I don't understand why the amount FSG paid matters. If they underpaid then they got a bargain, fair enough and well played to them. If they overpaid then more fool them but I sincerely doubt this to be the case considering the price. Some will say that if they underpaid then why have they not put the underpayment into the kitty. But if you bought something for a bargain price would you then waste the money you have saved...? Besides that, the outlay last summer wasn't exactly cheap and most would consider it wasted too when considering the amounts compared to quality (I know, I know. He will be along shortly...)
Since the days of John Houlding, fans have always expected Chairmen to spend whatever it takes to meet their expectations. It's no different today. However, Reds fans should look down the road at City and a little further afield to Chelsea to see what the true cost is of attracting the type of owner who is prepared to spend whatever it takes. We don't need a Jack Walker - see what the long terms effect has been for them! We do need the sustainable future that JH is proposing for us.
I can't see how reds can have a pop at them for their spending, as they've backed both managers with major funds. It's not their fault if the players bought haven't improved the team to the levels that they should have done, given the size of the spend. The only question I'd want answering, is how they're intending getting their return on investment? Are they seeking to turn you into a highly profitable business that pays them a handsome annual return? or are they looking to develop the value of the asset that they bought quite cheaply & make their profit via an exit strategy?
We already know. It's to make a shed load of cash out of us, when they find some daft twat to pay them 4 or 5 times what they paid.
Again that's fair comment but I don't think many of us do expect a City/Chelsea style spree. My own personal issues with FSG have little to do with the financial aspects and more to do with the total disconnection there seems to be between owners and club. Granted it's an old fashioned viewpoint these days but LFC to me is more than just a business. It's not like a place I go to buy my groceries where if one store pisses me off I just go round the corner to another one. Liverpool to me is more than a balance sheet and end of year profit figures. Its supposed to be part of the fabric of the city and it's supposed to be part of the soul of the people who live here. However for years now it's been getting more and more disconnected. FSG have talked a lot about "The Liverpool Way" and yet they have shown they know little or nothing about what that used to stand for.
Billy, I totally understand your point. If you remember, a few months back, I argued vehemently that Werner should either be based in Liverpool or pass the Chairmanship over to either somebody like David Dein or to a senior FSG executive who is based in Liverpool.
I remember it well Dave. I agree with you totally and I think its a farce nothings happened still. Who's replaced Chang anyway? "Liverpool way" my arse.
Ian Ross is the favourite I'm told He used to be our PR bod, but got *cough* moved on, after an e-mail scandal in which he slated the CEO & basically called the club a shambles. So he'll fit in perfectly
Didn't he say it was like working in a nursery at Goodison?Sounds about right that he'd be on the list
