Suppose the real story is they are worth what someone will pay..... there are very few out there now willing to stump that for a football club. The Chinese did buy a.c. Milan for 700 mil or so though
Very, very little. Your average "net spend" on players is almost zero, your average wage up to the last 4 years was low, you have built "big stand" on the strength of a loan from them which they are claiming back so basically no real investment from their own resources.
In that period revenue has gone up considerably too. They probably missed their best chance of selling us after last season. I can't see us getting much further without serious investment.
TBH I think they are making enough out of you at the moment to keep them happy, where has all the extra TV and Sponsorship revenue gone over the last few years? It doesn't go down well with most me saying this because I am a Manc, but I do really wonder about it because I see teams like Stoke, and Westham spending more with less sponsorship, smaller crowds and no extra money from CL/EL etc.
Me, the club or the owners? I have spent about £250 on the few games I have been to. The club have spent around £300m on players after sales. The owners have probably not had to spend anything, they let the club spend what is needed then take their dividends out of what is left (unless you think they are holding us back on this).
Giving a serious answer to what I consider a spurious question. 1. 50mil into kirkby. 2. 120mil into main stand. 3. 50mil to pay off some debt, interest free loans to balance books. Lfc are spending lfc money. To think that some strange off the book siphoning is occurring is silly. Fsg make a **** tonne hawking their crap alongside ours don't you worry. They are creaming it their way but there is not a pay fsg 100mil line on the club balance sheet
No no...just thinking we all sometimes forget it's about what happens on the pitch.. unless it's about watching stockmarkets... The money means **** all if it does nothing there does it? I mean say we sell Coutinho...and trust that the touted offers were real. ****, that means we have 2/3rds of the money the owners paid for club in the bank...with that new stand etc... Is that a good thing? Not if we keep playing like yesterday lol... You lot won at home....well...must feel good and almost new lol
1, didn't know about so fair enough 2, isn't that a loan like 3 which they are getting back? Seriously, do you not think you should have much more to spend on players given the extra TV and sponsorship deals? other clubs seem to have it who are not as attractive as you.
Hey, all I did was give an honest opinion as an answer to the question "how much have our owners invested in the club".
Given it kept us afloat in 2011 etc and in accounting terms it had to be a loan expect so. Of course I think we have to. I keep saying fsg have us making do. If you look at actual spend.... actual net spend... right now lfc have spent more tham spurs, Chelsea, and Everton and are with 2mil of arsenal.... city and Utd are 100mil+ ahead of everyone. So in short other clubs like Bournemouth have bought some lads and have spent 30mil but on more players. Everyone has cash.... lfc say thry have cash but ****ed their deals up.
Wasn't really disagreeing...we've spent pretty much at the level we are. Personally think our owners naievely believed ffp would actually be effectual...if so we might have been in the game But as we know, it wasn't. Now.. .as Mito has stated. Fsg have modernised our club (desperately needed). They've spent bigish money on single players.. .the issue is probably more in who picked out that player etc. I can still be quoted in saying... as I always have...if the money is there go get your managements targets...even if it's supposedly an overspend on the supposed value of the player... This window we have the money to get them. The sneaky cheap ass ****e we try to do is counter productive
Fsg madness. Buy Andy Carroll... 35mil. Sell Andy Carroll 19mil. Wtf was that all about Downing 20mil. The amount of money lost in the first 2/3 years was amazing. BUT BUT.... Torres sold 50mil... wasted on Carroll... sterling money. Suarez money. All pissed up against a wall. We spend -5mil, 35mil, 40mil, 20mil, 38mil,28mil. -6mil last year. 34mil this..... So..... that's lfc net spend... last year we threw out benteke, Allen, Ibe, skertl, ilori etc and brought in 5 players for klopp. It was dead wood. The fact is this year the fees have gone crazy... before this year lfc have spent more than most tbh but eaten cake is soon forgotten. The fact is with the money sloshing around fans (a fan) expected to see 10mil spent... we did appently bid on kieta but we still have It or hoped to see 50mil come in.
Some cracking goals in there. Asensio looks like the next big thing. 21 and looked head and shoulders over anyone at u21 euros and scoring goals in Madrid first team.
Just a quick note. Asensio has a tiny release clause in world terms now. 48mil. He will never join us of course
And of course there was nobody else of the same quality available. Never mind, that just means it will still be available in January or even next summer when the new transfer budget is added A few weeks back I told an Australian Leicester supporter that any club can put a big bid in for a player if they know it won't be accepted
Of course there are, but that comes down to the transfer strategy rather than having money available.
