin

This is why I don’t engage with you. In the space of 2 posts you have completely missed what I have actually said. Most likely because you don’t like what it points to.

I didn’t say the club wanted to sell Coutinho ( none of us will likely know that ) I actually suggested that we be thankful that HE ( Coutinho forced the move through ) wanted to leave. Just have to actually read what was written.

The fact he did go was what led to the purse strings finally be opened. Virgil - Allison and Fab incoming - It’s not spin either - it is fact.

As you were

[miller0863]

Do you really believe that Skyebo?? Look at City’s net spend, that doesn’t point to a club selling players to fund incomings.

[CCTV]

Wasn’t saying that he has been forced to sell anyone, but what we all know is we have had to sell to buy. Without Coutinho going, VVD and Alisson don’t come in.

I'm not so sure that's true.

We were in for Virgil before barca were in for Phil.
They only came in for Phil when PSG unexpectedly signed Neymar.
Ours was a longer term target, whereas there's was a panic/shock replacement.
We were trying to sign Virgil before Phil became a target for Barca

With Alisson, I think you can make that case but I'd suggest we'd have signed Alisson anyway. Looking at that problem area and our finances I'd speculate we might well have signed Alisson had Phil stayed.

Keita might not have become a target if Phil stayed imo.

[miller0863]

No it was Fabinho if you want to add a midfielder

[skyebo]

Do you really believe that Skyebo?? Look at City’s net spend, that doesn’t point to a club selling players to fund incomings.

Word it whichever way you like, players get sold and players come in.

[ianlfc]

If Salah goes in the summer, i would expect that money to go on replacements. What i wouldn't expect is for them to spend another couple of hundred million just to prove a point. And as for selling to buy, all clubs do it, even City. When they paid £50m for Sterling, i bet they had some outgoings too.

I think the Sterling transfer was around the time they were getting crazy money for sponsorship deals with companies owned but the owners. Thats when FFP first came into play , iirc.

[Steveo]

I think the Sterling transfer was around the time they were getting crazy money for sponsorship deals with companies owned but the owners. Thats when FFP first came into play , iirc.

Yes the good old FFP...

I guess City could use the claim - “players get sold and players come in” as a defence.. or any similar wording... hahaa

[Taksin]

@Taksin

This is why I don’t engage with you. In the space of 2 posts you have completely missed what I have actually said. Most likely because you don’t like what it points to.

I didn’t say the club wanted to sell Coutinho ( none of us will likely know that ) I actually suggested that we be thankful that HE ( Coutinho forced the move through ) wanted to leave. Just have to actually read what was written.

The fact he did go was what led to the purse strings finally be opened. Virgil - Allison and Fab incoming - It’s not spin either - it is fact.

As you were

You do engage with me though :)

What you said was

“ We sold Coutinho to fund that Ian. That isn’t really investment. ”

This is a mythologising of what happened.

We sold Coutinho because he wouldn’t stay, no matter how hard we tried to convince him.

It is not correct or fair to say we sold him in order to invest. The rest is post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

We only invested because we sold him
We wouldn’t have invested without selling him
Look at the net spend!

The fact is, the owners, with the manager built a winning team. You do not give credit to the owners for that. Worse still, you insinuate that they sell our best players to fund the managers plans. But we know that almost certainly isn’t true.

You don’t know what they would have done about Van Djik or Alisson if Coutinho had stayed. You’re just speculating, but in a knowing way. That’s the reason I argue with you on this issue - you behave as is if you know they are letting the club down.

[Steveo]

@ Taksin -

And we did sell Coutinho to fund it. It was enforced because he wanted to leave. Spending after you bag £140 million is not exactly what I would call investment. What part of that is confusing you?

[Kev0909]

people are really blind to see what FSG are making maybe not this season because of covid, but the previous ones when we you know won the champions league and prem...

obviously skimping on the squad, and doing as little as possible to get by since they've been here, only big money spend really has been from sales....

Needed 1 or 2 more players, that wouldn't of cost the earth especially if we sold the players that forever go on loan (instead of not accepting over 1m) pathetic.

-the end verdict? Stale squad- a lot of injiury prone players from bargain bucket....

Keita and Ox was a complete waste of money too, considering we don't spend much that's not cool even ox was only because he was english and a "bargain" due to contract situation, was it fuck

doubt they'll suddenly spend loads in the summer, they'll be selling up in the near future in a covid freeish world, and run away to the bank, if they do maybe they won't be going anywhere for a while

Sucess is on klopp and getting signings right, not FSG they've done good things like getting Klopp in the first place, but without him &team we'd be fucked we're lucky robbo turned out how he is, trent has progressed how he has, and gomez in a way apart from injury's (he was still cheap as fuck from charlton)... same with Salah and mane etc even henderson was cheap, will we get this lucky forever? well See Ox-Keita..... no and all of a sudden we end up being short ! and playing 35 year old milner often, (best bargain) and players that are injured most of the season or simply not good enough still hanging around stealing a living because we don't have the money to replace them.

"but top players aren't going to sit on the bench"- Not even asking for top players decent ones will do, plenty of other teams have a better bench than us.

Mid-table owners

even going go back to the start of them being owners, they're very average / poor signings or bargains that thankfully turned out well.

[Taksin]

@Steveo

We sold him because it was forced. You said it yourself. You are confused about attributing motive and agency in a way that was never manifest in the real world. It’s in your head.

[Steveo]

Some are just totally in bed with FSG. I would wager that most are young - and witnessing a top of the fable Liverpool for the first time and believe it is all down to the owners.

Some others don’t see it that way.

[Steveo]

@Steveo

We sold him because it was forced. You said it yourself. You are confused about attributing motive and agency in a way that was never manifest in the real world. It’s in your head.

No sorry Taksin.

Coutinho wanted to go to Barca - we sold him for a record fee - and used that cash to spend on 3 key players.

It was a great use of the profit made on Phil. But it isn’t what I call investment.

Please cite where FSG have sanctioned anything similar to the spend in that same year without a sale.

Hello

[TheDOC1979]

Some are just totally in bed with FSG. I would wager that most are young - and witnessing a top of the fable Liverpool for the first time and believe it is all down to the owners.

Some others don’t see it that way.

If we compare it to dumb and dumber, when they sold players and bought a bunch of 20m players to make it look like we were spending.

Not in bed with the owners, however, they have built a successful baseball club and pushed on from there to a certain extent. Not that I follow MLB.

Investing in the stadium, new training ground etc. They still have to invest more to guarantee longevity. Net spend is not an issue if spent wisely.

[Steveo]

If we compare it to dumb and dumber, when they sold players and bought a bunch of 20m players to make it look like we were spending.

Not in bed with the owners, however, they have built a successful baseball club and pushed on from there to a certain extent. Not that I follow MLB.

Investing in the stadium, new training ground etc. They still have to invest more to guarantee longevity. Net spend is not an issue if spent wisely.

It becomes an issue over time

[Taksin]

No sorry Taksin.

Coutinho wanted to go to Barca - we sold him for a record fee - and used that cash to spend on 3 key players.

It was a great use of the profit made on Phil. But it isn’t what I call investment.

Please cite where FSG have sanctioned anything similar to the spend in that same year without a sale.

Hello

This is your ill discipline in argumentation again, Steveo.

You've just contradicted yourself and you won't see it, never mind admit it


post number 15
We sold Coutinho to fund that Ian.

Post number 63
I didn’t say the club wanted to sell Coutinho ( none of us will likely know that )

post number 71
And we did sell Coutinho to fund it.

You need this story to paint the picture of the club as a selling club. It is not. They sold a player who they judged they could no longer keep. You have your idea of why it happened and you are sticking to it, even if you disagree with yourself.


Then you go on about being in bed with FSG, your old trope. And this one

Please cite where FSG have sanctioned anything similar

This is irrelevant to the point. As it happens this summer was pretty impressive for recruitment. And it was done during the uncertainty of Covid. I may as well ask you about when have we spent similarly during lockdown but life doesn't work like that, does it?

[CCTV]

No it was Fabinho if you want to add a midfielder

Let's say we didn't sell Coutinho and we didn't buy Naby, that would put about a 90 million extra into our net spend and leave us sitting just a few million behind spurs in the net spend table Steveo posted over the klopp years.

My impression of the sell to buy theory is that it is a useful tool in dampening down expectations and in persuading people of our lidlpool nature.

[Taksin]

I'm not so sure that's true.

We were in for Virgil before barca were in for Phil.
They only came in for Phil when PSG unexpectedly signed Neymar.
Ours was a longer term target, whereas there's was a panic/shock replacement.
We were trying to sign Virgil before Phil became a target for Barca

With Alisson, I think you can make that case but I'd suggest we'd have signed Alisson anyway. Looking at that problem area and our finances I'd speculate we might well have signed Alisson had Phil stayed.

Keita might not have become a target if Phil stayed imo.

this seems entirely reasonable to me

[Steveo]

@ Taksin

At no point have I suggested that the club wanted to sell Coutinho. You can see that from everything you have posted as evidence to the contrary.

What I said to Ian was an explanation of WHY the purse strings were loosened. That point stands. Again - look at the NET Spend table.

It all comes back to what I said at the very beginning in response to you.

Thank god Coutts wanted to leave and made it his business - otherwise those funds most likely would not have been there. .

[Kev0909]

Thank god barca got totally ripped off!

Think clubs may be more aware in the future after that.... mind doubt we'll get so lucky again.

[Steveo]

this seems entirely reasonable to me

Which probably means it is complete baloney.

Choose CCTV’s hunches over the evidence

[skyebo]

I'm pretty sure we would have signed Alisson too regardless of what Coutinho was doing. The only blessing in disguise of that CL final defeat was it convinced Klopp that neither keeper were good enough. You don't win titles with average keepers, thank god we signed him.

[Taksin]

Which probably means it is complete baloney.

Choose CCTV’s hunches over the evidence

which evidence?

all you have is your post hoc ergo propter hoc argument

Just because one thing follows another does not mean one thing caused the other.

That is your hunch, Steveo. It isn't evidence. It doesn't have a rounded and informed feel to it, as CCTV's comments do.

[skyebo]

which evidence?

all you have is your post hoc ergo propter hoc argument

Just because one thing follows another does not mean one thing caused the other.

That is your hunch, Steveo. It isn't evidence. It doesn't have a rounded and informed feel to it, as CCTV's comments do.

Some will blame the owners for lack of investment, others will point the finger at Klopp for having money but not spending enough of it. The truth could be somewhere in the middle.

[Taksin]

At no point have I suggested that the club wanted to sell Coutinho.



these arguments always get stuck on your unusual relationship with language, Steveo

We sold Coutinho to fund that Ian.


And we did sell Coutinho to fund it.

If you do something in order to do something else, you do the first thing because you want to do it.

To draw that conclusion from what you have said (never mind to see it 'suggested'), is an entirely orthodox use of language.

[Steveo]

which evidence?

all you have is your post hoc ergo propter hoc argument

Just because one thing follows another does not mean one thing caused the other.

That is your hunch, Steveo. It isn't evidence. It doesn't have a rounded and informed feel to it, as CCTV's comments do.

Erm - sadly for you it’s the NET spend table. It doesn’t talk and it doesn’t spin

[Steveo]

these arguments always get stuck on your unusual relationship with language, Steveo

We sold Coutinho to fund that Ian.


And we did sell Coutinho to fund it.

If you do something in order to do something else, you do the first thing because you want to do it.

To draw that conclusion from what you have said (never mind to see it 'suggested'), is an entirely orthodox use of language.

Yes we allowed him to leave - he wanted to go - tried to leave in August! Don’t you Remember any of this?

Oh look - at the very same time we tapped up Virgil...? naughty Klopp... Remember?

We didn’t HAVE to let him go. But we saw an opportunity to fleece Barca - no harm in that.

But that is not the same as the club wanting to sell him Taksin.

Please do try to keep up..

[Steveo]

If I sell my house to fund my child’s operation - god forbid - is that the same as wanting to sell my house.??? WTF

You are just put out by that NET Spend table.

It is fact - not the opinion of myself - or you or Skyebo or anyone. It is the cold hard actual amount spent on buying players.

This one

https://i.ibb.co/LJnnJx7/Net-spend-last-5-years.png

[Taksin]

Yes we allowed him to leave - he wanted to go - tried to leave in August! Don’t you Remember any of this?

Oh look - at the very same time we tapped up Virgil...?

So we tried to sign Virgil the same time we disallowed Coutinho to leave. That is not the same as

we did sell Coutinho to fund it.

is it?

