Liverpool transfers in/out and rumours 22/23 + Contracts

[eggy81]

That's where subjectivity comes into it, doesn't it?

The difference between cost and value.

What price for example would someone put on having Caicedo in the side that Mac Allister in, given that they already know each other's game and could help get our midfield up-and-running quickly to hopefully improve us in the middle for 3-5 years? I'd say a lot of people would say that's "worth" £40m extra over Lavia.

But compare Caicedo's potential fee to that of what we felt we would be getting out of Bellingham and it would be less palatable.

Of course, the real move to make would have been getting Caicedo in earlier for the £5m or whatever it was that Brighton paid, similar to Rafa (I think it was Rafa?) getting Casemiro into Real Madrid on the cheap - but imagine the FEWM last Summer if "those cheap FSG bastards" had made a move like that.

He wouldn’t have got to develop here like he did there sid. At the end of the day football is tiered. We need to decide which tier we are in. At the minute it’s hovering about 4th to 6th and declining.

[Insidious]

He wouldn’t have got to develop here like he did there sid. At the end of the day football is tiered. We need to decide which tier we are in. At the minute it’s hovering about 4th to 6th and declining.

Fair point, but again, it comes down to how you run a club.

Fabinho, Henderson, Milner and Thiago were both in their 30s last year or getting closer to that point - we could (for example's sake) have moved one on and brought in a younger mid in their place.

That's my enormous bias towards "future-proofing" coming through though and I completely understand the mindset some have of having a few older heads around the place - but Caicedo having come in on the cheap and having had Milner's minutes wouldn't have killed us.

[Insidious]

Well exactamundo. What is any player worth? If we sign a player for £50m and pay him £10m a year for 5 years we have invested £100m, if he brings in £150m in those 5 years, including any re-sale, then that's a great deal. But most people don't value players in that way, they just take one recently sold player as a benchmark and go from there, which drives the market. Like I said in another thread we all protest that prices are mad but we don't mind selling at those crazy prices.

As for signing a player for £5m and developing him into a £100m player in a couple of seasons well, that's my real gripe about us, rather than our inability to spend like a 'big' club.

I definitely wish we took more "gambles" (they're not terribly risky if your data analysts are good and have done their work, particularly as youth projects hold some value even when they don't work out) here and there.

The market is so nuts at the moment that someone like Elliott could probably fetch £35m - I'm not advocating that we sell him, but you get the idea - that kind of money could fund "the next" Diaz/Jota sort of player or go towards a more physical mid. Carvalho may yet be someone we get a decent fee for in the future - and so on.

[Insidious]

Some very good points Sid. The owners frugal approach is not the only crutch. Other mistakes have been made and the market inflation is out of our control.

Considering your consistent position throughout their tenure, upon reflection I phrased my question from my own perspective, which was never going to yield any fruit. So let me try again.

Does the frugal approach of the owners concern you? Having seen them already make huge gains on their initial investment do you consider that they should now alter their initial approach and make more funds readily available?

Apologies for taking a few hours on this one - when it came through I had multiple dogs with me and didn't feel I could rattle a reply off.

I'll quote your two questions here. Your questions in bold.

Does the frugal approach of the owners concern you?

No, it doesn't. Things that would concern me far more quickly are -

- the pace of a changing market
- the influence of Sports-washing on the market
- clubs being able to circumnavigate financial loopholes
- the lack of regulation for some of the above
- some of our failings within our set-up, ie who to award with a contract, the type of contract we give out, knowing when to sell, not investing more in youth/loan set-ups to accumulate Home-grown players to give us more flexibility in the foreign player market

Do you consider that they should now alter their initial approach and make more funds readily available?

Tweak it perhaps. I wouldn't drastically change it (no, really) as there's a lot we can tweak within our set-up to make it run more efficiently before trusting those people with further finances, finances that could be wasted in the wrong hands. No points getting into the habit of always buying two £50m players when you can buy two £35m players and the £30m saving being almost enough for a third player, etc etc

I've no interest in engaging in dick-swinging contests of £100m transfer fees on the regular. I have never understood the buzz of "winning the transfer window" - and I don't want us to turn into carbon copies of overly-entitled Man United fans. I don't think we need major additional funds each window.

Where I do think the purse-strings should be "loosened" is when we miss out on Champion's League football and so far we have dropped £95m up front on the midfield rebuild. In terms of cash flow that is pretty big - we'd normally amortise a contract over 3-5 years - if that was a 5-year investment we're talking £19m a year and it is all paid off despite us not having Champion's League football to boost the coffers.

The other time should be when we win a League title or Champion's League - strengthen while on top. I think every year we feel we are one player short - if that could be addressed I'd welcome it. We don't need £200m transfer windows and if we do then I'm not sure that future interests me much. They're all human and they can all be coached to improve.

[ianlfc]

Joyce just tweeted. Move to Chelsea expected to go through, LFC just saying they're interested if move falls through.
Fucks sake, they've even managed to make themselves look like cunts when pretending to go for a player.
They have zero intention of signing him.
None at all.
What an absolute shameless embarrassment they are, they make the club look bad and continually embarrass it. Just fuck off please.

We've came along way from the Edwards era.

[justme]

its Thursday and we play on Sunday and we are still short at Dm and 2 more players (imo). what team will sell their players to us now that the season is about to begin??. No one thats who.. this is 100% pathetic and those in charge of deals should be fking ashamed

[teesred]

Romano saying we intend to make an offer tomorrow.
I don't believe a word that guy says like.

[faridtoxteth]

For who?

[teesred]

For who?

Kane.





Only joking. Caicedo.

[ianlfc]

For who?

Take you pick. None of them are happening.