On the first day of January...............

[CCTV]

This 100% a figment of your imagination. I stated the last time the Saudi’s tried for Newcastle - That I would not want them to own us. And I would not still.

That is, the Saudi state, administration, regime, calls it what you will.

Please try get your facts straight before making false claims about what I have said based purely on your own misunderstanding.

You need to go back and read all of what has been said. Stop skimming and getting the wrong end of the stick

You list Saudi and USA around Yemen.
You fail to list Iran and China. Yet you cry at people not wanting a Chinese owner.

You've critiqued American and Saudi owners.
You've posted at length at how you find the Saudi ownership prospect vile.

Yet you think it's potential racism that would explain anti-china, Russia or Arab sentiment.

It's racism for those who view it differently and it's not racism or prejudice when you do it.

[Taksin]

So you are saying that a club is best served by being seen as an asset. To what end? Who is the real beneficiary?

Yes of course. It is an asset and assets need to be looked after carefully. Abramovic doesn’t need to see his asset in the same way as it’s a way for him to spend his money - more money than anyone could ever spend. So he doesn’t need to be as careful.

If you had said ‘purely as an asset’ that would be different. It is more than an asset. It is a club with lives, and supporters. Calling it Etihad is a disgrace

I would love to see a genuine argument against that point, that goes without the usual bais

I’ve given genuine arguments above. You just can’t see them

[Steveo]

You claim so, but you continue to use other American owners against an individual American owner.
So your assurance you will never do what you have done to date, is a little weak imo.

Most people are expecting the new Arab owners to spend a fortune like recent Arab owners, inflating the market.
The expectation follow from the previous similar owners.

Maybe if the Saudis run newcastle like a business the racists or anti-Saudi folk will be surprised and re-evaluate their prejudices.

Chinese billionaires are not exactly separate from the state. So not wanting Chinese billionaires is perfectly acceptable in the view of not wanting state owned clubs.
As is the case with the Arab owners.

People can expect whatever they like.. And I never said it was racist to oppose any state owning anyone - I do so myself. get it straight and dont twist it now to look like that is what was being discussed. see below for what I challenged on any owners from certain nations shores and races.

Nobody claimed that all evil comes from Russians or Arabs or the Chinese, but the ethical and moral reasons why most people at this club with its history wouldn't want ownership from anyone from any of their shores are pretty clear.

I use the example of actual US ownership to suggest that to date most US owners have predated on this sport.

It is so clear and utterly simple. Have US owners been as good for their clubs as the the Arabs at City (state-owned or otherwise) or the Russian at Chelsea... So simple.

Roman is the ONLY major Russian club owner and he has been exceptional for Chelsea. City similarly have enjoyed a total reverse in fortunes since the ruler of UAE bought them


And here we go. You now believe that a Chinese billionaire or an Arab billionaire IS indeed inextricably linked to the state defacto - while a US Billionaire is not..? How in the living fuck is this not a double standard?

Seriously - you betray more and more ignorance with every post.

[Steveo]

You list Saudi and USA around Yemen.
You fail to list Iran and China. Yet you cry at people not wanting a Chinese owner.

You've critiqued American and Saudi owners.
You've posted at length at how you find the Saudi ownership prospect vile.

Yet you think it's potential racism that would explain anti-china, Russia or Arab sentiment.

It's racism for those who view it differently and it's not racism or prejudice when you do it.

Why should I mention Iran or China? I never said that the English game was being ruined by Iranian or Chinese billionaires. I didn't state that they were buying up the country either, as was leveled at Russian and Arab owners. GO BACK AND READ FFS!

And ANY generic Anti-Russian, Arab or Chinese sentiment directed at the entirety of those nations or races is definitely born of brainwash and is in no small way racist 100%


YOu are wrong and misguided on all points here CC. You seem desperate to justify your own clear prejudice (we have seen it many times) by finding some in me. When you cannot find any you start bringing in more and more examples. Now we are looking at the Iranian's and Chinese who have been accused of arming the Houthis to fight their hugely powerful and wealthy next-door neighbor Saudi Arabia.

Absolutely pathetic

[southernboy]

It’s pretty depressing that we’re not linked with anyone, even in the gossip columns. Even the fake ITKs can’t be bothered to make up rumours.

[Steveo]

Yes of course. It is an asset and assets need to be looked after carefully. Abramovic doesn’t need to see his asset in the same way as it’s a way for him to spend his money - more money than anyone could ever spend. So he doesn’t need to be as careful.