You're so bad at this, Steveo

[Taksin]

If I sell my house to fund my child’s operation - god forbid - is that the same as wanting to sell my house.??? WTF




Yes it is. It suggests that you, as a free moral agent, chose to do one thing - sell your house - in order to achieve another thing - afford an operation for your child.

It suggests that you decided you would not have paid for that operation by other means

So yes, to recap, you did want to sell your house, the decision became the basis of your plan for managing your resources

That's how free will works

[CCTV]

Which probably means it is complete baloney.

Choose CCTV’s hunches over the evidence

Hunches ?

Here's some perspective.

Fsg have turned around the club's finances.

They hired Klopp who was and is a perfect manager.

They have signed up with Nike and as much as you despise Nike over the altruistic Adidas or New balance, it is a sign of progress. It's new balances loss imo that they weren't proactive in securing their great sponsorship deal by offering more money to a criminally undervalued deal.

Having money in the bank is never a bad thing, our low net spend is a great thing considering the transformation of the squad.

Klopp signed up till 2024, around the same time as we'd be looking at a new kit deal. It is an integral point where we need to be pretty strong to get another big kit deal. It is also a point where we might have to appoint a new manager.
From a fiscal perspective 2024 is probably a good point to be planning for.

Out of our current squad we could expect to have a decent side from the current squad. All our older players will be at the end of their careers or packed up.

So
Alisson/Kelleher
Trent Gomez Robbo
Fabinho Keita Jones Grujic
Elliot Mini Jota
Are young enough now to be considered then if they are still here. I'll spare adding neco and a few others like kabak etc.

We can probably rely on one of Salah or Mane being sold to la liga in the coming years. Though they both could stay here past their high sale points.

I like our low net spend as it simply means our squad turnover which has been amazing has come at the cost of little investment relatively.

I think it sets us up well to add a commercial cash cow attacker, Mbappe being the better fit imo and a potential summer transfer.

Then Klopp has a few places to fill over the coming seasons and that gives him time to do that and also see how certain youth players develop and whether say with Keita he can ever get fit for a few seasons.

If we add Mbappe this summer.
A 2024 team of

Alisson
Trent Gomez Robbo
Jones Fabinho Keita
Elliot/Mini Jota Mbappe

Is a pretty decent side to have in lieu as of now.

Van Dijk, Hendo, Gini, Front 3 are the players we'll have to deal with reaching the end of their careers over the coming seasons.
Jota & Mbappe would be 2 of the standard required, maybe elliot comes good too.

A longer term strategy would be the aim for us to be able to spend like manu have done with the revenue we generate.
It's not a goal beyond us imo.

[Steveo]

So we tried to sign Virgil the same time we disallowed Coutinho to leave. That is not the same as

we did sell Coutinho to fund it.

is it?

You're so bad at this, Steveo

Not really Taksin - but I think you should eat fish it’s good for memory. Coutinho was out of the door - August 2017 - about to go - at the very same time we thought we had bagged Virgil. The Virgil deal falls through - and suddenly Coutinho’s move is off. He even went on strike. Or did I imagine that too?

Fast forward to Christmas - Virgil deal is announced - and the night of his debut - Coutinho sold to a Barca is announced.

So....

[Kev0909]

"if we add mbappe"

Good joke, real good made me laugh 10/10

More likely to sign Ivan Toney

[Taksin]

Not really Taksin - but I think you should eat fish it’s good for memory. Coutinho was out of the door - August 2017 - about to go - at the very same time we thought we had bagged Virgil. The Virgil deal falls through - and suddenly Coutinho’s move is off. He even went on strike. Or did I imagine that too?

Fast forward to Christmas - Virgil deal is announced - and the night of his debut - Coutinho sold to a Barca is announced.

So....

I'm not the one crafting this story Steveo

What you have just said contradicts your recent evasive statement;

At no point have I suggested that the club wanted to sell Coutinho.

You can't have it both ways, but that doesn't stop you from trying!

[CCTV]

Also Steveo as you well know I've posted the net spend from transfermstkt repeatedly over the years, so I'm not sure how you posting the same evidence equates to my hunches versus your evidence.

[Steveo]

I'm not the one crafting this story Steveo

What you have just said contradicts your recent evasive statement;

At no point have I suggested that the club wanted to sell Coutinho.

You can't have it both ways, but that doesn't stop you from trying!

Except is doesn’t.

If the club know Coutinho wants to leave then that is a problem. The club wants Virgil.

If you can’t put the two together - well maybe you should stick to medicine

[Taksin]

The Virgil deal falls through - and suddenly Coutinho’s move is off. He even went on strike. Or did I imagine that too?


Do you believe that Coutinho stayed that summer because we couldn't sign Van Dijk so there was no point selling him?

It's an interesting theory - never heard anyone use it before. Or are you just running around like a headless chicken?

[Taksin]

Except is doesn’t.

If the club know Coutinho wants to leave then that is a problem. The club wants Virgil.

If you can’t put the two together - well maybe you should stick to medicine

These sentences barely hang together, Steveo. I honestly think you are floundering now. You can't have a proper argument if you don't know what you are arguing for.

[Steveo]

Do you believe that Coutinho stayed that summer because we couldn't sign Van Dijk so there was no point selling him?

It's an interesting theory - never heard anyone use it before. Or are you just running around like a headless chicken?

I would say this is the most likely scenario.

Coutinho wants to leave - he is a prized asset worth a huge amount, we don’t want to sell him - Klopp loved him - but we are in desperate need of a CB - Klopp identifies Virgil but he costs a lot. We are going to have to match the kind of money City would pay.

Surely you can see the link.

[Steveo]

These sentences barely hang together, Steveo. I honestly think you are floundering now. You can't have a proper argument if you don't know what you are arguing for.

I am not even attempting to argue. I don’t need to - just look at the net spend table.

It is for you to postulate how it has no bearing

https://i.ibb.co/LJnnJx7/Net-spend-last-5-years.png

[CCTV]

I'm not the one crafting this story Steveo

What you have just said contradicts your recent evasive statement;

At no point have I suggested that the club wanted to sell Coutinho.

You can't have it both ways, but that doesn't stop you from trying!

I'd agree with Steve the club didn't want to sell coutinho. They were forced into it and made sure to get their great fee out of barca who came in for him in a panic.

I disagree with some of his other claims.

What he's saying is that we wouldn't have signed others without Phil's fee. Which I'd contest as being a falling for the narrative and not seeing how that narrative benefits the club.

But as I replied to Milner, if you take away the phil fee and remove the addition of keita we are 90 million extra on net spend.
Evidently that is affordable for us given our net spend and profits posted.

For me that is no big deal as essentially it just leaves more money in the bank to acquire players.

[CCTV]

I would say this is the most likely scenario.

Coutinho wants to leave - he is a prized asset worth a huge amount, we don’t want to sell him - Klopp loved him - but we are in desperate need of a CB - Klopp identifies Virgil but he costs a lot. We are going to have to match the kind of money City would pay.

Surely you can see the link.

We were in for virgil long before neymar's move to PSG led to Barcas desperation to replace him.

BBC 7th June 2017 lfc apologise and end interest in VVD

August 3rd 2017 - Neymar joins PSG - in a move that shocks Barcelona chiefs. Which led to their scramble to sign a replacement.

[Steveo]

We were in for Salah before he went to Chelsea..

Coutinho’s head was in Catalonia a year before he left.

None of this is proof of anything really. What matters is what happened.

[Taksin]

I
What he's saying is that we wouldn't have signed others without Phil's fee. Which I'd contest as being a falling for the narrative and not seeing how that narrative benefits the club


What he’s saying is the fact that we invested heavily after selling Coutinho supports his idea that the owners are guilty of under investment.

The reason this is self-evident to him is because of the net spend.

If the net spend was in the red like all the other clubs, then he could not claim there was under investment.

He has also claimed we are a selling club under FSG, which means we have to (or choose to) sell players like Coutinho in order to invest. The idea seems to be that if only the owners dipped into their own pockets a bit, finally we would have a proper squad or team.

These are all rational arguments but the problem with them is they don’t stand up to reality.

In reality we have enjoyed success beyond the expectations of the FSG critics (or the FSG ‘supporters’). Now that we have hit a rough patch, they are forgetting all this and throwing their dummies out the pram again.

[CCTV]

We were in for Salah before he went to Chelsea..

Coutinho’s head was in Catalonia a year before he left.

None of this is proof of anything really. What matters is what happened.

When BR was manager in January 2014, not Klopp.

We were in for virgil before the interest in coutinho materialised.
We'd signed Phil upto a new deal the season beforehand to secure him and he was happy at the club.

The evidence points to us being interest in signing Virgil beforehand and not by selling Phil.

Phil was only bought by barca when they lost neymar. He had his 'bad back' for the first time after neymar left and the interest materialised.

The fee we got was based in part on their desperation.

Phil if he had left the year beforehand as you claim might not have signed a new deal with the club and as we saw, when the interest was there his bad back was instantaneously present.

Had he been sought by barca a year earlier when neymar was there, with hindsight we can speculate hed have acted as he did when the interest actually materialised.

[LEGS]

Reading a few predictions and some seem to suggest possibly no full grounds until 2022/23.

This is not my rant about BCD but if the above is true then that will be another £80-100m we will lose.

Now surely if the above is true transfer fees have to come down otherwise the oil clubs will be the only ones bidding for the best players.

[reddownunder]

Reading a few predictions and some seem to suggest possibly no full grounds until 2022/23.

This is not my rant about BCD but if the above is true then that will be another £80-100m we will lose.

Now surely if the above is true transfer fees have to come down otherwise the oil clubs will be the only ones bidding for the best players.

UEFA seem confident that there will be full stadiums for the Euro's

[LEGS]

UEFA seem confident that there will be full stadiums for the Euro's

Lets hope they are right but I think that is very optimistic.

[Steveo]

When BR was manager in January 2014, not Klopp.

We were in for virgil before the interest in coutinho materialised.
We'd signed Phil upto a new deal the season beforehand to secure him and he was happy at the club.

The evidence points to us being interest in signing Virgil beforehand and not by selling Phil.

Phil was only bought by barca when they lost neymar. He had his 'bad back' for the first time after neymar left and the interest materialised.

The fee we got was based in part on their desperation.

Phil if he had left the year beforehand as you claim might not have signed a new deal with the club and as we saw, when the interest was there his bad back was instantaneously present.

Had he been sought by barca a year earlier when neymar was there, with hindsight we can speculate hed have acted as he did when the interest actually materialised.

Rodgers or Klopp - the club was looking at Salah years before we got him. I am simply saying many clubs are in for many players they don’t actually get or are unwilling to pay a high price for.

On Phil - you have got your timeline mixed up.

Rumours of Barcelona’s interest in Phil date back to Summer 2016. They came to a head in January 2017 a full Year before he departed -


6 Jan 2017: Jurgen Klopp issues statement telling Barcelona to forget about signing Coutinho.

“We never had any ideas or plans or any talks about him leaving, because he is our player – there are no other ideas, nothing has changed,” Klopp said.

We all know Neymar pushed the prices up though - so Virgil would have cost about 35/40 and Phil would have gone for more like 80...

As for a lack of investment - that NET spend table is a key component when discussing it.

[Taksin]

As for a lack of investment - that NET spend table is a key component when discussing it.


Ok. So would you argue Arsenal have seen a far greater investment in their playing staff than LFC have in that time frame?

[Steveo]

Ok. So would you argue Arsenal have seen a far greater investment in their playing staff than LFC have in that time frame?

I wouldn't really know that as I can't see all the contracts - bonuses/actual salaries with any reliable transparency. Not sure they are obliged to publish them all?

Looking at the NET spend table via Transfermarkt - they seem to have spent considerably more. Shockingly more so even than Chelsea!

[Taksin]

I wouldn't really know that as I can't see all the contracts - bonuses/actual salaries with any reliable transparency. Not sure they are obliged to publish them all?

Looking at the NET spend table via Transfermarkt - they seem to have spent considerably more. Shockingly more so even than Chelsea!

Exactly. So you are prepared to look at factors other than that chart for them. Why not for us?

Clearly their squad has not been invested in to the degree that ours has. In my opinion, ours is second only to Man City. Maybe Chelsea, but theirs could be a case of a massive waste of investment, which is not the same thing.

If I'm correct, then the chart is misleading and not the 'key component' as you put it.

