|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628 |
I have been saying for years this club missed its chance ten to fifteen years ago it looks too far gone now. Sponsorship is dependent on exposure and we are no longer a champions league status club and. Look to be a long way from it. Tv money we are losing every year. We have a small stadium and prices are at their limit
Where do we go from here ?
IF YOU WANT TO BE HEARD SPEAK SOFTLY - BOB PAISLEY
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
Matchday revenue / ticket prices has been a big talking point for the last 4 or 5 weeks (although it seems a lot longer!). I've just found this article which shows the top 7 clubs in terms of matchday revenue: http://www.talksport.co.uk/magazine/feat...revealed-195721In a nutshell, it looks like this: 1st - Man Utd £99m 2nd - Arsenal £95m 3rd - Chelsea £78m 4th - LIVERPOOL £45m 5th - Tottenham £41m 6th - Newcastle £24m 7th - Man City £20m Of course there are other factors that will determine how much money we can spend to stay in line with FFP, but this shows how far off the pace we are in one aspect. On one hand, it's not unreasonable to think that if we're bringing in the 4th highest amount of money, we can spend the 4th highest amount.....and possibly finish 4th on a regular basis? On the other hand, how can we possibly ever expect to catch Man Utd or have a proper crack at winning the league again? FSG or no FSG, financial fair play looks like it will seriously restrict our chances of catching up. Every year, utd, arsenal and chelsea will be able to spend more money to strengthen their squads. Our small price increase and small capacity increase won't make a lot of difference - it might even be prohibitive. Only option is to increase the stadium capacity funded by preferably a Sugar Daddy and not through a bank loan as Arsenal did. FFP doesn't take into account infrastructure expenditure. It will still be difficult to match Manure, but we can get to second place in terms of available transfer funds as Arsenal still has to repay their loans. From there we might have a chance if we have a better manager than Manure, but, all this is not easy and it has to happen fast before that Chelsea's fan base overtakes us. Not sure FSG are the Sugar Daddies though.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 106
Under 16 Player
|
|
Under 16 Player
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 106 |
Fans have been saying for years that ticket prices are too high
Under the monetarist system heralded by those loveable rogues Ronny Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, the economies were modernised. Today is a great day to remember why you can not afford to go the game, and some of you who voted tory deserve it
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,446
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,446 |
if FSG do increase the stadium capacity to 65.000 most of the extra seats will go to corporate clients. this should increase our revenue to about the same level as arsenal.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628 |
if FSG do increase the stadium capacity to 65.000 most of the extra seats will go to corporate clients. this should increase our revenue to about the same level as arsenal. I don't believe they will increase to 65000 anflield is not big enough to redevelop that big. But if its done years into the future it will be too late anyway. In fact it's probably already too late.
IF YOU WANT TO BE HEARD SPEAK SOFTLY - BOB PAISLEY
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,595
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,595 |
Matchday revenue / ticket prices has been a big talking point for the last 4 or 5 weeks (although it seems a lot longer!). I've just found this article which shows the top 7 clubs in terms of matchday revenue: http://www.talksport.co.uk/magazine/feat...revealed-195721In a nutshell, it looks like this: 1st - Man Utd £99m 2nd - Arsenal £95m 3rd - Chelsea £78m 4th - LIVERPOOL £45m 5th - Tottenham £41m 6th - Newcastle £24m 7th - Man City £20m Of course there are other factors that will determine how much money we can spend to stay in line with FFP, but this shows how far off the pace we are in one aspect. On one hand, it's not unreasonable to think that if we're bringing in the 4th highest amount of money, we can spend the 4th highest amount.....and possibly finish 4th on a regular basis? On the other hand, how can we possibly ever expect to catch Man Utd or have a proper crack at winning the league again? FSG or no FSG, financial fair play looks like it will seriously restrict our chances of catching up. Every year, utd, arsenal and chelsea will be able to spend more money to strengthen their squads. Our small price increase and small capacity increase won't make a lot of difference - it might even be prohibitive. Good post there Carheex, If the figures are correct it shows just how foolhardy FSG plans are regarding the redevelopment of Anfield to a mere 60,000 seats. If we're not to become permanent underdogs to United, Arsenal, City, etc. we have to compete on the stadia front, as well as on all other fronts. If Anfield cannot be redeveloped to 75.000 seats, we need to opt for a new stadium.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
Matchday revenue / ticket prices has been a big talking point for the last 4 or 5 weeks (although it seems a lot longer!). I've just found this article which shows the top 7 clubs in terms of matchday revenue: http://www.talksport.co.uk/magazine/feat...revealed-195721In a nutshell, it looks like this: 1st - Man Utd £99m 2nd - Arsenal £95m 3rd - Chelsea £78m 4th - LIVERPOOL £45m 5th - Tottenham £41m 6th - Newcastle £24m 7th - Man City £20m Of course there are other factors that will determine how much money we can spend to stay in line with FFP, but this shows how far off the pace we are in one aspect. On one hand, it's not unreasonable to think that if we're bringing in the 4th highest amount of money, we can spend the 4th highest amount.....and possibly finish 4th on a regular basis? On the other hand, how can we possibly ever expect to catch Man Utd or have a proper crack at winning the league again? FSG or no FSG, financial fair play looks like it will seriously restrict our chances of catching up. Every year, utd, arsenal and chelsea will be able to spend more money to strengthen their squads. Our small price increase and small capacity increase won't make a lot of difference - it might even be prohibitive. how did they get the utd figs i did some quick sums = 77'000 per game at say 50 quid = 3'850'000 quid so how many games are they working on 17 prem games ? thats 65'450'000 that only leaves another 9-10 games to get to 99mil so i think that fig would be bigger given there in cl and usually stay in fa and league cups a few rounds at least! if your trying to justify raising tickets at anfield balony and if you say no a bigger ground that will raise prices too football tickets are a rort they all need to go down stop screwing fans! there are better ways! from organisations that can and will coff up extra if prodded enough ive said this before FSG has a good record of increasing sponsorship/advertising revenues, why do you think that what you are suggesting has not been looked into yet? I did tell you that before, why don't you send your suggestions to LFC's marketing unit or/and Ian Ayre, it might be helpful?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628 |
Annfield NO chance of developing Anfield to 75,000 we would do well with todays elf and safety to get to 55,000.
The club has become a complete joke.
IF YOU WANT TO BE HEARD SPEAK SOFTLY - BOB PAISLEY
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
just to clarify, if you think fans would be ok with price rises, why wouldn't sponsors/advertisers be happy to pay more for more exposure ? at least they get cash returns out of it, unlike the fans Who tells you that FSG is not trying to maximise this revenue as well?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 583
Under 18 Player
|
|
Under 18 Player
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 583 |
I have been saying for years this club missed its chance ten to fifteen years ago it looks too far gone now. Sponsorship is dependent on exposure and we are no longer a champions league status club and. Look to be a long way from it. Tv money we are losing every year. We have a small stadium and prices are at their limit
Where do we go from here ? The awkward moment when in fact were only 8 points away from been a Champions League club, if we beat Arsenal, City, West Ham and Reading as we *should* have, were right in the mix, lets not be to dramatic.
|
|
|
|
|
