I've just finished ploughing my way through Brian Reade's book. I say ploughing because the style of writing really didn't suit my aprticular tastes. However, I was left with the impression that this book was far from being the definitive work on this topic. Obviously there is a commercial drive to 'get something out there' but this book lacks balance and does not truly explore the financial dealings and situation of LFC prior, during and at the end of the H&G nightmare. I kept asking myself where are the numbers?. Perhaps the main problem is that it is too soon for all of the main characters to give their considered opinions of events. David Moores has put information into the public domain but appears to have been even more vilified by it because it has neither been corroberated or denied by other 'players' in the game. Rick Parry has a lot more to tell as does both Rafa, Martin Broughton, Ian Ayre and Christian Purslow. It goes without saying that the story of how all of these issues affected the team is a story in itself and may have to wait until Steve and Carra retire. The book is obviously written from a fan's perspective. It does not seek to hide its prejudices and I think suffers for that. It also assumes that the majority of readers have some understanding of the Spirit Of Shankley and the main characters involved in that - which I don't believe is true. Having made all of the above comments, I still found pieces of information that I didn't know before. However, my overall impression was that I was being sold a story and from one perspective only. So, would I recommend the book. The answer is simply YES. As I said it's somewhat hard going but all Liverpool supporters should make themselves aware of what happened so as to ensure that it does not happen again. I would also recommend it to supporters of other clubs if only because it paints a picture of what could easily happen to your club - forewarned is forearmed. If you've read the book, do you agree?
I'm about 2 thirds in and it's not as good as I was hoping. It seems they have spent the first 100 pages saying Hicks/Gillette were bad and thats about it. It's a shame we couldn't get their side of the story as well. there are lots of unamed sources giving quotes, friends of players, "Senior sources within the club" but no names. I'm hoping that the book picks up as the last football behind the scense style book I read (Left foot in the Grave) was superb
The passages I read in the newspapers were very imbalanced. I know Hicks and Gillett did a lot of things wrong.One being the leveraged buyout. However they did do a small number of things right.Okay some of it may have been due to their overall greed.But they did do it right.They brought Liverpool kicking and screaming into the 21st century when it came to commercialism.Under Parry and Moores,Liverpool were not marketed properly.Hicks himself said Liverpool had nowhere near the acceptable number of sponsors.Hicks addressed that and increased the number of sponsors. In a way Hicks getting rid of Parry was one of the best things that happened to the club. Ian Ayre who was then one of the commercial directors was appointed by Hicks.Hicks also created Liverpools very first commercial team.That at the time included Ian Ayre and Philip Nash...both of whom are still at the club. Maybe although I may get abused for saying so,we did need a Hicks type to get the club into the 21st century when it came to commercialism.
Hicks without the greed & Leverage would have been very good for Liverpool FC, I feel that in the grand scheme of things if it had all worked out and the loans were paid, hicks savvy for bringing in the right people for marketting would have seen us make a huge profit. Hicks original forecast would have had Liverpool finance us, him and the Dallas Stars so he obviously felt he knew how to expolit the club and with that thought in mind I think JWH will be similar (hear me out first) he'll use Liverpool and our marketing power to promote us globally and then have the Red Sox ride it's coat tails (I'm sure there are regulations in baseball regarding advertising which do not affect european football teams in the US) so Liverpool will make so much money that we'll help finance the Red Sox. Next year there is talk about a US tour with a game at Fenway, who do you think will get a large percentage of the gate?? and to be honest I don't care if Henry does this as long as Liverpool keep the profits they make, any exposure by proxy for the sox is just good business by JWH
I feel the whole story is diffiuclt to get together as different sides won't really divulge things and so you are open to libel. someone needs to spend at least a year with some epxertise and probe every document thats obtainable including financial reports, minute of meetings and such. I think moores and parry have a big story to tell about how they choose and sold the club, indeed their decision making as a whole during thier tenure as it seems moores really held the club back via penny pinching and not understanding the potential. I think g&H have their own side of things, personally i think being wide boys on a run they thought they'd make a killing but were never interested in success on the filed driving offfield success. Thier work in revenue generation was much better than moores. Thier model was crzy. While litigation is underway broughan, ayre and purslow will never comment to anyone on the whole sale process. thats going to be quite a book purslow publishes one day but not for a long time. Only an outsider looking in at court transcripts, financial data etc can write the story. KPR must be appluaded for saying the unpopular thing about hicks... we all know he didn't care about the club or fans nor had the money but just beacuse he was not liked doesn't mean he didn't do the work. We'd all seemingly prefer to see a john henry in the door day one as he seems to understand how to get with people and bring things together but could he afford us at the time of the sale? hicks nearly bankrupted us. he was the guy that nearly bankrupted a lot of us sports clubs too. but he did increase our revenues by double in his time... pity he dragged so much debt with him it was just putting a cork in the dam.