[miller0863]

Chelsea have done very well at recruiting young talent developing them, loaning them out and selling them for very good money.
If you look at their incoming money for transfer dealings over the last 5 years it’s pretty good on that basis alone, never mind what the brought in for the sale of Eden Hazard to Real and even Courtois.
Arsenal’s dealings in the transfer market have been shocking, over paying for average players and allowing too many contracts to run down for players to leave for nothing.

[Steveo]

Exactly. So you are prepared to look at factors other than that chart for them. Why not for us?

Clearly their squad has not been invested in to the degree that ours has. In my opinion, ours is second only to Man City. Maybe Chelsea, but theirs could be a case of a massive waste of investment, which is not the same thing.

If I'm correct, then the chart is misleading and not the 'key component' as you put it.

If you are correct... maybe.

We shall have to agree to disagree - it is surely a key component in my eyes - probably the single biggest indicator - what you sell and what you buy. The fact that on Klopp's watch we have managed to do so well is not something to pat the owners on the back for.. Just my opinion though - well aware that many think they are AMAZING!

[Steveo]

Chelsea have done very well at recruiting young talent developing them, loaning them out and selling them for very good money.
If you look at their incoming money for transfer dealings over the last 5 years it’s pretty good on that basis alone, never mind what the brought in for the sale of Eden Hazard to Real and even Courtois.
Arsenal’s dealings in the transfer market have been shocking, over paying for average players and allowing too many contracts to run down for players to leave for nothing.

Ozil... :D

If ever there was a sad demise thread - That holding onto Wenger when it was clearly counter productive - while good on the loyalty front - it has set them back years.

Imagine if they had got Klopp in 2015... and not us.. AAAGGHHH... Perish the thought.

[CCTV]

Rodgers or Klopp - the club was looking at Salah years before we got him. I am simply saying many clubs are in for many players they don’t actually get or are unwilling to pay a high price for.

On Phil - you have got your timeline mixed up.

Rumours of Barcelona’s interest in Phil date back to Summer 2016. They came to a head in January 2017 a full Year before he departed -


6 Jan 2017: Jurgen Klopp issues statement telling Barcelona to forget about signing Coutinho.

“We never had any ideas or plans or any talks about him leaving, because he is our player – there are no other ideas, nothing has changed,” Klopp said.

We all know Neymar pushed the prices up though - so Virgil would have cost about 35/40 and Phil would have gone for more like 80...

As for a lack of investment - that NET spend table is a key component when discussing it.

Thats true. It was said we were interested in Van Dijk when he was at/leaving Celtic.

Think it's fair to say there wasn't any real credible offers till Neymar left, as we saw how he acted when a credible interest emerged.

Similarly think it's fair to say we were signing virgil before that concrete interest emerged.
Imo we probably went to the transfer fee for virgil in part due to the neymar transfer and the apology issued.
Still think wed have paid more than 35/40, that's close to the rio Ferdinand transfer many years prior and virgil arrived with a similar reputation. The excitement was palpable and the competition stiff. The market for defenders had already been inflated naturally and by pep at city with his plethora of expensive defenders too.

Klopp gross spend is a little over half of peps, where peps spend has been pretty ridiculous.
Klopp £480 mill
Pep €925 mill

Klopp net spend is around a fifth of peps.
Half the gross spend at a fifth of the cost.

Think we agree pep inherited a better squad, yet for all their spending gross and net, there is little difference in the squad evaluations. Presently on transfermarkt our squad is valued higher than theirs, largely due to our first team having more highly valued players.
We've managed to match them for 2 league campaigns, though they won 2 titles to our 1 (probably 3), and in Europe we've left them in our wake.

Not sure if you have followed the market value flow of additions. This shows in each window the difference transfers make to the squad valuation.

Whether you bought for less or more than the valuation, or over time track the impact of signings in this regard our 2 fullbacks costing €9mill versus their current valuations.
Or in robbos case they reckon we paid 2mill more for him than his market but he's now worth about 10 times more than his market value back then. Or with thiago we bought him for about half of his market value.
(At a guess we'll hit a dip in their next update or over the coming months and city will overtake us)

So I'd suggest looking at the gross spend, player sales, net spend, market value of squads or individual players, we've absolutely smashed it in the transfer market.

Now net spend itself is low and I've corrected noods before in his overestimation of our net spend per season.
It is undeniable that our net spend has been very low. But that's not all bad as it does reflect excellence in the market when you look at the (more) complete set of metrics.

Now I've posted that had we not sold coutinho and not bought naby, wed have not spent about £90 mill more and that would bring us upto spurs in the net spend table.

Which is a reasonable expectation to match in terms of net spend and looking at our accounts something we most certainly could have afforded given profits.
Spurs in contrast to us are an exemplary club for keeping wages as a percentage of turnover very low. Though that trick can only be held up for so long and I'd imagine it will have risen and will do so under Jose.

So my position with regard to net spend is that it is evidently the case we could have had a greater net spend.
The difference perhaps between us, might be that I see that as money in the bank for future investments. Whereas more skeptical than me people might believe that the owners are not likely to want to see that money banked spent on transfers.
But I'd suggest that Fsg will want to continue to rise up the financial league and to do so will perhaps need a commercial cash cow. These players dont come cheap but they do add significant commercial value to the brand as well as their footballing contributions.

Guess we'll have to wait and see how that pans out.

[RedNoodle]

@CCTV

How exactly have you 'corrected me' in regards to our net spend?

[CCTV]

@CCTV

How exactly have you 'corrected me' in regards to our net spend?

At the time of correction, I would have given you a number less than the one you had given.
Something like you were saying our net spend was 20 mill a season under whereas it was lower at 16 mill iirc.

[CCTV]

Under klopp

[CCTV]

Probably after summer 2019 and before Taki Minaminos arrival in January 2020

[Taksin]

The fact that on Klopp's watch we have managed to do so well is not something to pat the owners on the back for.. Just my opinion though - well aware that many think they are AMAZING!


I think your mockery of the alternate position reveals you to have a prejudice. In your opinion praise for the owners is axiomatically some kind of naiveté or sycophancy, and you couldn't be found to partake in it, no matter how good they are.

Why is that? Because they are foreigners, or just because they are business minded?

The alternate view is to recognise that they have stewarded the club back to success, which is exactly what we would want and need our owners to do if we want the club to experience winning. I'll go further than that and say I think some of their methods and good conduct actually have amazed me. I look around the Premiership and feel gratitude we have them above the others.

I have asked you in the past which club you think is better run than ours but I realise it gets you a bit too close to admitting they are actually very competent for your liking.

[Steveo]

Do everyone a favour and stick to the script.

This is a thread asking about a lack of investment ‘under investment. You can keep changing the questions to suit your own transparent agenda all you like. Silence at the blame cast on players and the manager yet leaping to the defence of the owners when a NET spend table is produced.


Seriously Taksin - carry on believing what you will and I will happily do the same.

[Taksin]

You don't like a challenging conversation, it seems.

If the thread was called 'net spend' there'd be no real argument. (I actually suspect the chart is wrong in some ways, but that doesn't bother me)

The phrase 'under investment' is an accusation. It is not identical with net spend. It implies negligence and is being used as an explanation for where we are now.

You can't keep throwing my 'silence' at me, by the way - more of your own side-stepping of the argument. My silence implies nothing. I have limited time and enjoy taking on certain debates. I also have plenty to say in defence of the players and the manager - I feel no need to defend myself against you on that front. If you have a specific accusation against the players someone has made somewhere that you wish me to comment on, feel free to ask.

You are making a moral clam about the owners and drawing inferences as to what their immoral behaviour has caused. I think you're wrong. If you want to say other things on here I am free to pick you up on them, as I have in the previous post.

Stop telling me to keep quiet while insulting me at the same time. It's babyish.

[Steveo]

I don't see where I have asked you to keep quiet..? If I did then sorry.

Forgive me but this thread is about the 'level of investment' - the title is indeed a little accusatory and I simply posted
the last 5 years combined NET spend list from the very reputable Transfermarkt. It shows that we are well behind all of our rivals and plenty other clubs in that regard.

You seem unhappy that I have dared to post it. You haven't provided anything to discredit it but your own suspicions and are now trying to steer the conversation in the direction of how well run the club is....?

[Nineteenx]

FSG will probably feel they spent good money on Thiago and Jota for Jurgen to evolve the team and he's made an almighty cock up of it

[Taksin]

You seem unhappy that I have dared to post it. You haven't provided anything to discredit it but your own suspicions and are now trying to steer the conversation in the direction of how well run the club is....?

You have claimed net spend can be used to justify the accusation.

When asked about whether Arsenal there have seen superior investment I their squad, you were non committal, which implies net spend is only a part of the story.

When the argument is then made that the club has not in fact experienced under investment - it's clear for all to see, unless our eyes are deceiving us - you then claim all that is needed for the accusation to be true is to look at the net spend chart.

So the chart is either an absolute measure or it isn't. You can't have it both ways.

[Steveo]

You have claimed net spend can be used to justify the accusation.

When asked about whether Arsenal there have seen superior investment I their squad, you were non committal, which implies net spend is only a part of the story.

When the argument is then made that the club has not in fact experienced under investment - it's clear for all to see, unless our eyes are deceiving us - you then claim all that is needed for the accusation to be true is to look at the net spend chart.

So the chart is either an absolute measure or it isn't. You can't have it both ways.

NET spend IS only part of the story. I have never said it was everything. NET spend is however important.You seem to be suggesting that I can only post the chart IF it represents everything. Who has everything?

Seems a perfectly appropriate place to put it.

[Taksin]

FSG will probably feel they spent good money on Thiago and Jota for Jurgen to evolve the team and he's made an almighty cock up of it

They might also have watched last night's game and wondered if we over spent on our goalkeeper. But he is the acceptable face of FSG investment on this thread.

So, knee-jerk arguments need to be examined a bit before jumping to conclusions (or indulging our prejudices).

[Taksin]

NET spend IS only part of the story. I have never said it was everything.


post 102
I am not even attempting to argue. I don’t need to - just look at the net spend table.


It's very hard to know what your argument is, Steveo, when you are so ill-disciplined. The reason we have these endless disputes is because of what I have always accused you of. Wanting to have your cake and eat it.

[justme]

https://image.cnbcfm.com/api/v1/image/105815446-1553624918736gettyimages-1078542150.jpeg?v=1612303414


BREAKING NEWS.... our new investor

[miller0863]

Is it?

[CCTV]

https://image.cnbcfm.com/api/v1/image/105815446-1553624918736gettyimages-1078542150.jpeg?v=1612303414


BREAKING NEWS.... our new investor

Lolz - that's a joke right

[Steveo]

post 102
I am not even attempting to argue. I don’t need to - just look at the net spend table.


It's very hard to know what your argument is, Steveo, when you are so ill-disciplined. The reason we have these endless disputes is because of what I have always accused you of. Wanting to have your cake and eat it.

Oh yes - I love my cake and I very much do intend to eat it.

Once again IF you have issue with that table and want to back up your loose claim that it isn't accurate please feel free.

That's if you think it's worth it on NET spend.. :D

[justme]

Ooops yeah a joke :D

[CCTV]

Ooops yeah a joke :D

Chuckles - I googled it immediately to be sure to be sure

[Steveo]

You can talk about chuckles - That laugh...



https://youtu.be/lZ_DyimkS54

[CCTV]

You can talk about chuckles - That laugh...



https://youtu.be/lZ_DyimkS54

Could be something to justmes joke, I can see why hed be interested in us...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0fE7Otpoiq4

[CCTV]

I like klopp even if he has a mad lad laugh

[Steveo]

Could be something to justmes joke, I can see why hed be interested in us...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0fE7Otpoiq4

Wouldn't be bad at all if true..

[justme]

sorry didnt mean to mislead anyone. just a lot of fans on here and in the wilder world. want more huge investments in players. and who else is richer that Jeff Bezos?

[Steveo]

sorry didnt mean to mislead anyone. just a lot of fans on here and in the wilder world. want more huge investments in players. and who else is richer that Jeff Bezos?

Elon Musk but I would happily take either.. Would love to see the faces of the Mansours and Shitties fans.

[skyebo]

Elon Musk but I would happily take either.. Would love to see the faces of the Mansours and Shitties fans.

Why would you want to bring a sugar daddy in when everyone seems to be against City having success only because of the same thing?

[Steveo]

Why would you want to bring a sugar daddy in when everyone seems to be against City having success only because of the same thing?

It was a little tongue in cheek Skye - The post about Bezos was surely a joke?.

But if we are being serious - I guess there might be a few reasons why I might like it.

