Transfer Rumours Transfer Rumours thread

  • 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!
The question regarding FSG is have they taken the club as far as they can? With the changes in football ownership in recent years can FSG keep up anymore?

And if they can't should they sell up and move on?
There is a straw that will break soon and that is if FSG demonstrate they are no longer willing/able to challenge against the top of the league and are just happy to stay in the upper reaches of the league occasional winning a cup. That is probably closer now that it has been before.
I think it's clear that they are looking at an exit plan. They have been searching for investment ( with a possible/probable view to selling up completely) for a good while.
 
Part of the problem with fan's frustration regarding transfers is that it's all played out on social media. Links to exciting players, when in reality there are no links; personal terms agreed, when they aren't; bids submitted, when they haven't been; etc. etc.

There are a few weeks left till the window shuts. I'm waiting to see where we are then before being concerned and even if we don't address all the needs this window, we are going into the season with two fantastic new players and some very talented young ones.
I'm more concerned about our apparent desire to adopt a system that doesn't work, than the lack of recruitment.
Though I do think we need a DM no matter what system we use.
 
Remind me how many titles Chelsea have won in the 20 years, bottom half of the table lol

They won it a lot when Roman was still actively investing, and stopped once he got bored. If you're looking to the future, who would you expect to win the title again first: us, or Chelsea. I'm sure most people would pick us.

Also, if we face a decade of City/Nuke dominance, do you think Boehly will still be investing heavily, or will he be crying in his beer? What about FSG, they're in it for the investment, they don't care if we finish 3rd for a decade, as long as the money rolls in. 2040: Chelsea in Champions League, we're still kicking around in the top-flight. I know who I'd rather be a fan of for the long-term.

Chelsea were weeks away from failing to exist as a club (although I'm sure they would have been resurrected as AFC Chelsea in the lower leagues) Boehly saved them in the nick of time. Having corrupt oil-daddy owners does that to you. We were in a similar situation with H&G, heading to bankruptcy, having unfit owners can do that for you too.

I just want a club I can support and watch for the long term. I want Liverpool to stay in top flight and compete for trophies. I don't care for a decade of dominance followed by disappearing from sight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: johnsonsbaby
Ok Donga, we differ on this subject, but take this as an attempt at a meaningful debate.
In your second paragraph you outline what the Glazers have done for MU then follow that up by saying you don't want similar done with us. Therefore I'm not really sure what your point is in bringing them up?
By all means just state that you want someone who will put more money into the club but citing the effect of a process you disagree with isn't really a good argument, imo.
I've enquired of several [HASHTAG]#fsgout[/HASHTAG] posters as to who they would like to replace them, but the answers are always vague.
I'd be quite happy if they were replaced by someone more effective but I have no idea who - it's far easier to identify a problem than its solution.
I see three types of potential owners; a sugar daddy for whom we're a vanity project; someone who will saddle the club with debt; or the state fund of murderous tyrants.
I don't want any of these. If someone can come up with a viable, ethical alternative I'm all ears.
There was a report at the end of last year that the Norwegian oil fund was looking at investing in us. Now that's a state fund that isn't murderous. It does, however, depend on your view of the oil industry as to whether it's considered ethical or whatever other arguments one could put up against it.
 
I think it's clear that they are looking at an exit plan. They have been searching for investment ( with a possible/probable view to selling up completely) for a good while.

I don't think so. they have the chance to clean sell.

they are too greedy and don't want to lose what lfc brand brings them in the USA etc

they want cake and to eat it.
 
There was a report at the end of last year that the Norwegian oil fund was looking at investing in us. Now that's a state fund that isn't murderous. It does, however, depend on your view of the oil industry as to whether it's considered ethical or whatever other arguments one could put up against it.

They also wouldn't be unlimited cash donors. They would be buying us as in investment rather than as a glorification of the home nation as in City/Nuke. So we wouldn't be able to expect them to provide the type of transfers that some on here hope for.
 
There was a report at the end of last year that the Norwegian oil fund was looking at investing in us. Now that's a state fund that isn't murderous. It does, however, depend on your view of the oil industry as to whether it's considered ethical or whatever other arguments one could put up against it.
It's impossible to exist in the modern consumerist world without having some detrimental effect. My objection to some - the Saudis in particular - is not that their wealth derives from oil, but their repressive regime.
Human rights transcend footballing ambition for me. But we've been over this ad nauseam so I don't want to kick it off again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: johnsonsbaby
They also wouldn't be unlimited cash donors. They would be buying us as in investment rather than as a glorification of the home nation as in City/Nuke. So we wouldn't be able to expect them to provide the type of transfers that some on here hope for.
Yeah. Oil companies need to diversify given the current trends in energy production (pun intended).
So we'd probably end up with just another FSG scenario anyway.
 
