Separate TV deals!?

Swarbs

Liverpool have almost nailed Asia, they however have gone further and have plonked themselves in India and have a decent sized following which they plan to expand even further. There is a Delhi branch of Liverpool support.

 

Now that is bollocks.

You just have to appeal, and to do that you have to have lots of air time and win things which is different to pedigree, and in League terms since the inception and globalisation of the Prem only four teams have achieved.

Champs league - Fair enough, 2005 was an amazing feat and worthy of its recognition but you are now not in it for the second year running...it stacks up, crowds are fickle and you're not in their window...Newcastle used to have a smart global audience once FFS

City will be up there soon if they keep going the way they have, would you deny them that position as well?

 

Except apparently the American Liverpool fan on this very thread who has stated he considers Chelsea to be ahead of Liverpool over there. Plus of course your own owners who hadn't even heard of you before the buy out.

You really are clown shoes.

 

Exactly. Do you think some glory hunting fans in Asia/Africa etc are going to support Liverpool because they won stuff 20 years ago. They will support who gets the most exposure, who is winning stuff now and who has the big name players. Carroll and Henderson don't quite cut it compared to Drogba, Torres etc do they?

 

With the rise of fox soccer channel and fox soccer plus, more and more Americans are wanting to see footy on TV. In the time of this channel coming across ( also ESPN showing games but usually at 6 in the morning, bastards), was the same time RA had bought Chelsea and got the Special one in. They immediattely came over for a tour of the US and got the ball rolling. At the moment, yes Chelsea is bigger over here, they might have been closer when we were in the Champions league but with us slipping out, and Chelsea still in the mix with Drogba a big name now, Torres, Mata, lamps and Terry are household names as well, they just have more to offer the average US fan.

This again can change, but as stated previously, City will catch up and quickly with the way they are being marquee players and if the continue to win and stay in champs league it could be them sitting right behind United.

Chelsea Clinton? Does anyone know just how long ago that was? people know of Chelsea, we aren't in the 90's and World Cup 94 with everyone American going wth is this?

 

Quick question and just your thoughts, what teams reign supreme in Africa in terms of the prem? I have to say whenever I talk to an African about a favorite team it is usually and almost always Arsenal but Chelsea have caught up due to Drog, kalou, Essien, Obi, etc.

 

This

How many Asian or American kids who have never seen a Premier League footballer in the flesh give a flying monkeys about how many trophies English clubs won in the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s or early 00s. All they will really care about when choosing a club is do they have players from our country, do they have good players, do they win a lot and can we watch them on the telly.

Apparently City now have the fastest growing brand value in world football.

 

No one debates that. But Africa is not where the money is. It's Asia. And Liverpool are still huge there. Take our friendies for example in the summer, the stadiums there were packed for the LFC and United games. Less so for Arsenal... But as you say, the US's love for footie is growing and I don't think we have a big enough presence there atm. Glad we've cottoned on to India though. One of the biggest countries in the world and has gone unnoticed in terms of potential talent and also establishing a large fanbase.

 

Just a thought on Africa support but as you say it isn't where the big bucks are. I know we won't knock United off their perch in the US in terms of support but it would be nice to have a chance to see Liverpool come over and try to go see them train at the very least. I would be real curious to see how the turn-out is. With all this debate, when do you expect to see us start signing asian players, or players from abroad to help boost this ( obviously they would have to be good!).

I saw somewhere that Liverpool were monitoring Brek Shea ( plays for FC Dallas and US International now). he is good but the level we want? Not sure about that yet but he is very young (19-20 I believe).

 

I was surpirsed we never put in for Honda this year. I'd imagine Standard Chartered are keen for us to sign someone big from Asia to boost shirt sales and exposure there.

 

Honda or Kagawa are excellent players and would not be signed just for shirt sales alone, both have top talent.

 

Your post clearly identifies exactly why Page asked you for facts. On what basis do you contend that Ayre is "a little out of his depth by making this statement as he clearly hadn't sought the counsel of his peers prior to his rather too public assertions, and has been left looking rather like a complete twat, espescially with your owners confession that he'd never really heard of you prior to the buy out."

You certainly aren't in control of your own arguement.

 

I think all the 'big four' are well followed but as you say Chelsea and Arsenal have and have had an advantage due to the african players they have. Drogba in particular is a 100% legend in Africa and very well followed due to his humanitarian side as well as being probably their greatest ever footballer (maybe eto).

 

I rate Eto'o higher but Drogba is right there.

 

I base it on the fact that no other club has supported him, he evidently didn't ask around the league or poll anyone and therefore he looks like a twat.

Anything else staring you in the face that I should clarify or is that all?

 

Ian Ayre's statement was made on behalf of Liverpool Football Club and reflects the interests of LFC. There was absolutely no need for him to consult with any other club or take a poll. I am sure that he is really hurt by your opinion of both him and his statement.

 

Is that what you said when Liverpool were the first club to get a sponsor on their shirt? "Haha, youse look stupid, you never asked anyone else about this, it'll never catch on, who wants Hitachi written on the front of their shirt"

 

I personally rate Drogba higher but that doesn't mean I like him.

On to the issue of TV deals...

While I don't think we should be able to negotiate our own deal (after all, these games aren't friendlies and there is more then one team involved) I do think there should be more transparency as to where the money goes. Ian Ayre is a money man, his job is to make LFC money and this is obviously an easy way for him to do that as i'm sure any negotiated deal would also tie in club sponsers and partners meaning more deals could be made and milked, does that make him right?

I'd imagine most fans, managers and people that participate in football (at all levels) because it's a sport would say that he isn't.

and as for people making comments about John W. Henry's admission that he hadn't heard of us before buying us, to be honest I don't care - He is doing right by us now and that's all that matters. I doubt Randy Lerner, Stan Kroenke or The Venky's knew much about the teams they own until they brought them

And didn't Bruce Buck recently reveal that Roman Abramovic nearly brought Spurs instead of Chelsea??

 

I don't think he understands that Ian Ayre's job is to maximise revenue streams for Liverpool, not to make some nice friends and be a popular character.

 

I think that point has been forgotton by most... I bet these are the same people that have mocked Liverpool over the last 20 years for not capitalising on our previous success and letting Man Utd grow and become a force both off and on the pitch. If Ian Ayre was paid to wear a tracksuit to work then views on him as an individual could be made...

but he doesn't, he wears a suit - thats because he is here to make as much money by any means possible