1. To have my cake and eat it.

And

2. ‘cause I don’t really give a flying a Monkey what everyone else thinks. :D

[Steveo]

You’re a bunch of idiots..!


https://youtu.be/5iDxEdXJ_Mc

[justme]

Manchester City and United have LOST the most money across Europe in the transfer market since 2016 with Everton and Aston Villa above Premier League rivals Chelsea and Arsenal... and Real Madrid have cost themselves LESS than newly-promoted Leeds
New data shows how much teams have lost in the transfer market since 2016
It shows money spent, money earned through sales and the total profit or loss
Man City have posted the biggest loss, spending £554m more than they earned
Rivals Man United follow them in second in the table, with a deficit of £515m
Barcelona, PSG, Inter, Everton and Aston Villa also find themselves in the top 10







CLUB LEAGUE MONEY SPENT MONEY EARNED TOTAL DEFICIT

Manchester City Premier League £883m £329m -£554m

Manchester United Premier League £730m £215m -£515m

Barcelona LaLiga £1bn £614m -£413m


Theres several others but not posted! not sure where we come in. It doesnt say.. But Man-city have made a loss of over half a billon in less than 5 years.. Ridiculous and they still paid 95 million in the summer transfer window.

[CCTV]

Manchester City and United have LOST the most money across Europe in the transfer market since 2016 with Everton and Aston Villa above Premier League rivals Chelsea and Arsenal... and Real Madrid have cost themselves LESS than newly-promoted Leeds
New data shows how much teams have lost in the transfer market since 2016
It shows money spent, money earned through sales and the total profit or loss
Man City have posted the biggest loss, spending £554m more than they earned
Rivals Man United follow them in second in the table, with a deficit of £515m
Barcelona, PSG, Inter, Everton and Aston Villa also find themselves in the top 10







CLUB LEAGUE MONEY SPENT MONEY EARNED TOTAL DEFICIT

Manchester City Premier League £883m £329m -£554m

Manchester United Premier League £730m £215m -£515m

Barcelona LaLiga £1bn £614m -£413m


Theres several others but not posted! not sure where we come in. It doesnt say.. But Man-city have made a loss of over half a billon in less than 5 years.. Ridiculous and they still paid 95 million in the summer transfer window.

Are those figures for transfer spending deficits.

[Steveo]

Jürgen Klopp has been let down by Liverpool owners
Henry Winter, Chief Football Writer,
February 9 2021, The Times

There is no shame in losing to a team of Manchester City’s exceptional class or being outwitted by a coach of Pep Guardiola’s endless inventiveness. The only shame is in not responding. That is the challenge for Liverpool now.

The central question is whether the club’s owner, Fenway Sports Group (FSG), will respond. It is wrestling with the cost of the pandemic, and can point to investment in the magnificent training ground at Kirkby and to almost £72 million spent on Diogo Jota, Thiago Alcântara and Kostas Tsimikas in the summer.

The company is largely perceived as a good owner, partly because it is not Tom Hicks and George Gillett — fellow Americans and unpopular predecessors — nor the Glazers at Manchester United, and because John W Henry, the club’s principal owner, engages in community initiatives, speaks well and showed decisiveness when appointing Jürgen Klopp and recruiting Alisson and Virgil van Dijk.

Yet FSG is also the organisation that proposed a £77 ticket before apologising to fans who staged a mass walkout in protest in 2016, that furloughed staff last year before relenting after a supporters’ backlash, that co-drove the shameless attempted power-grab of Project Big Picture and is now involved in money-spinning plans for a European Super League.

For all the occasional romantic narrative spun around Henry, he is a businessman, looking for a fistful of dollars and more. Liverpool is not a hobby, a passion for Henry; he is prospecting in a Kop Klondike. Do the maths. Money means more. At a time when Liverpool’s squad required proper investment, Henry paused. All the indications are that the summer will be another period of retrenchment, of the seeds of success left unsown, and the fields of Anfield Road lying fallow.

For the first time, Henry has let Klopp down, forcing him to raid the middle ranks of the Sky Bet Championship and the bottom of the Bundesliga for central-defensive reinforcements, corner-shop purchasing by a household name. FSG has gone all cheap on Klopp. For an owner who prides himself on his knowledge of the club’s history, Henry should know that Liverpool traditionally strengthened when ahead.

Those of us lucky to be heading into Anfield on Sunday for Liverpool’s showdown with City, which became a meltdown, saw Sir Kenny Dalglish also arriving, striding in, always there, always supporting the team from the smart seats, just as he delivered on the pitch for them. Dalglish first arrived at Anfield in 1977, following Kevin Keegan, who was moving on to Hamburg. Henry and his acolytes will not need reminding that Liverpool won the European Cup in 1977 with Keegan in attack, then retained the trophy with Dalglish scoring the decisive goal. Momentum maintained. Always strengthen.

Of the Liverpool team who lost the 2018 Champions League final in Kiev, seven started against City: Trent Alexander-Arnold, Andrew Robertson, Jordan Henderson, Georginio Wijnaldum, Mohamed Salah, Roberto Firmino and Sadio Mané, while nine from the triumphant 2019 team in Madrid started at Anfield (adding Alisson and Fabinho). Even dynasties need refreshing. Even a pool of talent needs topping up.

Liverpool look tired, in need of rejuvenating. Not since the start of the 1963-64 season have they succumbed in three successive games at Anfield, to Nottingham Forest, Blackpool and West Ham United. They still finished champions, under Bill Shankly, that season but that is not going to happen this year. City are too good. Liverpool too drained.

They need substantial investment in the squad by FSG in the summer, a clearout too, perhaps freeing up some funds. Naby Keita, sadly, is too injury-prone while Divock Origi and Xherdan Shaqiri are good but not elite, although Liverpool fans will offer them thanks for the memories. Wijnaldum’s contract impasse seems symptomatic of Liverpool’s predicament: a principal owner looking at the bottom line when he should be focusing on giving Klopp the resources to be top of the table again.

If money matters most to Henry, he will surely understand the price of not qualifying for the Champions League, of the embarrassment for him among his Super League plotters. Worryingly for the majority who care about the sporting integrity of the game, Liverpool failing to dash down the Premier League platform and reboard the Champions League gravy train may simply encourage FSG to become further in cahoots with the European greed club.

Henry needs to respond the right way: speculate to accumulate. Back Klopp. In the acrimonious aftermath of Liverpool’s second-half collapse against an outstanding City, BBC Radio 5 Live’s 606 phone-in with Chris Sutton and Robbie Savage heard from some callers who had clearly divested themselves of all common sense. Klopp out, a couple ventured. Radio going gaga. Fortunately, Sutton and Savage put them in their place. Klopp represents Liverpool’s rescue plan.

He will respond to the adversity. It is in his nature. He will be furious about Liverpool’s supine defence of their league crown, even if amid the bonfire of the sanities on Sunday evening it was forgotten that there have been far worse title defences, going back to Blackburn Rovers, finishing 7th in 1995-96, Chelsea 10th in 2015-16 and Leicester City ending up 12th a season later.

Klopp, such an intelligent man, will scrutinise and analyse himself and others. He needs to be less twitchy in interviews and more bold with his substitutions. He needs to hold his nerve, keep showing the courage that defined his 2019 and 2020 teams. Removing Curtis Jones, who was playing well against City, was bizarre, running against Klopp’s identity.

As well as reinvigorating his squad, Klopp should also consider continuing to refresh his coaching staff, bringing in a new voice for players to respond to. Sir Alex Ferguson was the master of recruiting players to challenge the squad and coaches to challenge the status quo.

Some new faces will help but anybody with any familiarity with some of the characters in Klopp’s dressing room will know they will still respond. Experienced campaigners and driven individuals such as Henderson, Robertson and Mané will respond. At 35, James Milner’s legs are going, but not his hunger. Alisson is too conscientious a professional not to refocus and immerse himself in training to eradicate the errors of distribution that scarred the second half on Sunday.

A supreme talent like Alexander-Arnold, only 22, will respond, working on his defensive attributes to complement his phenomenal attacking strengths. A fearless youngster such as Jones, only 20, will respond. Absent friends like Van Dijk and Joe Gomez will return at some point this year, and respond, providing the pacey cover that allows Robertson and Alexander-Arnold to push up more confidently. Jota will return and respond.

Liverpool will be back and they will respond, but they need backing from FSG.

When Liverpool, Everton, Manchester United and Manchester City joined forces at the weekend to demand an end to the online abuse of players, they also referred to the criticism that referees endure, which needed condemning and addressing. The death threats sent to the referee Mike Dean and his family after his decision to dismiss West Ham United’s Tomas Soucek against Fulham, a red card overturned on appeal yesterday, sadly highlighted again the lowlifes lurking online, inevitably intensifying with fans at present barred from airing their views inside grounds. Dean is an honest, hard-working official who loves the game and makes the occasional mistake, yet some people criminally cross the line in calling him to task and the tech giants, as well as the police, have to devote the requisite resources to bringing the perpetrators to account.

If the online platforms do not accept their responsibility and make those posting more visible then the government has to step in. The game also has a responsibility to Dean, including being more mindful of comments by managers or media that could fan the flames of enmity online.

[Steveo]

An interesting article by Winter - and some very good points made.

[fiordearg]

We don't always have to spend huge for players to be successful. Of our backline only Allison and Van Dijk cost big money. As alluded to earlier they took us on to another level. The team has suffered from investment in key positions such as right back, centre back, defensive midfielder and a central forward. Some of our latest signings have not come to fruition. Thiago is increasingly looking like Klopp's version of Juan Veron, Tsimikas has been injured and Minamino has been shipped out. Only Jota looked the real deal before his injury and he represented a major long-term investment

[justme]

Are those figures for transfer spending deficits.

seems so

[RedNoodle]

At the time of correction, I would have given you a number less than the one you had given.
Something like you were saying our net spend was 20 mill a season under whereas it was lower at 16 mill iirc.

That's hardly 'correcting me' is it? Most available sources have our net spend at around that £20m mark give or take a million or two, a figure/margin of error which hardly requires any kind of 'correction'.

[CCTV]

Jürgen Klopp has been let down by Liverpool owners
Henry Winter, Chief Football Writer,
February 9 2021, The Times

There is no shame in losing to a team of Manchester City’s exceptional class or being outwitted by a coach of Pep Guardiola’s endless inventiveness. The only shame is in not responding. That is the challenge for Liverpool now.

The central question is whether the club’s owner, Fenway Sports Group (FSG), will respond. It is wrestling with the cost of the pandemic, and can point to investment in the magnificent training ground at Kirkby and to almost £72 million spent on Diogo Jota, Thiago Alcântara and Kostas Tsimikas in the summer.

The company is largely perceived as a good owner, partly because it is not Tom Hicks and George Gillett — fellow Americans and unpopular predecessors — nor the Glazers at Manchester United, and because John W Henry, the club’s principal owner, engages in community initiatives, speaks well and showed decisiveness when appointing Jürgen Klopp and recruiting Alisson and Virgil van Dijk.

Yet FSG is also the organisation that proposed a £77 ticket before apologising to fans who staged a mass walkout in protest in 2016, that furloughed staff last year before relenting after a supporters’ backlash, that co-drove the shameless attempted power-grab of Project Big Picture and is now involved in money-spinning plans for a European Super League.

For all the occasional romantic narrative spun around Henry, he is a businessman, looking for a fistful of dollars and more. Liverpool is not a hobby, a passion for Henry; he is prospecting in a Kop Klondike. Do the maths. Money means more. At a time when Liverpool’s squad required proper investment, Henry paused. All the indications are that the summer will be another period of retrenchment, of the seeds of success left unsown, and the fields of Anfield Road lying fallow.

For the first time, Henry has let Klopp down, forcing him to raid the middle ranks of the Sky Bet Championship and the bottom of the Bundesliga for central-defensive reinforcements, corner-shop purchasing by a household name. FSG has gone all cheap on Klopp. For an owner who prides himself on his knowledge of the club’s history, Henry should know that Liverpool traditionally strengthened when ahead.

Those of us lucky to be heading into Anfield on Sunday for Liverpool’s showdown with City, which became a meltdown, saw Sir Kenny Dalglish also arriving, striding in, always there, always supporting the team from the smart seats, just as he delivered on the pitch for them. Dalglish first arrived at Anfield in 1977, following Kevin Keegan, who was moving on to Hamburg. Henry and his acolytes will not need reminding that Liverpool won the European Cup in 1977 with Keegan in attack, then retained the trophy with Dalglish scoring the decisive goal. Momentum maintained. Always strengthen.