It's impossible to exist in the modern consumerist world without having some detrimental effect.

Obviously, it's fiction, and not just fiction but humor: but have you seen the show "The Good Place" in that show, no one had made it to heaven in centuries, everyone went to hell, because, they explained, it's impossible to live your life doing more good than harm, because everything you try to do that's good ends up being bad to someone, in some way.
 
It's impossible to exist in the modern consumerist world without having some detrimental effect. My objection to some - the Saudis in particular - is not that their wealth derives from oil, but their repressive regime.
Human rights transcend footballing ambition for me. But we've been over this ad nauseam so I don't want to kick it off again.
I get that and I'm 100% in agreement with you. I was thinking more that while Norway has a nice clean record on human rights, those that like to look at the negatives or reasons not to, would point out the oil aspect as that seems to be huge these days.
 
  • Like
Reactions: saintanton
I'm sure I read we shifted over £1m a week off our wage bill this summer with Milner, Ox, Keta, Bobby, Fab, and Hendo gone. I think somebody pointed out that it's @ £850k less when you factor in the wages of Mac and Slob. I assume Lavia will be £100k+ despite his age too, but nonetheless, we're not that bad when you do a wages-to-earning ratio. We still have lots of wiggle room when it comes to FFP, though as Klopp has pointed out, we simply don't have the finances to be able to pay the like of Mbappe £2m-£3m a week, even with ridiculous shirt sales that would follow.
now i'm just a somebody to you <grr>

FFP really doesn't come in to play for us it just appears lack of money or refusal to pay other clubs values. As you know i think a club should be self sufficient and not need owners to pump funds in but apparently not allowing the club to take out a line of credit to fund transfers in such a vital window is self defeating as the competition is getting is growing year on year .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ivan Dobsky
Have to say this belief the club is worth £5bn i find ludicrous considering the lack of profits to justify that sort of price
then again lots about football today strikes meas ludicrous so who knows.

it's a grand ponsie scheme.

someone at some point will hold the asset when it all deflates. those people will lose massively.

this is why the glaziers threw thier asset up for sale but such is the greed they cannot let go of the stipends they get.

utd have increasing debts yet payment sout to glaziers every year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Solid Air
Another bit of speculation is that a move for Andre will depend on the outcome of Fluminense's Libertadores cup game tonight. The speculation being that if they win, we put another bid in for Lavia but if they lose, they will be open to a bid from us for Andre and we will walk away from Lavia.
 
Another bit of speculation is that a move for Andre will depend on the outcome of Fluminense's Libertadores cup game tonight. The speculation being that if they win, we put another bid in for Lavia but if they lose, they will be open to a bid from us for Andre and we will walk away from Lavia.
Think that one kicks off at 23:00
 
  • Like
Reactions: johnsonsbaby
Another bit of speculation is that a move for Andre will depend on the outcome of Fluminense's Libertadores cup game tonight. The speculation being that if they win, we put another bid in for Lavia but if they lose, they will be open to a bid from us for Andre and we will walk away from Lavia.

sounds like adding 2 and 2 and getting a click bait article out there.

they can fake a bid tomorrow for another click bait or better yet if a bid does go in they can claim itk
 
Another bit of speculation is that a move for Andre will depend on the outcome of Fluminense's Libertadores cup game tonight. The speculation being that if they win, we put another bid in for Lavia but if they lose, they will be open to a bid from us for Andre and we will walk away from Lavia.

Can’t understand in what logical sense why the outcome of that one game would make a difference?
 
Can’t understand in what logical sense why the outcome of that one game would make a difference?

Well, it's their equivalent of the Champions League, and I'm not familiar with the format, but presume, half-way through South American season they're in the knock-out stages now. While they've got a chance of winning they wouldn't want to lose a key player (or close to knock outs if like Champions League format). If they're out of the cup they could presumably get by with one less player.

Not saying I think it's likely, just assuming that's the logic whichever journalist made up that rumor was trying to follow. A bit like, if a European club made it to the knock-outs they wouldn't want their key players going when they were "that-close" to a cup.
 
  • Like
Reactions: johnsonsbaby