Separate TV deals!?

Interesting that out of the two 'ambiguous' clubs: United and Liverpool, even the LFC chairman says United have a much bigger profile.
'We knew virtually nothing about Liverpool Football Club. I certainly knew about Manchester United."

 

But either way they all knew Chelsea was Bill and Hilary Clinton's daughter.

 

Americans associate Chelsea with the Swinging 60s, Liverpool with the Beatles, and Manchester with United

 

GTF.

Yanks associate Chelsea with Austin Powers.

 

Yanks associate English football clubs with $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

 

Americans think of one thing when they hear the word Chelsea...

please log in to view this image

 

Then you'd better start earning some $$$$$$$ then. You'll need them when Putin puts your Russian in jail and sizes all his assets

 

I'm not sure what happens when your assets are sized, but it doesn't sound good.

 

And if Manchester was the name of the ex president's daughter, they'd think the same. Using Americans in any debate about Football should be avoided at all cost.

 

Is it ok to bring Russian gangsters into a football debate?

 

Is it ok to bring getting us banned from Europe into the debate? Tool.

 

Jeez did i hit a raw nerve there lad.

 

All this crying. Football is not competitive.

Akll the balls of the spanish league when there have ben two teams at the top every season for how long in the prem. UNited and Liverpool with brief spels by arsenal and Che.

As for killing half the league. Hahahahahahaha
Blackburn wigan ect, have absolutely no ****ing chance of winning the league and not much more of a cup. They have been badly managed hence their poor status internationally, so in essence, clubs liverpool and manu who were once like blackburn managed to market themselves and win a few things and can now benefit from this.

Let all clubs negotiate their own deals, if Liverpol get more money this way, why can't blackburn? that is the question most important as much as we are disgusted by cash grabbing, some of this needs to be based in reality.

 

All

Saw this on the Times:

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/sport/football/premierleague/article3192868.ece

I know it's only an opinion but seems to be an informed one at least, and makes you wonder what the fark Ayre was thinking.

If you can't get past the paywall the text reads:

Liverpool are the fourth most popular English team abroad behind Manchester United, Chelsea and Arsenal and the seventh most followed in Europe, according to the unpublished part of a global fan survey released yesterday.

A confidential club-by-club analysis obtained by The Times shows that United have nearly five times as many overseas supporters as Liverpool and more than twice the figure for the next popular club.

The Barclays Premier League champions command a following of 354 million, ahead of Chelsea’s 135 million and Arsenal’s 113 million according to research by the Sport+Markt business consultancy. Liverpool’s foreign supporter base of 71 million puts them between AC Milan and Inter Milan in a European landscape dominated by Barcelona (270 million) and Real Madrid (174 million).

The figures emerged after Ian Ayre, the Liverpool managing director, voiced a desire to break away from the Premier League’s collective bargaining agreement for overseas television rights. Putting his club in the same bracket as United for the power of their global brand, he asked why top clubs should share their international media value “just to be nice” to smaller rivals.

 

True fan count is not obtainable, the above is complete speculation and utter bollow, not he poster the data

 

Yep,loads of facts there then.

 

Since 09, Liverpool have fallen way behind in global support, mainly due to falling out of the champions league ( which is shown over here and you can get any of those games), slipping down the league, losing key players not oonly in terms of the team but in terms of attracting new fans ( If a kid over here had a Liverpool jersey, 9/10 times it was Torres for example).

Also, when we were in the champions league we were usually awesome and were the team, along with Man United, that was shown the most. I am not saying that the support was up there with United but between 05-09, I think we were better supported than Chelsea and Arsenal. City will start to move up that ladder fast and you are now seeing loads of silva, aguero, tevez,etc jerseys around that you never saw before.

Either way, it seems to have hit a nerve with the other managers in the league ( outside the top 6).

 

Great response.

Nice one buddy.

Good work.

Cheers pal.

 

There was nothing to respond to buddy,it was all a fella i know told me his mate got told blah blah blah.

Try digging deeper and coming back with some facts that back up the figures pal.

 

Bluff, you've got your US blinkers on again. LFC have not fallen way behind in global terms. If they had done so then the income streams from commercial activity would not be growing at the rate they are. Neither would that income far exceede that produced by Arsenal, Chelsea and City. It is testimony to the reputation of the club that the fan base is still growing without CL football and the near extinction of the club. Remeber Real Madrid grew their commercial base at a time when their success was certainly on the wane.

In the end, it is the ability ot consistently gain commercial income from that fan base that is the true measure of success. Therefore I would rather base my judgements upon the statements of Addidas who claimed that Liverpool was their biggest shirt sales contract last season than a survey, the basis as which is undisclosed.