Of the Liverpool team who lost the 2018 Champions League final in Kiev, seven started against City: Trent Alexander-Arnold, Andrew Robertson, Jordan Henderson, Georginio Wijnaldum, Mohamed Salah, Roberto Firmino and Sadio Mané, while nine from the triumphant 2019 team in Madrid started at Anfield (adding Alisson and Fabinho). Even dynasties need refreshing. Even a pool of talent needs topping up.

Liverpool look tired, in need of rejuvenating. Not since the start of the 1963-64 season have they succumbed in three successive games at Anfield, to Nottingham Forest, Blackpool and West Ham United. They still finished champions, under Bill Shankly, that season but that is not going to happen this year. City are too good. Liverpool too drained.

They need substantial investment in the squad by FSG in the summer, a clearout too, perhaps freeing up some funds. Naby Keita, sadly, is too injury-prone while Divock Origi and Xherdan Shaqiri are good but not elite, although Liverpool fans will offer them thanks for the memories. Wijnaldum’s contract impasse seems symptomatic of Liverpool’s predicament: a principal owner looking at the bottom line when he should be focusing on giving Klopp the resources to be top of the table again.

If money matters most to Henry, he will surely understand the price of not qualifying for the Champions League, of the embarrassment for him among his Super League plotters. Worryingly for the majority who care about the sporting integrity of the game, Liverpool failing to dash down the Premier League platform and reboard the Champions League gravy train may simply encourage FSG to become further in cahoots with the European greed club.

Henry needs to respond the right way: speculate to accumulate. Back Klopp. In the acrimonious aftermath of Liverpool’s second-half collapse against an outstanding City, BBC Radio 5 Live’s 606 phone-in with Chris Sutton and Robbie Savage heard from some callers who had clearly divested themselves of all common sense. Klopp out, a couple ventured. Radio going gaga. Fortunately, Sutton and Savage put them in their place. Klopp represents Liverpool’s rescue plan.

He will respond to the adversity. It is in his nature. He will be furious about Liverpool’s supine defence of their league crown, even if amid the bonfire of the sanities on Sunday evening it was forgotten that there have been far worse title defences, going back to Blackburn Rovers, finishing 7th in 1995-96, Chelsea 10th in 2015-16 and Leicester City ending up 12th a season later.

Klopp, such an intelligent man, will scrutinise and analyse himself and others. He needs to be less twitchy in interviews and more bold with his substitutions. He needs to hold his nerve, keep showing the courage that defined his 2019 and 2020 teams. Removing Curtis Jones, who was playing well against City, was bizarre, running against Klopp’s identity.

As well as reinvigorating his squad, Klopp should also consider continuing to refresh his coaching staff, bringing in a new voice for players to respond to. Sir Alex Ferguson was the master of recruiting players to challenge the squad and coaches to challenge the status quo.

Some new faces will help but anybody with any familiarity with some of the characters in Klopp’s dressing room will know they will still respond. Experienced campaigners and driven individuals such as Henderson, Robertson and Mané will respond. At 35, James Milner’s legs are going, but not his hunger. Alisson is too conscientious a professional not to refocus and immerse himself in training to eradicate the errors of distribution that scarred the second half on Sunday.

A supreme talent like Alexander-Arnold, only 22, will respond, working on his defensive attributes to complement his phenomenal attacking strengths. A fearless youngster such as Jones, only 20, will respond. Absent friends like Van Dijk and Joe Gomez will return at some point this year, and respond, providing the pacey cover that allows Robertson and Alexander-Arnold to push up more confidently. Jota will return and respond.

Liverpool will be back and they will respond, but they need backing from FSG.

When Liverpool, Everton, Manchester United and Manchester City joined forces at the weekend to demand an end to the online abuse of players, they also referred to the criticism that referees endure, which needed condemning and addressing. The death threats sent to the referee Mike Dean and his family after his decision to dismiss West Ham United’s Tomas Soucek against Fulham, a red card overturned on appeal yesterday, sadly highlighted again the lowlifes lurking online, inevitably intensifying with fans at present barred from airing their views inside grounds. Dean is an honest, hard-working official who loves the game and makes the occasional mistake, yet some people criminally cross the line in calling him to task and the tech giants, as well as the police, have to devote the requisite resources to bringing the perpetrators to account.

If the online platforms do not accept their responsibility and make those posting more visible then the government has to step in. The game also has a responsibility to Dean, including being more mindful of comments by managers or media that could fan the flames of enmity online.

Some good points I'd agree with, yet its has the typical lyrical flow of a well paid BBC journo and pitifully repost with the ball-less potency of a eunuch :D

A team like city who've flailed in producing an incredible third season of football.

A team perhaps demoralised by the CAS wilful assistance of financial doping and crooked accounting at the Etihad. An awful body in sport probably the worst ever. Enabling city to compete in the CL. After great work by the Germans in exposing their corruption.
Whats that about the class and quality of city ?

What contrived image has the city ownership developed ?

A team demoralised by poor officiating and the loss of players like van dijk to the terrible and persistent injuring of lfc players by everton. Be great to leave the bitters in a lower league.

A team with players whose international managers have been loathe to release, for relief and player welfare.

A team that looks to produce beautiful football whilst sharing revenue sportingly with a host of teams that park the bus.

A management that would seek to produce the greatest spectacle in football where the best teams, playing the highest quality football regularly would wet the appetite of football purists the world over.

A management that has sought to drag the club up the financial ladder of European football. Delivered an unprecendted 6th and long sought 19th.

Klopp has recruited from the championship, let down, oh no, yet with a no mark robbo, gini and shaq all recruited from championship bound, bottom of the epl sides.
Against a Schalke side whose been in the CL struggling now, versus the calibre of Newcastle, stoke and hull and their European exploits.
Of course a lowly championship player could never del alli for a season or two. The snobbish bore of a man who publicly dictate to Klopp, at least I have the decency to do it anonymously and in a quite place. Maybe you have some balls , not for truth but your own arrogance.

How little you care for the welfare of Jurgen or Jwh you hypocrite and soft touch writer, pandering to meet the emotional tone of a disappointed fan base and to hell with an objective and more balanced report.

Dear Henry Winters you authoritarian tyrant, please keep your maniacal phatansies to yourself. You and your ilk were Orwells warning to name but one.
The welfare of the people…has always been the alibi of tyrants…giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.

If fanning the flames of enmity are of such concern for you, I formally request your resignation from the BBC.

[CCTV]

That's hardly 'correcting me' is it? Most available sources have our net spend at around that £20m mark give or take a million or two, a figure/margin of error which hardly requires any kind of 'correction'.

It meets a definition of correcting, it's not meant as a stinging blow, unlike my correction of they tyrant in lieu

[Steveo]

Winter writes for The Times primarily, think his job is safe :D

[CCTV]

Winter writes for The Times primarily, think his job is safe :D

BBC/Times an assault on our owner and manager. He should be in prison for his hate speech and xenophobia.

[Steveo]

Really - where is the assault on Klopp?? Everything the he cites in Jurgen I myself noted on this very forum before Christmas.

He has been very balanced on Henry too. What is your beef - is Henry a distant Irish relative?

Below is the nugget for me at least.

The company is largely perceived as a good owner, partly because it is not Tom Hicks and George Gillett — fellow Americans and unpopular predecessors — nor the Glazers at Manchester United, and because John W Henry, the club’s principal owner, engages in community initiatives, speaks well and showed decisiveness when appointing Jürgen Klopp and recruiting Alisson and Virgil van Dijk.

Yet FSG is also the organisation that proposed a £77 ticket before apologising to fans who staged a mass walkout in protest in 2016, that furloughed staff last year before relenting after a supporters’ backlash, that co-drove the shameless attempted power-grab of Project Big Picture and is now involved in money-spinning plans for a European Super League.

For all the occasional romantic narrative spun around Henry, he is a businessman, looking for a fistful of dollars and more. Liverpool is not a hobby, a passion for Henry; he is prospecting in a Kop Klondike. Do the maths. Money means more. At a time when Liverpool’s squad required proper investment, Henry paused. All the indications are that the summer will be another period of retrenchment, of the seeds of success left unsown, and the fields of Anfield Road lying fallow.


Looks a very succinct description of the reality and divorced from any spin. I would go further - back to summer 2019 for the pause. A price we are now paying for.

[eggy81]

City had a terrible start to the season. Were we close on 10 points ahead give or take. 10 points behind now. That’s some collapse. Very little to do with city and all to do with us.

[Steveo]

We don't always have to spend huge for players to be successful. Of our backline only Allison and Van Dijk cost big money. As alluded to earlier they took us on to another level. The team has suffered from investment in key positions such as right back, centre back, defensive midfielder and a central forward. Some of our latest signings have not come to fruition. Thiago is increasingly looking like Klopp's version of Juan Veron, Tsimikas has been injured and Minamino has been shipped out. Only Jota looked the real deal before his injury and he represented a major long-term investment

Agreed..

[miller0863]

Talking about City and Utd’s spending is a red herring in this debate, held onto by the naysayers in this discussion.
Those of us who feel there is lack of investment point to our 14th placed position in the net spend table on the back of record profits, a Champions League win, World Club Cup/ Championship win and a Premier League win.
No one expects us to spend the obscene amounts spent by City and Utd but we could expect to match or better at least 10 of those clubs above us in the net spend table.
Our performances and results against the bottom six this year are appalling, something which would have improved with a stronger squad.
Financially we are one of the strongest clubs in Europe, outside the Oil rich anomalies.

Net spend may not be everything but it’s a large part of it and a major indicator in the debate. Bringing up City constantly is just annoying they are completely irrelevant.

[LEGS]

I think this season is not really fair to make a balanced arguement either way.

People can say we dont have strong enough squad players thats a fair point but we have had injuries to key players that is freakish bad luck.

As for not spending fair enough but we still need other clubs to spend to get Wilson Origi Shaqiri off the books we cant afford to let players rot.

All the love in for Pep is a joke how did the genius do in his first season at City ??

He had Laporte out last season and his answer is give me £100m for two CBs granted Dias is very good but Ake has played very little and they are writing off £40m on him.

Same with Mendy £50m he is crap lets face it and Pep must have spent close to £350m on defenders alone !

As for our power grab that is wrong Clarke organised that meeting between six clubs so obviously we will listen.

FSG are greedy businessmen and we all know they arent real football fans, but lets be right there was 6-7 clubs chairmen who didnt want project restart.

Funny enough one of those clubs is very very happy to play now they are 5th ....funny that anyone would think they were shit scared of relegation and losing MONEY !!

Next season is the time to see how things go but with very little chance of full grounds spending will be lower again not an excuse its a fact.

We can be smart by looking in the French league at the likes of Soumare if Gini goes sure we can get bargains over there.

[Steveo]

Talking about City and Utd’s spending is a red herring in this debate, held onto by the naysayers in this discussion.
Those of us who feel there is lack of investment point to our 14th placed position in the net spend table on the back of record profits, a Champions League win, World Club Cup/ Championship win and a Premier League win.
No one expects us to spend the obscene amounts spent by City and Utd but we could expect to match or better at least 10 of those clubs above us in the net spend table.
Our performances and results against the bottom six this year are appalling, something which would have improved with a stronger squad.
Financially we are one of the strongest clubs in Europe, outside the Oil rich anomalies.

Net spend may not be everything but it’s a large part of it and a major indicator in the debate. Bringing up City constantly is just annoying they are completely irrelevant.

100%..

[CCTV]

Really - where is the assault on Klopp?? Everything the he cites in Jurgen I myself noted on this very forum before Christmas.

He has been very balanced on Henry too. What is your beef - is Henry a distant Irish relative?

Below is the nugget for me at least.

The company is largely perceived as a good owner, partly because it is not Tom Hicks and George Gillett — fellow Americans and unpopular predecessors — nor the Glazers at Manchester United, and because John W Henry, the club’s principal owner, engages in community initiatives, speaks well and showed decisiveness when appointing Jürgen Klopp and recruiting Alisson and Virgil van Dijk.

Yet FSG is also the organisation that proposed a £77 ticket before apologising to fans who staged a mass walkout in protest in 2016, that furloughed staff last year before relenting after a supporters’ backlash, that co-drove the shameless attempted power-grab of Project Big Picture and is now involved in money-spinning plans for a European Super League.

