of course they would. Why would they not maintain the value of the share they still own. It would make no sense to not put some back into the club at all.
They didn't do it before
of course they would. Why would they not maintain the value of the share they still own. It would make no sense to not put some back into the club at all.
Well guess what they did with red bird money?
They effectively sold a stake in lfc to them. It was 10% of fsg but in effect why would red bird want anything but in to Liverpool.
All the money went on pet projects for red sox and buying and ice hockey team
Lfc didn't benefit one jot.
They didn’t need to before.
They didn’t need to then, that team nearly won everything. Let’s see if they sell outright or a stake. If it’s a stake then they will want to protect the value of the asset, as will the investor. If it’s a outright sale then the buyer would have to stump up and hopefully FSG would insist on selling to someone willing to invest in the squad.
They sell a stake, that money is then their money. Not a chance they'll put it into the club. They just won't.
So, you own a house with land. The roof of the house needs repairing. You sell off a piece of the land and even though only a small part of the money would fix the roof, you wouldn’t do it?
doesn’t make any sense to me.
That doesn't translate at all. You sold off the bit of land, that land is no longer yours but the house is still 100% yours.
Selling 10% shares means the buyer becomes a 10% part owner and is therefore expected to contribute 10% towards costs. The purchase of the shares doesn't come into it, that transaction as already passed
fair enough but the fact remains that they would own part of the club and they wouldn’t let it go to ruin. Nor would any potential investor. That would be idiocy of epic proportions on both sides. All moot if they sell outright.
Think most of us would invest that money back into the club but these aren't fans, they're unattached business men unfortunately.
Personally, if I'd bought the club for £300m and it was now worth £4b, I'd happily chuck a **** load of cash at the club. You can't lose really.
They’re smart though mate. Sell it all for £5b or sell £2b, keep control, ‘fix the roof’ and pocket 5 times what you originally paid while your remaining £3b grows back to £5b. They will not watch a valuable asset devalue without doing anything. Nobody in business would. Nobody would pay £2b without assurances that x would not be the reinvested in the club. Not even filthy rich oil men….especially not them.
so it’s sell it all or the above imo
If they sell a stake, they're not going to put that money into the club. They've not done that before.
Agree with that. They just won't use the money they get by selling shares (aka their own money) unless it's a loan with interest as they've done previously.

who’s going to buy without assurances that some of that money will be reinvested? It simply won’t happen. Time to bookmark this and wait to see who’s right![]()
Didn't Chelsea have four American approaches?Hard to see another FSG type owner come in when the asset is so highly valued. Spending £4bn to purchase it and then expecting to invest more? Hard to see where the value is.
Can only see one type of investor coming for LFC, and that is Middle East money.
Didn't Chelsea have four American approaches?
So four American involved consortiums. No Middle Eastern money in there which was sort of my point. Like Chelsea, we're not ideal sportswashing candidates.no they had multiple tyre kickers when the fire sale was announced, n truth they had the following shortlist
a consortium led by the co-owner of the LA Dodgers, Todd Boehly, this has a uk element and a swiss billionaire as well.
a consortium led by the owners of the Chicago Cubs, Tom and Laura Ricketts. (winner and lunatic spender)
A consortium led by Sir Martin Broughton and Sebastian Coe backed by the owners of the Philadelphia 76ers basketball team, Josh Harris and David Blitzer.
A consortium led by the Boston Celtics’ co-owner, Steve Pagliuca.
I would not call them American's but rather complicated consortiums that have yank involvement but are really trans national groups out to rake in dough.
there was also a longer list including some uk interests that were excluded.