If you had said ‘purely as an asset’ that would be different. It is more than an asset. It is a club with lives, and supporters. Calling it Etihad is a disgrace



I’ve given genuine arguments above. You just can’t see them

So - Chelsea's debt to Roman is £1.5 Billion

If Henry has bought us for £300 million (half of the £600 million net profit he personally made since April) and has made sure we run ourselves financially (money out on infrastructure and players comes from within the club) AND we are now worth between 2 and 3 billion. What happens when they sell?

Who benefits?

Do Liverpool FC benefit?

Or have any new owners just had to spend a shed load more to buy us - AND in so doing will have that much less to put into the club infrastructure and players in future.

What you call good ownership I call predatory, profit-making, and IMO totally 100% the antithesis of why anyone should own a football club!

[Steveo]

It’s pretty depressing that we’re not linked with anyone, even in the gossip columns. Even the fake ITKs can’t be bothered to make up rumours.

It is indeed. Hopefully, we are keeping our powder dry in anticipation of a strike to acquire a much-needed quality midfielder...

[Kev0909]

It’s pretty depressing that we’re not linked with anyone, even in the gossip columns. Even the fake ITKs can’t be bothered to make up rumours.

At least load of other clubs are making moves not boring!

Villas latest club coutinho strongly linked too, would be nice to see him in the prem again.

[Taksin]

What you call good ownership I call predatory, profit-making, and IMO totally 100% the antithesis of why anyone should own a football club!

Profits are the rewards for successful business. Marx didn't like them but his economic concepts have been shown to be wrong over and over again. We all wish to profit in some way from our work. Some jobs are much bigger with greater financial rewards and risks. I've never bought a football club for £300 million and never will but someone has to do it. I'm glad the only option isn't The State.

You favour the Abramovich model but his spending uses his (actually predatory) profits from Russian oil. So his true business lies elsewhere, something you haven't factored in. You are blinded by your fantasies about how much money your club could spend, which is ironic as spending is dependent on profits one way or another. You just want to offset the predation to someone actual (a Russian oil worker or an Indian scaffolder in Dubai) rather that someone imagined (a Liverpool supporter). As long as these characters are spending their money on something they really, really love (swoon), you don't mind how they made their money.

It's worth noting that footballers profit from football, managers profit from football, physios profit from football, throw-in coaches profit from football. Not only do we accept that, we say things like 'give Salah whatever the fuck he wants'. So you'd have to explain why they can profit whilst the owners, who take on more risk than anyone else in the picture, cannot profit from their own expertise. Making LFC great is an achievement worth profiting from in my opinion.

FSG profit solely by increasing the performance of their asset within the market. So that's good for the fans if they succeed. Everyone benefits.

If Man City do well, the Sheikh uses that to increase his personal standing in the West, the status of his national airline and the prestige of his stinking, evil country, as well servicing his own childish footballing fantasies. And yes I know all countries are evil to one extent or another - the point is that our club is not being used primarily to promote them or, in Chelsea's case, used to rehabilitate the character of the owner in some way.

I prefer the focus to be on LFC and thankfully that seems to be the emphasis at Anfield

[CCTV]

Why should I mention Iran or China? I never said that the English game was being ruined by Iranian or Chinese billionaires. I didn't state that they were buying up the country either, as was leveled at Russian and Arab owners. GO BACK AND READ FFS!

And ANY generic Anti-Russian, Arab or Chinese sentiment directed at the entirety of those nations or races is definitely born of brainwash and is in no small way racist 100%


YOu are wrong and misguided on all points here CC. You seem desperate to justify your own clear prejudice (we have seen it many times) by finding some in me. When you cannot find any you start bringing in more and more examples. Now we are looking at the Iranian's and Chinese who have been accused of arming the Houthis to fight their hugely powerful and wealthy next-door neighbor Saudi Arabia.

Absolutely pathetic

It reads like the suffering in Yemen is down to 1 side when there are 2 clear sides to that proxy war. There's an Iran v Saudi aspect and the USA v China.

This second paragraph is an area where you've moved from talking about owners to the entire race or nationality of those owners.
When people talk about an Arab or Saudi owning lfc you are talking about a select few from that group.

Where have I displayed a prejudice around the racial, national or religious characteristics ?

It doesn't bother me if you or CD believe I have prejudices. It doesn't bother me that you have yours, but I'd be curious to know what my prejudices are within this context of football owners 🤔 or more widely.

For me you are acting like Labour in the last election, trying to whinge about Islamophobia while dismissing charges against your own antisemitism.