For all the occasional romantic narrative spun around Henry, he is a businessman, looking for a fistful of dollars and more. Liverpool is not a hobby, a passion for Henry; he is prospecting in a Kop Klondike. Do the maths. Money means more. At a time when Liverpool’s squad required proper investment, Henry paused. All the indications are that the summer will be another period of retrenchment, of the seeds of success left unsown, and the fields of Anfield Road lying fallow.


Looks a very succinct description of the reality and divorced from any spin. I would go further - back to summer 2019 for the pause. A price we are now paying for.

Henry and Klopp are both hard working decent fellows. Yet this Winters is seeking to gag criticism for refs, while dishing it out in spades to our lads.

As per this succinct conclusion all the indicators, what indicators ?

I've posted a critique of the piece, maybe you could have a look at the absent points which would balance the piece.

For all the generous gifting by the altruistic city ownership, they burned out last season after 2 great seasons. Yet we are down now and it's the spend, maybe city didn't spend enough either ?

This cunt is all about the money himself ironically , soft on thinking and the piece doesn't reflect the football realities.

[CCTV]

Shit season so far, shit happens, Everton.

Go back to the summer and the acquisitions of jota and thiago. A bit of bad luck, bitters exist, and the spin on their stewardship is cringe. Can't remember the doom bad gloom posts

Wasn't many complaints in the summer and the only one made really re Lovren was a risk taken that typically would be safe enough. But then VVD got mullered.

Pandering to meet the emotional wants of fans, short on criticising city whose wondrous benevolent owners are well known to advertise with numerous papers so as to discourage criticism.

[CCTV]

Talking about City and Utd’s spending is a red herring in this debate, held onto by the naysayers in this discussion.
Those of us who feel there is lack of investment point to our 14th placed position in the net spend table on the back of record profits, a Champions League win, World Club Cup/ Championship win and a Premier League win.
No one expects us to spend the obscene amounts spent by City and Utd but we could expect to match or better at least 10 of those clubs above us in the net spend table.
Our performances and results against the bottom six this year are appalling, something which would have improved with a stronger squad.
Financially we are one of the strongest clubs in Europe, outside the Oil rich anomalies.

Net spend may not be everything but it’s a large part of it and a major indicator in the debate. Bringing up City constantly is just annoying they are completely irrelevant.

Maybe city should have given pep enough money so as to avoid a poor third season after w cracking seasons.
As city fans say, the owners haven't really backed pep.

[Steveo]

Henry and Klopp are both hard working decent fellows. Yet this Winters is seeking to gag criticism for refs, while dishing it out in spades to our lads.

As per this succinct conclusion all the indicators, what indicators ?

I've posted a critique of the piece, maybe you could have a look at the absent points which would balance the piece.

For all the generous gifting by the altruistic city ownership, they burned out last season after 2 great seasons. Yet we are down now and it's the spend, maybe city didn't spend enough either ?

This cunt is all about the money himself ironically , soft on thinking and the piece doesn't reflect the football realities.

Yawn...Again - the focus on City and also refs. t



The article is mainly targeting a lack of support for Klopp at a crucial time. If it gets you foaming at the mouth like a rabid dog - then perhaps you should look within and readjust your own perception of who and what is running Liverpool FC. Perhaps they are not quite so AMAZING as some believe. They we not amazing when we were winning nothing - not amazing while we won number 6 and and they have been below par since we won number 19.

[CCTV]

Yawn...Again - the focus on City and also refs. t

The article is mainly targeting a lack of support for Klopp at a crucial time. If it gets you foaming at the mouth like a rabid dog - then perhaps you should look within and readjust your own perception of who and what is running Liverpool FC. Perhaps they are not quite so AMAZING as some believe. They we not amazing when we were winning nothing - not amazing while we won number 6 and and they have been below par since we won number 19.

They tagging on of some politically motivated and hypocritical garbage at the end needs pointing out, as imo the article isn't as good as you think.

If you post an article you describe as succinct with the refs and city in it, don't be surprised if the reply to your article addresses those points in the article you posted.

It's rather glowing of city and yet fails to acknowledge we are having a dip they had last season. The CAS overruling the decision based on sound reporting on them in Germany. City shouldn't be in the cal this year and should be suffering from their own corrupt accounting practices.
Yet the case case again let's cheaters, benefit.

I'll defend Klopp and Henry against your Winters article.

I'm under no illusion as to the significance of klopp in our upturn in fortunes.
Net spend was larger in the same timeframe before Klopp arrived. Yet the benefits of that extra investment didn't materialise in 2 massive titles, 2 incredible pl seasons and 3 euro finals.
Same way with arsenal it didn't materialise, same way it didn't prevent Pepsi city dipping last season.
Spurs are also a very well run club too without the titles.

I did ask you what indicators are credibly the basis for the predicted summer out come ? Like most journos I'd suggest the artistry of the piece overrides a critical and composed piece.

Way i see it Klopp arrived and talked about building organically, using time to get a side together and acquire the requisite parts.
He was given that time and when the time came he got most of the targets he wanted, according to him he settled for Salah as the back up option.

We are all whinging now and fucked off with the season, bcd football, yet there was little to mean about at the start of the season.
I'd have liked Mbappe of course.

[eggy81]

Shit season so far, shit happens, Everton.

Go back to the summer and the acquisitions of jota and thiago. A bit of bad luck, bitters exist, and the spin on their stewardship is cringe. Can't remember the doom bad gloom posts

Wasn't many complaints in the summer and the only one made really re Lovren was a risk taken that typically would be safe enough. But then VVD got mullered.

Pandering to meet the emotional wants of fans, short on criticising city whose wondrous benevolent owners are well known to advertise with numerous papers so as to discourage criticism.

Nah there was plenty of posts even last season worrying about the mini slump in form post lockdown 1, though rather hopefully we all put it down to having walked the league and not needing to be near our best to finish. In reality the slump started last season.

[CCTV]

The cas again (fucking autocorrect)

[Steveo]

They tagging on of some politically motivated and hypocritical garbage at the end needs pointing out, as imo the article isn't as good as you think.

If you post an article you describe as succinct with the refs and city in it, don't be surprised if the reply to your article addresses those points in the article you posted.

It's rather glowing of city and yet fails to acknowledge we are having a dip they had last season. The CAS overruling the decision based on sound reporting on them in Germany. City shouldn't be in the cal this year and should be suffering from their own corrupt accounting practices.
Yet the case case again let's cheaters, benefit.

I'll defend Klopp and Henry against your Winters article.

I'm under no illusion as to the significance of klopp in our upturn in fortunes.
Net spend was larger in the same timeframe before Klopp arrived. Yet the benefits of that extra investment didn't materialise in 2 massive titles, 2 incredible pl seasons and 3 euro finals.
Same way with arsenal it didn't materialise, same way it didn't prevent Pepsi city dipping last season.
Spurs are also a very well run club too without the titles.

I did ask you what indicators are credibly the basis for the predicted summer out come ? Like most journos I'd suggest the artistry of the piece overrides a critical and composed piece.

Way i see it Klopp arrived and talked about building organically, using time to get a side together and acquire the requisite parts.
He was given that time and when the time came he got most of the targets he wanted, according to him he settled for Salah as the back up option.

We are all whinging now and fucked off with the season, bcd football, yet there was little to mean about at the start of the season.
I'd have liked Mbappe of course.

I shouldn't have to spell it out for you twice..!

Reading is not the same as understanding.

Indicators like these

1. An enhanced sense good will among many supporters due to the atrocious nature of their predecessors and by comparison with the Glazers down the East lancs. Their crowning glory in Klopp - which I always credit them.. And the 2 stand out purchases Virgil and Alisson - payed for by...? insert your own musings..

2. Continually trying to drive up prices, use TAX payers money to save them paying club staff salaries - despite record profits

3. That they are first and foremost investors who aim for a windfall rather than to facilitate continued success on the pitch



1.The company is largely perceived as a good owner, partly because it is not Tom Hicks and George Gillett — fellow Americans and unpopular predecessors — nor the Glazers at Manchester United, and because John W Henry, the club’s principal owner, engages in community initiatives, speaks well and showed decisiveness when appointing Jürgen Klopp and recruiting Alisson and Virgil van Dijk.

2. Yet FSG is also the organisation that proposed a £77 ticket before apologising to fans who staged a mass walkout in protest in 2016, that furloughed staff last year before relenting after a supporters’ backlash, that co-drove the shameless attempted power-grab of Project Big Picture and is now involved in money-spinning plans for a European Super League.

3. For all the occasional romantic narrative spun around Henry, he is a businessman, looking for a fistful of dollars and more. Liverpool is not a hobby, a passion for Henry; he is prospecting in a Kop Klondike. Do the maths. Money means more. At a time when Liverpool’s squad required proper investment, Henry paused. All the indications are that the summer will be another period of retrenchment, of the seeds of success left unsown, and the fields of Anfield Road lying fallow.

You don't notice these nuggets because you don't like them.

[CCTV]

Nah there was plenty of posts even last season worrying about the mini slump in form post lockdown 1, though rather hopefully we all put it down to having walked the league and not needing to be near our best to finish. In reality the slump started last season.

That's a fair point, I do remember many posts about how they had won the league and had their rhythm interrupted.

Don't recall statements back then that they were fatigued and jaded after the lockdown 1 break from football. More a time off issue as with our winter breaks in years prior.

[Steveo]

That's a fair point, I do remember many posts about how they had won the league and had their rhythm interrupted.

Don't recall statements back then that they were fatigued and jaded after the lockdown 1 break from football. More a time off issue as with our winter breaks in years prior.

I said we would likely be here back in the summer of 2019 - even suggesting we might well win the title with a galvanised team desperate for justice in missing out by a single rotten point.

I didn't predict the injuries but I did predict a huge crash in performance levels. For me it started a year ago. 6 months after we failed to buy anyone following that remarkable season ending with a 6th European Cup.

[skyebo]

Maybe for next season the club could stump up £300m on new players, to ensure we get past the giants that is Brighton Southampton Newcastle Burnley and Villa. I'm not including WBA and Fulham as they are going down. If you look at the results against those teams, that's not down to the owners, it's down to Klopp and his players.

[Steveo]

https://youtu.be/Sv_GcxkmW4Y


Oh the sound of Ennio never ages..

[teesred]

Talking about City and Utd’s spending is a red herring in this debate, held onto by the naysayers in this discussion.
Those of us who feel there is lack of investment point to our 14th placed position in the net spend table on the back of record profits, a Champions League win, World Club Cup/ Championship win and a Premier League win.
No one expects us to spend the obscene amounts spent by City and Utd but we could expect to match or better at least 10 of those clubs above us in the net spend table.
Our performances and results against the bottom six this year are appalling, something which would have improved with a stronger squad.
Financially we are one of the strongest clubs in Europe, outside the Oil rich anomalies.

Net spend may not be everything but it’s a large part of it and a major indicator in the debate. Bringing up City constantly is just annoying they are completely irrelevant.

100 percent.
I don't think any fan would deny that FSG have turned the club around in terms of a well functioning business but that is all because of success on the pitch. If that drys up then so does everything else. They all compliment each other in terms of staying ahead and on track.
The most poignant part of that article is how embarrassing a saga it will be if we finish out of the top 4 whilst pushing for a super league or whatever guise it may be.

[teesred]

https://youtu.be/Sv_GcxkmW4Y


Oh the sound of Ennio never ages..

Movie!

[teesred]

That's a fair point, I do remember many posts about how they had won the league and had their rhythm interrupted.

Don't recall statements back then that they were fatigued and jaded after the lockdown 1 break from football. More a time off issue as with our winter breaks in years prior.

There were more than a few of us who said so.
I particularly remember the Wolves game where we laboured to a win, that was in January. We were spent back then. After boxing day was when it started, 20 odd pints ahead obviously added to it but the signs of burnout were there.

[justme]

Maybe for next season the club could stump up £300m on new players, to ensure we get past the giants that is Brighton Southampton Newcastle Burnley and Villa. I'm not including WBA and Fulham as they are going down. If you look at the results against those teams, that's not down to the owners, it's down to Klopp and his players.

Its simple do you wants us to buy quality players or not? I watched Carragher mention how much our top players have played ie amount of games over the last 3 years. They are bound to run out of steam. Or are you happy with them doing it again next season

[CCTV]

I shouldn't have to spell it out for you twice..!

Reading is not the same as understanding.

Indicators like these

1. An enhanced sense good will among many supporters due to the atrocious nature of their predecessors and by comparison with the Glazers down the East lancs.

2. Continually trying to drive up prices, use TAX payers money to save them paying club staff salaries - despite record profits

3. That they are first and foremost investors who aim for a windfall rather than to facilitate continued success on the pitch - again despite record profits.



