KopTalk.com Forums Football Liverpool FC Forum The consequences now are the highest we have ever faced

thanks solar. but be warned, you'll probably be accused for being sarcastic.

It just occured to me that We should also not forget the the club was bought at a discount which was the stress value. It's obvious that the actual market value of the club was more than 300 m. This therefore means that if even they sell the club at a haircut, they are still likely to to get their money back. From where I am sitting, I think they will either sell or bring in an equity partner to reduce the financial burden as well as the risk!

Yes but does not mean the same will apply to Liverpool there are many variables here. And no disrespect to redsox but Liverpool are a global brand which is great but you need money and unlimited amounts of it. Not sure Henry realised this he always appears to be one step behind events to me. We are told what a smart guy he is lets see it then.

I sure don't what the hell is that?

Given that the "stress value" you mention does not include the hundreds of millions of debt the club had prior to the sale, you'd be forgiven for thinking the club was worth more than 300m now. Sadly for them, Liverpool FC cannot be sold for a profit at this point in time.

no problem, my google hand is strong



True, it doesn't mean the same applies to Liverpool. However, Henry doesn't have a history of buying teams then selling them for a quick buck. It's quite the opposite in fact, but only time will tell. It's safe to say we're all expecting some big changes this summer. Hopefully Henry has something planned.

Thundyr I have said this countless times whether the debt is on the club or a notional debt in the books of FSG its still a debt it does not go away unless John Henry clears it out of his own personal funds. Moving the debt to head office is an accounting trick thats all it still has to be serviced and FSG will measure the LFC return after the debt charge. So in effect its the same as if the debt was on the club the onlt difference with G&H is they did not have funds to run the club so were using LFC's cash flow to keep afloat.

Here are some quotes from a John Henry interview that appeared in the Daily Telegraph.

I have tried to post bits that I thought might shed some light.



What are your targets for this season? Is there a minimum requirement for Kenny Dalglish and his team?

Manchester United has done an incredible job of building a young, talented, deep squad. I watched a number of their pre-season matches and they seemed in top form even then. We've just begun to build and are years behind them so we don't expect this to be our year to win the Premier League. Manchester City seems to have unlimited spending restraint and are attempting to have all-star quality at each position - two deep. That will be hard to beat. This year our goal is to get back to Champions League. This is a club with a history in European competition and people throughout the world - at least our supporters - yearn for European nights. That's our first goal. But it won't be at all easy as there are 6 big clubs - among the best in Europe - fighting for four spots.

The worry seemed to be that we wouldn't spend. But we've been consistent, we intend to strengthen this club annually but that doesn't mean we will deficit spend. It's up to us to strengthen revenues. Only then will the club be strong enough to compete in Europe.

Has there been any progress on the prospects of a new stadium? Is building a new stadium a viable option in the current climate? Your group has indicated in the past that a ground-share with Everton is off the agenda - is this still the case?

I've seen a lot of talk recently about ground-sharing, but our position hasn't changed. There's no doubt that if a new stadium were to be built in Liverpool from a financial perspective - which is the major issue - a ground-share would be helpful for both clubs. But there doesn't seem to be any support for that from Red or Blue fans - at all. So how could that ever happen? We would love to expand Anfield, but there are enough local and regulatory issues to keep that avenue stalled for years with no assurances that once begun it would bear any fruit. If Anfield cannot be expanded a new stadium is a wonderful choice. But the fact is we already have 45,000 seats. If a new stadium is constructed with 60,000 seats you've spent an incredible sum of money to add just 15,000 seats. If the cost is £300m for an extra 15,000 seats, that doesn't make any sense at all. Liverpool isn't London, you can't charge £1 million for a long-term club seat. And concession revenues per seat aren't that much different at Emirates from Anfield. That's why the search is on currently for a naming-rights partner. And that could very well happen.

Read that Faz I agree entirely and the gap is getting bigger and bigger. If the new owners can't support the team and new stadium for our sakes and theirs they need to sell up and fast.