Yay or Nay for FSG?

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Do you want us (if possible) to change ownership if alternate investment was available?

  • Total voters
    20
my view on this is simple and consistent.

1. We are being spoilt. we are getting anfield redeveloped.

2. FSG clearly can do SOME things well.. .or at least well enough. I am coming to the view their sponsors generate good but not great revenues and open up more channels for FSG business than necessarily get LFC most money... do we blame them for that? no. We are supposedly breaking even now.. again that's good

3. They clearly cannot organised a football club and i feel that aside from appointing Klopp they have fairly consistently got it badly wrong structurally and have made do form within. they thought to appoint a CEO. clearly they didn't find one in their limited pool of knowledge and didn't trust anyone so just thre it at ayre. then mike gordon wandered in. they kept the guys comolli put in but sacked him.. does that make any sense? Nope. Their absentee chairman is also an issue

In short for me FSG need a good long hard look and go hire talent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Klopp's Mannschaft
I just think back to what I wanted to see happen when Hicks & Gillette were finally removed from the club. Overall, I am very happy with FSG, they have done pretty much everything I wanted. The only issue over that time is player recruitment.

They are ultimately responsible as owners since they choose who to appoint to what role. However, it is their staff that as let them down.


Edit: okay, two issues (after seeing PMK's comment)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Page_Moss_Kopite
Page_Moss_Kopite said:
FSG's gift to Liverpool fans, £77 tickets for the new main stand despite increased revenue from tv and and sponsorship.

Cheers guys.<ok>
Click to expand...

This hasn't gone unnoticed - especially with the likes of SOS who had had positive feedback with the club regarding ticket price then they just did it anyway.
 
Bow4fowler* said:
This hasn't gone unnoticed - especially with the likes of SOS who had had positive feedback with the club regarding ticket price then they just did it anyway.
Click to expand...

"The Reds insist they have done their best to listen to supporter concerns and find solutions to balance the need for affordability for their core fans with the need to raise revenues to firstly pay for the Main Stand - and then in future years to help allow the club to compete at the very highest levels in the Premier League and in Europe."

They only need to(and probably will)sell the naming rights of the stand to cover the cost of building it.
 
Page_Moss_Kopite said:
"The Reds insist they have done their best to listen to supporter concerns and find solutions to balance the need for affordability for their core fans with the need to raise revenues to firstly pay for the Main Stand - and then in future years to help allow the club to compete at the very highest levels in the Premier League and in Europe."

They only need to(and probably will)sell the naming rights of the stand to cover the cost of building it.
Click to expand...

Yup.

I read recently that the actual revenue generated from ticket price is small in comparison to the likes of TV rights.

Its one area where they could afford to be more lenient.

But they won't ignore the revenue potential and essentially aren't too interested in the fans.

£77 for one ticket? For an hour and a half?

Football is mental.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Page_Moss_Kopite
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back