1.The company is largely perceived as a good owner, partly because it is not Tom Hicks and George Gillett — fellow Americans and unpopular predecessors — nor the Glazers at Manchester United, and because John W Henry, the club’s principal owner, engages in community initiatives, speaks well and showed decisiveness when appointing Jürgen Klopp and recruiting Alisson and Virgil van Dijk.

2. Yet FSG is also the organisation that proposed a £77 ticket before apologising to fans who staged a mass walkout in protest in 2016, that furloughed staff last year before relenting after a supporters’ backlash, that co-drove the shameless attempted power-grab of Project Big Picture and is now involved in money-spinning plans for a European Super League.

3. For all the occasional romantic narrative spun around Henry, he is a businessman, looking for a fistful of dollars and more. Liverpool is not a hobby, a passion for Henry; he is prospecting in a Kop Klondike. Do the maths. Money means more. At a time when Liverpool’s squad required proper investment, Henry paused. All the indications are that the summer will be another period of retrenchment, of the seeds of success left unsown, and the fields of Anfield Road lying fallow.

You don't notice these nuggets because you don't like them.

I read them but they are not what I'd call wise or useful in predicting summer investment.

1) a nothing paragraph in my opinion

2) ticket prices rise and clubs can set increases, fans can protest, they are tax payers and can receive benefits as a result, the move two a European super league has been mooted for some time and before jwh bought the club. Again for me these are nothing much in terms of significance.

The financial analysis I posted is probably a better basis and yet I conclude time will tell.

"All the indications are that the summer will be another period of retrenchment, of the seeds of success left unsown, and the fields of Anfield Road lying fallow."
Waxing lyrical and talking shite. Given he has so much advice for Klopp as an esteemed pundit maybe Klopp should hire Winters to be his assistant coach :D
This is a great example of pandering to the target audience and not writing a robust and credible piece imo.

Spurs are above us in the net spend table when under klopp wed been ahead of them mostly.
They spent after losing the cl final and haven't seen a bang for their buck.

We are at the point where our amortisation costs are going down and our big summer spending as dubbed by media then to mount pressure on Klopp are past their halfway point. Now its turning on the low net spend, when the net spend was low per season the time they were going on about our big summer spending.

Henry and Klopp get their detractors online and in media too, yet he'll mention toning down ref talk by managers while critiquing a manager. Plenty of advice for the hapless Klopp and Henry.
Ignoring the reality that defending a title is tougher, or that city had their slump after 2 excellent seasons.

[CCTV]

I said we would likely be here back in the summer of 2019 - even suggesting we might well win the title with a galvanised team desperate for justice in missing out by a single rotten point.

I didn't predict the injuries but I did predict a huge crash in performance levels. For me it started a year ago. 6 months after we failed to buy anyone following that remarkable season ending with a 6th European Cup.

That's a fair point are your complaint then, though I think injuries v the bitters is sadly a predictable outcome.

City's slump after 2 seasons, failure to buy or net spend ?
Maybe a natural occurrence on occasion with exceptionally high performing teams.

Theres was due to laporte being out last season in the media mostly, sure virgils no laporte :D
Maybe Gomez, virgil and Matip combined might get the same relevance in the media coverage.

By right city should be banned from the cl, but all I see is credit to them and their class whilst only getting their shit together over the last 13 or so games.

But for us, spurs could have won a cl title and city would be walking to a 4th consecutive title.

Our net spend is low and I have hope it means we can get the deals done we need to get done, like with with Virgil and Alisson.

[Steveo]

'Asleep at the wheel' is what we have been.

[Kev0909]

Summer

Ins
Tonali
Raphina/neto
Toney

Outs
Origi
Wilson
Grujic
Shaqiri
Wij?

Elliot back in squad to play a role if klopps been show enough

Surely that's realistic enough for FSG?? just a example of 3 players roughly along those lines anyway, Tonali can be swapped for any youing decent CM Toney is a beast in the championship would be a better option than Origi at least...

Ideal world we'd Get Haaland or mbappe to replace firmino + young CM and neto/Raphina but like that'll happen

[justme]

Summer

Ins
Tonali
Raphina/neto
Toney

Outs
Origi
Wilson
Grujic
Shaqiri
Wij?

Elliot back in squad to play a role if klopps been show enough

Surely that's realistic enough for FSG??

Is that big Tonali or small Tonali??

[LEGS]

Summer

Ins
Tonali
Raphina/neto
Toney

Outs
Origi
Wilson
Grujic
Shaqiri
Wij?

Elliot back in squad to play a role if klopps been show enough

Surely that's realistic enough for FSG?? just a example of 3 players roughly along those lines anyway, Tonali can be swapped for any youing decent CM Toney is a beast in the championship would be a better option than Origi at least...

Ideal world we'd Get Haaland or mbappe to replace firmino + young CM and neto/Raphina but like that'll happen

Kev I think you better add a CB too we dont want a repeat of this season !

Not sure id buy anyone from Italy especially a midfielder

[Steveo]

We keeping Keita , Matip & Ox then..?

[justme]

We keeping Keita , Matip & Ox then..?

They can just about walk. sooo they are staying

[Kev0909]

We keeping Keita , Matip & Ox then..?

Ox won't be going anywhere sadly he's english, matip noone will buy him..... and I don't think Klopp with get rid of keita, maybe next season, if it was down to me we'd get 2 midfielders in and Keita gone but he still has time on his side

I personally think midfield needs a big refresh but we're forgetting fabinho will go back there, with Henderson and Thiago i'm guessing, can't see us getting more than 1 midfielder unless we have more leaving which will surprise me.

Please read legs, just a example young CM, not bothered who as long as they're decent, and tonali is probably too much like thiago passing wise player..

we won't need a CB ffs we have 5-6 Kabak and davies won't be going anywhere, neither will gomez and VVD phillips maybe, and you're laughing if someone will pay us for matip / his wages, in total we'll have 5-6 CB'S and 2 players that can fill in at CB which surely won't have to happen again unless 5 cbs get injured

But my point is after sales, surely FSG can put that much into the team?? I do think we need 3 new players, i'd love them personally to be better than what i've listed, not just a young decent CM but a top CM, and not a striker who's killing it in the championship- but.... that's what it's like with these owners i'm afraid.

[LEGS]

Ox won't be going anywhere sadly he's english, matip noone will buy him..... and I don't think Klopp with get rid of keita, maybe next season, if it was down to me we'd get 2 midfielders in and Keita gone but he still has time on his side

I personally think midfield needs a big refresh but we're forgetting fabinho will go back there, with Henderson and Thiago i'm guessing, can't see us getting more than 1 midfielder unless we have more leaving which will surprise me.

Please read legs, just a example young CM, not bothered who as long as they're decent, and tonali is probably too much like thiago passing wise player..

we won't need a CB ffs we have 5-6 Kabak and davies won't be going anywhere, neither will gomez and VVD phillips maybe, and you're laughing if someone will pay us for matip / his wages, in total we'll have 5-6 CB'S and 2 players that can fill in at CB which surely won't have to happen again unless 5 cbs get injured

But my point is after sales, surely FSG can put that much into the team?? I do think we need 3 new players, i'd love them personally to be better than what i've listed, not just a young decent CM but a top CM, and not a striker who's killing it in the championship- but.... that's what it's like with these owners i'm afraid.

Kanak hasnt signed yet.

Williams/Phillips not be here.

We need 5 to cover Matip/Gomez.

Im just saying Serie A midfielders are not for the EPL but yes you are right you have named young players with a point to prove.

[miller0863]

That’s what we need to buy more of, young really talented players with a point to prove. We have a squad stacked with experienced winners, we need a good injection of quality hungry young blood, ready to run through brick walls for the cause.

[skyebo]

Its simple do you wants us to buy quality players or not? I watched Carragher mention how much our top players have played ie amount of games over the last 3 years. They are bound to run out of steam. Or are you happy with them doing it again next season

Of course, but my point was, the players who are already here should have beaten those teams, whether it was a full strength team or not. It's ok for Carragher to come out and say those things, but in that time, they won the CL and the title, i didn't hear the word tiredness used then. Can't keep blaming injuries everytime we hit a buffer, the squad should be big enough to see those teams off, that is down to Klopp and the players. The owners don't pick the team, and they don't have squad numbers.

[Kev0909]

That’s what we need to buy more of, young really talented players with a point to prove. We have a squad stacked with experienced winners, we need a good injection of quality hungry young blood, ready to run through brick walls for the cause.

Yep especially when parts of the squad are aging

And true but you'd think if he's half decent we'll snap up Kabak if we don't sign him, we must have another CB in our sights

So what if Phillips/Williams won't be here?

VVD
Gomez
Matip
Davies

probably Kabak
Fabinho

that's how FSG will see it, I think we should let phillips stay too, could be better than davies doubt they'll go and spend 50m+ on a top cb

[justme]

Of course, but my point was, the players who are already here should have beaten those teams, whether it was a full strength team or not. It's ok for Carragher to come out and say those things, but in that time, they won the CL and the title, i didn't hear the word tiredness used then. Can't keep blaming injuries everytime we hit a buffer, the squad should be big enough to see those teams off, that is down to Klopp and the players. The owners don't pick the team, and they don't have squad numbers.
Ok, so people who want us to spend money. You are happy with them? good.. seems your conflicted. depending on who you are responding too.

We need real top quality. Like Halaand and Maddison (who i rate highly). that will cost loads.I know we have done well in getting bargains like Robbo.. but the rest have cost upwards of 25 million.

[justme]

has for tiredness its been Klopp himself whos been mentioning it numerous times. I agree we should have beaten the smaller teams. But you have to be up physically for every minute of every game even against the so called lesser lights.

[skyebo]

Ok, so people who want us to spend money. You are happy with them? good.. seems your conflicted. depending on who you are responding too.

We need real top quality. Like Halaand and Maddison (who i rate highly). that will cost loads.I know we have done well in getting bargains like Robbo.. but the rest have cost upwards of 25 million.
My views are consistent, they are also my own i'm not a sheep, therefore i will come to my own conclusions, i don't care how many agree or disagree with my comments. I don't come on here to bash the owners, enough do that already, they have made mistakes but they are not the only ones. Speaking of those small teams, we beat them and there is no Winter essay or no Carragher wisdom.

[Steveo]

Of course, but my point was, the players who are already here should have beaten those teams, whether it was a full strength team or not. It's ok for Carragher to come out and say those things, but in that time, they won the CL and the title, i didn't hear the word tiredness used then. Can't keep blaming injuries everytime we hit a buffer, the squad should be big enough to see those teams off, that is down to Klopp and the players. The owners don't pick the team, and they don't have squad numbers.


My views are consistent, they are also my own i'm not a sheep, therefore i will come to my own conclusions, i don't care how many agree or disagree with my comments. I don't come on here to bash the owners, enough do that already, they have made mistakes but they are not the only ones. Speaking of those small teams, we beat them and there is no Winter essay or no Carragher wisdom.


Good that you don't follow the crowd, but to be fair Skye - IF Spurs beat us in the 2019 final - everything that has transpired since might well be very different too.


I am not happy with the net spend but there is no way I can discount the injuries. Come on it is a simple reality that any team with multiple injuries will find games far harder - especially in such a competitive league.

The focus right now is all on the massive gulf between the team with a couple of individuals present ( Virgil and Gomez) and them missing. A lack of genuine senior cover.. Cover is not stealing from Peter to Pay Paul.. Fabinho is a Midfielder - so is Hendo both absolutely crucial to our game.

Even at full strength last February we saw the drop in energy. Can mitigate that with having all but won the title - doesn't work for the CL though or the games this season before injuries mounted.


Players will get tired skye - they are humans. I hope I am wrong but you seem to be saying they can't or nobody can use it as evidence because it wasn't mentioned when we were winning the CL or Title. That if they were not tired in 2019 they cannot be tired now.? If I have you right then this is clearly a ridiculous belief.

The fact that the squad "should be big enough" is precisely why some of us believe a lack of investment on players is the root cause. Some have been saying it in the immediate aftermath of the 2019 final in Madrid.

