John W. Henry @John_W_Henry @SupremeWisdom Always anonymous sources. Last year it was Sox. We have a lot to accomplish...we've really just started. Committed Determined https://mobile.twitter.com/John_W_Henry/status/361212757267333121 Who would take him selling out to a sugar daddy? Not me, no soul or as much pride when we win something We need to improve our starting 11, squad depth is there for first time in ages imo. So John, lets get some improvements on the team that takes to the pitch. There has been some, Mingolet + Aspas imo, but we need more
I wouldn't. Been saying I don't want a sugar daddy well before H&G rolled up and rapped our rears ends. After that experience, I was convinced that the sugar daddy route was wrong. We can't be in a position where we rely so heavily on one man or group. I'd obviously love their recent trophies but I'd hate to be in Chelsea's or Man City's shoes where the owner could get board and **** off at any time leaving the club to die. I am 100% behind the self-sustaining approach that FSG have been working towards. It is the model that got Man Utd where they are today too before the Glazer's rocked up and slowed their spending down! We just need that bloody stadium!!!!
wha.... slowed utd spending???? check back mate glaziers accelerated utd spending along with tv money in... we do need a lot of things start with stadium now cos team aint getting better... the aount of money wasted in sacking guys and selling flops is also disasterous
All clubs spent more due to TV money. In relation to what other clubs spent (obviously ignoring Chelsea) before and after, it slow. Beforehand they regularly bought £30m+ players as well as squad players, when did they last do that?
hmmmmm.... under who did they sign... they took over in 2005 utd sure bought rooney and ferdinand before then but they have spent quite a lot since then.... carrick, berbaflop and other. their net spend is not that high but i put that down to STABILTY... degea, jones, yuong for example.. .all bought for just under 20mil last season they bought zaha and rvp and it was not offset by sales. Compared to silly fools like city or cheslea sure it looks weak but i don't see it as different, jsut the top fee is not city or cheslea not utd... i'd say since RVN, ferdinand and the like utd have not paid the big summer fee. is that cheap or is that the same wisdom that we are praising fsg for????
I really would despise a sugar daddy owner. I'd rather stay mid table trying to achieve top 4 off our own back. Yes we have wasted and spent a copious amount of money over the years, but the majority of it has come from profit/sales (loans under the cowboys ). Man City have spent big on players like Milner and Lescott and it goes fairly unnoticed because the money doesn't mean that much to them. Whereas we get pulled up for spending money on players like Allen, Henderson and Carroll because people know we spent more than what they were worth and we can't really afford to do that.
Morning RHC Lads the rumours about FSG selling up have been doing the rounds for 6 months at least. I can't see there being anything in it but if they are feeling the pressure financially who knows. The Red Sox performance could still impact on their thinking one way or the other. The Anfield expansion will be costly. Once it's done obviously the club value will be significantly higher so if they want a return they'd have to be patient. During the rebuilding process gate receipts will drop for a year or two so if they were to sell it would be once planning permission is granted but before work starts. You'd imagine seeing the response from fans in Indonesia and Oz they must be rubbing their hands together at the marketing potential of the club though so I can't see any sense in them selling unless they are desperate.
I wouldn't mind selling to a 'sugar daddy' but not so we had endless amounts to spend, but just enough to be competitive each year in the transfer market. They'd also have the funds to sort the stadium out once and for all.
Can't we have a sugar daddy who has the obvious bottomless resources of cash but also has a long term vision for the club with the end goal of making the club self sustainable? I think FSG are doing things the right way but only time will tell to see if we will ever be in a position to compete again, without the need of wealthy oil oligarchs. My concern now is that this is probably the first transfer window where our lack of CL and poor league finishes have come to haunt us. We've been out of CL for a while but we could still get the likes of Suarez, Meireles, Coutinho. But now we're missing out on the likes of HM, possibly Bernard and Soldado (depending on how serious our interest it). We could only rely on our history for so long. From now on, it's only gonna get harder to attract the required players without the need for splashing stupid amounts of cash. EDIT: I still feel we need a big name as a Sporting Director or summat to help attract players.
IMO there is only one model that can try to compete with the oligarchs. Utd. Now utd have shot themselves in the foot with their owners debts which frankly was totally unnecessary as they were a PLC getting along fabulously but now are paying of their own purchase. that said they have also appointed the worst choice of coach for a top club imaginable. I just didn't get it at all. Add that to the team they have and the cracks are there. When city and cheslea spend like they do even utd can't afford slip ups. However those points aside the Utd model is the only one in town for LFC... Or hell lets call it the arsenal model (arsenal have the mistake of an idiot manager) Build the stadium... build the revenue.... build the finances. So lets just look at LFC. 1990/91... capacity was somewhere in the mid 30s. you could proabably get more on the Kop frnakyl but there you go. Mr Moores. the man who ruined LFC IMO.... he went in 1992 for the centenary stand. this cost about £12million at the time and showed the limit of his ambition. Its great stonking thing was stuck up but was actually a second teir to the existing stand and ended up needed strengthening later such was his penny pinching. Then the kop got done... again the limit to the ambition... not corners, surrendering massive seating potential. .no cooperate boxes (sorry but pandering to the masses) Then the anfield road end "shed" After all that 45k capacity..... Thanks again mr moores. Over at old trafford similar pojects with vision and scale led to 76k capacity. that 30k different HAUNTS LFC to this day.... Now i am not saying the same difficulties would not exist with planning but i will contend we could have an should have shown for more ambition in driving the project through and upping the capacity above that 60k mark well before the year 2000. Arsenal's model was built on property.the highbury site being historic but valuable and fair enough... LFc can't do that. LFc must simply build the global brand on a annual globetrotter type touring facade, grow revenue streams, pay less wages and more bonuses and most of all STOP BEING WASTEFUL. simply put buying a dud costs the club 10s on millions... in wages, losses on fees, bad will, paying wages while the play elsewhere is a sin etc etc.. sacking managers and paying them off is also costly.... frnakly LFC need to employ rodgers until the end of his contract no matter where he sits in the league and they must buy only the coutinho's and sturridge's of this world not the soldados or downings. Soldado is going to have zero sell on value and downing is a dud. At least coutinho now is worth 20mil, at least sturrdige would go for the same if not more money AND at least suarez will generate huge profit. LFC must be lead... an
I said "I am 100% behind the self-sustaining approach that FSG have been working towards. It is the model that got Man Utd where they are today too" before adding "...before the Glazer's rocked up and slowed their spending down!" In other words, they aren't spending as much because (and I could be wrong) the debts are having to be serviced. Still self sustaining. TBF, the latter part wasn't needed
FSG have made great strides from a commercial aspect. They have signed up new sponsorships deals, improved on existing deals and it looks like there is more to come. I agree that the stadium is a big issue and it's a concern that we're looking at renovating Anfield to increase the capacity to just 60k - what about the future, can we expand further? I don't just want 60k, I want 80k etc etc. There are rumours that Oreedoo are still lurking and want to become a sponsor for the club (sponsor training kits etc) and this has potential to be a huge deal and one that transform our finances. No quick fixes but FSG are doing this the right way.