Bozz. JWH made his money by hedging.In other words he doesn't put all his eggs in one basket,he spreads his profits about.If Liverpool play at Fenway next year expect the Redsox to pick up both the exposure and the finance from it.However He will return the favour at a later date.He can do so as both the Red Sox and Liverpool are owned by the same parent company. I've no problem with that.I reckon that he's using his other companies to expose Liverpool to a large audience ie NESN and FSM.So Liverpool are benefitting. I also completely agree,that if Hicks had FSG's money I reckon he would have been a capable owner.It was the leveraged buyout that caused his down-fall.
KPR, saying Hicks "got a few things right" is rather like saying Hitler built autobhans and got the trains to run on time - at a fearful cost to the whole of Europe! As for as Hicks was concerned, all that mattered was the leverage premium. LFC were just another Weetabix. All the rest was chin-music.
bozz, i don't agree that red sox are going to ride on our coat tails at all. individuals like lebron james will do that it seems. red sox are successful in their own right. they've the moeny to compelte at the top of thier sport with the yankees. that is very different to hicks DAY ONE talking about how this cash ow over in little england would help the texas teams out of thier difficulties... which hicks created by doing the same leveraged rubbish. I do agree access to a huge world wide market is now open to red sox as a result of our link up but lets face it thats access not money out of our clubs pockets. I simply do not see a scenario in which LFC profits are goign to the red sox directly, rather i see us opening up new markets to the likes of lebron et al. those who worhsip liveprool will do so still, those in asia easily influenced will by red sox baseball hats..... thats life. I think the big difference is on the field. mr henry sees that success breeds success, mr hicks didn't care if we were rubbish as long as we sold stuff.
Moreinjuredthanowen. I agree with your first point. The Le Bron James deal will expose all of FSG's sports ventures into new markets.Liverpool,the NASCAR team,and The Red Sox. However seeing as all 3 are owned by the one company.I reckon JWH will ensure that all 3 are self sufficient and if he needs to supplement one of the other,he will return the favour.Supposing he creams a little off the top of each of his 7 companies to help build Liverpools new stadium.He will in return when the time is right,expect Liverpool to return the favour.When seperate companies are owned under the one umbrella this is possible.
Thanks for the review, Dave. I got it for my dad and he's read it so he was gonna give me his copy. I'm wondering if I should bother now. I said on 606 in the midst of the storm that Hicks deserved some credit for overhauling and increasing revenue. Now I think it's less credit than criticism deserved for Parry because any corporate with a modicum of smarts should've spotted it. I think if it hadn't been for the credit crunch we might've seen a spade in the ground. It's a scary thought to think of H&G getting the stadium and it allowing them to pay off the debt, or enough of it for it not to be a concern to fans. But they lived by the market in getting the club and they died by the market. Ya gotta love coldhearted Capitalism.
One of the advantages that FSG have is that they have several iconic brands and the inter-relationships between them can be managed for everybody's benefit. Hence, Red Sox can promote the sale of LFC merchandising alongside that of its own. In the US, LFC can use the contacts and media contracts owned/used by the Sox to further its own promotion and merchandising in the US & Canada. From what I hear FSG are also active in South America and this also gives LFC are far greater opprtunity than they already have. Where I believe we will see the most interesting arrangements will be in the Far East. I would not be surprised to see an 'arrangement' between LFC and say a club in China in the next few years. The difference between Hicks and Henry is that Henry is not looking for a quick premium. He's in it for the much longer haul. Also he appears, so far, to be true to his word.
I was hoping people would rate this higher to be honest. I think I will have to read it. Perhaps a few more pieces will be written once the dust settles.