[CCTV]

3 - Alisson/Adrian/Kelleher

2 - Trent/Neco
2 - Robbo/Tsimi
7 -VVD/Gomez/Matip/Philips Williams/Kabak/Davies

8-Fabinho/Hendo/Gini/Thiago Keita/Oxlade/Milner/Jones

6- Salah/Shaq/Bobby/Jota/Mane/Origi

28 in the squad now - 27 prior to 2 new centre backs

City

3 Ederson/Steffen/Carson

2 Walker/Cancello

2 Mendy/Zinchenko

6 Dias/Laporte/Stones/Ake/Garcia/Sandler

5 Rodri/Fernandinho/Gundogan/KdB/Foden

6 Silva/Torres/Kunt/Jesus/Sterling/Mahrez

24 in the squad

Obviously spending about an extra half a billion gross and/or net makes a difference.

Most of the difference in the defenders peps bought.

[Steveo]

What in the everlasting fook has Manchester Cities squad got to do with our levels of investment and 27 point reduction on last year @game 23?

City have a squad that competes for 4 trophies a season. They spend money like it grows on trees - so what..? Who cares about City?

[LEGS]

I think you have to take the spending of City into account and here is why.

FSG probably think like Spurs/Arsenal what is the point of spending an extra lets say £40-60m when the difference in money back is small.

Some wont like this but the reality is out of 5 seasons you would guess City win at least 3 of them possibly 4.

I do however think it is clear we need FSG to spend extra just in case they have a collapse season so we can nip in potentially.

FSG have been unlucky with the timing of Covid as well we havent had chance to make the most of it and im bitter as a fan we didnt get the parade we deserved.

FSG wont change we know that, so we all know what the other option is and how many fans are going to admit they want a sugar daddy ?!

Our league at the minute is lucky it is competitive to some degree but if this lot at City bought United instead the league would be like Germany/France with only one winner.

[justme]

Kunt



hes really called that??

[CCTV]

What in the everlasting fook has Manchester Cities squad got to do with our levels of investment and 27 point reduction on last year @game 23?

City have a squad that competes for 4 trophies a season. They spend money like it grows on trees - so what..? Who cares about City?

Why would you post a table with city's net spend on it so ? O

Why not just look at our own financials.
Can't be 14th in a league table of net spend without bringing up the other sides.

You seem to be able to post net spend, articles with city in them and wonder why I'd bring up city.

I've picked city as they have been our main rivals in a footballing sense and have the best squad.

Is there another squad you'd like to look at instead ? You can post another squad if you like.

[CCTV]

hes really called that??

It's a term of admiration, he gets it out of their squad. Great player.

[justme]

It's a term of admiration, he gets it out of their squad. Great player.

He gets called the same from me as well. And its not in admiration.

[CCTV]

I think you have to take the spending of City into account and here is why.

FSG probably think like Spurs/Arsenal what is the point of spending an extra lets say £40-60m when the difference in money back is small.

Some wont like this but the reality is out of 5 seasons you would guess City win at least 3 of them possibly 4.

I do however think it is clear we need FSG to spend extra just in case they have a collapse season so we can nip in potentially.

FSG have been unlucky with the timing of Covid as well we havent had chance to make the most of it and im bitter as a fan we didnt get the parade we deserved.

FSG wont change we know that, so we all know what the other option is and how many fans are going to admit they want a sugar daddy ?!

Our league at the minute is lucky it is competitive to some degree but if this lot at City bought United instead the league would be like Germany/France with only one winner.

Good post. The no celebrations/party must have been rough af.

Think we can be a bit more ambitious in terms of competing for league titles though.

There was a time not so long ago a few thought we could never win the league without a sugar daddy.
Unlucky not to be on 20&7 so I'd be a little more optimistic on our ability to win the big titles. Not this year though sadly.

[Steveo]

Why would you post a table with city's net spend on it so ? O

Why not just look at our own financials.
Can't be 14th in a league table of net spend without bringing up the other sides.

You seem to be able to post net spend, articles with city in them and wonder why I'd bring up city.

I've picked city as they have been our main rivals in a footballing sense and have the best squad.

Is there another squad you'd like to look at instead ? You can post another squad if you like.

Precisely because it shows that we are 14th in a table of 20.

It didn't just show City - it reflects the array of other clubs willing to spend more overall than record earning Liverpool FC. It seems you are fixated with City.

They have spent shite loads more than us ( none of us expect us to come close either ) and they have won a shiteload more than us too. So what? United have spent similar and won barely anything in the same time frame. Again so what.

Every club is at a different stage. United are spending to catch up - City are spending to stay ahead... We are...? What are we doing CC?

It looks to me like we have said. Oh right that's it - win the CL -didn't cost much to do it. Rake in the profits and don't re invest. At least that is what happened in summer 2019.. and by February 20 - 6 months later the team ran out of steam. This summer - too little too late.

[Steveo]

Simple really - we have the best manager in the world - have done for over 5 years. He has more than proved what he can do when given licence to buy just 2 truly world class - sort after players. Ok one of them is missing for now - and boy does it show - but the time has come to invest properly. Year on year - otherwise you get caught with your pants down.

[CCTV]

Precisely because it shows that we are 14th in a table of 20.

It didn't just show City - it reflects the array of other clubs willing to spend more overall than record earning Liverpool FC. It seems you are fixated with City.

They have spent shite loads more than us ( none of us expect us to come close either ) and they have won a shiteload more than us too. So what? United have spent similar and won barely anything in the same time frame. Again so what.

Every club is at a different stage. United are spending to catch up - City are spending to stay ahead... We are...? What are we doing CC?

It looks to me like we have said. Oh right that's it - win the CL -didn't cost much to do it. Rake in the profits and don't re invest. At least that is what happened in summer 2019.. and by February 20 - 6 months later the team ran out of steam. This summer - too little too late.

Not sure how you see me as being fixated with city, it's been the running theme of the pl for 3 seasons pretty much. They and we there main rival over that time. Maybe you haven't been focused on city in a likewise manner.

Also I'm not sure how I'm supposed to take the position that we were physically drained from not adding in summer 2019 which I also think was a mistake (not adding) and can see your point there, but not with how we have not recovered or refreshed over the duration of lockdown 1.
City were off it last year too and only brought back to speed really in the last 13 pl games. I've asked you and Miller how we explain that and simply suggested that perhaps we like city have slumped after a few cracking seasons of football.
Theres been no period of lack of transfers identified by them or issues with their net spend, except by city fans who feel he hasn't been backed.

The Glazer's being business men too, are spending as they are at risk of losing their position and revenue from their sponsorship deals which have lingered off fergie's achievements.

Well the addition of Thiago on a high wage and Jota a decent fee could have not been purchased. There were plenty of people including the lfc journo class who were poo-pooing the idea we could add in the era of covid.

"There is no shame in losing to a team of Manchester City’s exceptional class or being outwitted by a coach of Pep Guardiola’s endless inventiveness. The only shame is in not responding. That is the challenge for Liverpool now."

Lost a cl final invested heavily enough.
Won a cl final only added taki in january.
Won a pl added thiago and jota and a back up left back.

We've added quality players each season:
16/17 Mane, Gini, Joel
17/18 VVD, Ox, Salah, Robbo
18/19 Alisson Fab Keita Shaq
19/20 take adrian
20/21 Thiago, Jota, tsimikas

We are 14th in the pl net spend table as we have sold players really well, bought players really well and as a result done really well.
Leaving us pay off the training complex, right down the main stand and keep debt really low.
I hope it also means we will have money when we need it this summer.

"The central question is whether the club’s owner, Fenway Sports Group (FSG), will respond....... All the indications are that the summer will be another period of retrenchment, of the seeds of success left unsown, and the fields of Anfield Road lying fallow."
First return to the CL under klopp made a final, lost a final.
Brought in the right players and won the cl the following season, amassing an incredible points tally finishing second.
Didn't buy any players of the top end or proven variety, won our 1st pl title again and incredible points tally.
Another period of retrenchment of the seeds of success left unseen and fields of Anfield road.. incredible piece of writing, it's just a pity it doesn't connect well with the reality of the club.

I'm not surprised there is no focus on cities owners, nor their escape from their cl ban which would have had massive implications for their on book earnings and future spending/finances should they have wished to return to the cl under ffp regulations, abetted by the shithouses at the cas.

He'll have a pop at lfc for availing of a facility for their employees as employers and tax payers, hiking ticket prices and dropping them when protests occurred- which isn't an unusual thing.
But not a whisper of city, guess he's not obsessed enough :D

[CCTV]

I expect and hope we will see investment this summer.

No doubt Klopp is a massive part of our success.

[CCTV]

Simple really - we have the best manager in the world - have done for over 5 years. He has more than proved what he can do when given licence to buy just 2 truly world class - sort after players. Ok one of them is missing for now - and boy does it show - but the time has come to invest properly. Year on year - otherwise you get caught with your pants down.

He's here still 2024 and hopefully beyond, he'll want to leave us in better shape and build a second side with the younger elements of this team.
Having money in the bank as you rise up is a wise and prudent approach. He'll have learned from Dortmund, where he's a loved figure still.

[Steveo]

We shall see.

So glad we have that money in the bank - with interest rates where they are we could make literally a good few Bob. Priorities :D

[CCTV]

We shall see.

So glad we have that money in the bank - with interest rates where they are we could make literally a good few Bob. Priorities :D

I was hoping you'd reply to some of the points and questions presented.

[miller0863]

From the Echo, using “since we won the Champions League in 2018” as a measure for recent net spend and comparing us to the big 6. As you can see we have actually brought more in than we have spent since winning the Champions League.

“Net spend is another metric used to determine how much a club has really shelled out on transfers too.

And since Liverpool became European champions, they have recouped £85.14m - meaning their total net spend on transfers during this time is positive £1.39m, since they have made more money than they've spent.

Harvey Elliott's potential fee has not been included in that yet, however, since it is yet to be decided in court.

However, that incoming figure includes the £23.4m departure of Rhian Brewster, the £10.8m exit of Dejan Lovren, the £19.98m for Danny Ings, the £6.48m for Ryan Kent and £6.3m for Simon Mignolet. A payment of £8.82m for Ki-Jana Hoever, £3.51m for Ovie Ejaria and loan fees of £1.17m and £2.43m for Harry Wilson, £1.8m for Marko Grujic and £450k for Taiwo Awoniyi make up the rest of the total.

Now, again during that same time for outgoing transfers; Man City brought in £117.59m, United saw £89.62m added to their funds, Chelsea had an injection of £193.11m, Tottenham made £70.02m and Arsenal recouped £65.08m.

That means, since Liverpool lifted the Champions League trophy in 2019, each club's transfer net spend is as follows:

Liverpool: +£1.39m (*Elliott fee to be decided)

Man City: -£181.56m

United: -£189.63m

Chelsea: -£69.89m

Tottenham: -£163.08m

Arsenal: -£154.9m

Clearly, Liverpool's model - which seems to rely on sales before major purchases - is a much more cautious one when compared with that of their rivals.

Such an approach allows them to keep financially stable at all times and even when the unthinkable happens, such as a worldwide pandemic, the Reds will emerge on the other side in a much more healthy position than those around them - which is most certainly a positive.“

[CCTV]

We shall see.

So glad we have that money in the bank - with interest rates where they are we could make literally a good few Bob. Priorities :D

Just to repeat steveo, it's worth bearing in mind that FSG invested far more on transfers in the 5 years prior to Klopp than the 5 years with Klopp.

The under investment could very well be under his guidance. Some of those germans are very thrift and plan for the future, a nation aghast at hyper inflation from the post war era.
He's brought a lot of influence away from the training field and pitch to the club ;)

It's inconceivable imo to suggest that FSG brought him in and weren't willing to match the backing they gave BR in the transfer market.
After all he would do better than Br, and secondly if fsg are so tight thered be no chance they were giving Rodgers bigger investments than Klopp when revenue has grown so much.

[Steveo]

EDIT @miller - It is a model that is utterly reliant on a Jurgen Klopp. Let’s hope they grow on trees. :D

I do like the sound of the last para though.

Hopefully it comes to pass. As the saying goes - If you’ve got your health...

[LEGS]

It is a model that is utterly reliant on a Jurgen Klopp. Let’s hope they grow on trees. :D

I do like the sound of the last para though.

Hopefully it comes to pass. As the saying goes - If you’ve got your health...

I agree with you here Klopp is the difference.

We have seen this with how Man United have performed since Ferguson left.

My one big fear with social media around is if we completely collapse and finish 8-9th FSG could do something stupid.

We thought we were smart last time we got rid of Rafa for the serial winner Roy I mean you can see why we swapped em when you look at each others CV.

[Kev0909]

Why i say I hope the owners go before Klopp however he does he won't be around forever and whoever comes in won't be able to do as good with some limits, unless there's some miracle

it's why fsg went for him in the first place