Originally Posted by
RedNoodle
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.
Originally Posted by
RedNoodle
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.
Originally Posted by
RedNoodle
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.
Originally Posted by
RedNoodle
.....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.
Originally Posted by
RedNoodle
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.
Originally Posted by
RedNoodle
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.
Originally Posted by
RedNoodle
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.
'I got told there's an English phrase, 'You don't win trophies with kids'. I didn't know that' ... - Jurgen Klopp
Stone-Cold Savage!
Bookmarks