KopTalk

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 11 of 14 1 2 … 9 10 11 12 13 14
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,387
Under 23 Player
Under 23 Player
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,387
Originally Posted By: Stanley Park
The last two posters are correct the club is in the business of profits not winning trophies

The optimum profitability is probably being 5th or 6th and spending little keeping the wage bill down and milking the large fan base for as many years as they can.

It's been clear for some time that's their plan

To qualify for champions league would incur disprortionate expenditure relative to the revenue / risk algorithm



We may as well rename ourselves Newcastle United if we stick with these tw@ts.

Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,387
Under 23 Player
Under 23 Player
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,387
So having an Abramovich would be suicide would it?

I don't think so.

http://www.chelseafc.com/news-article/article/3597982/title/annual-financial-results-announced


Just goes to show what INVESTMENT can bring.

Last edited by TrueRed; 04/02/14 10:15 AM.
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628
Liverpool Legend
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628
Originally Posted By: cp1972
There is another theory.

All the other big clubs are spending ridiculous amounts on players and wages. LFC have been very busy trying bring in new income outside of gate receipts. The impact of FFP is based on three year accounts, which means those who pay inflated fees and wages now will have less to spend when as predicted prices fall

Simple ecomonics of supply and demand, we are already seeing this in Spain and Italy. I think Liverpool are trying to get the biggest impact from their finances. This maybe not be until next season. Simple fact is man city, PSG and Monaco are already being challenged by local clubs lobbying the FA.

Chelsea had to see mata to United because they needed to balance their spending, this is very new to the premier league. When would Chelsea sell such a good player to a direct rival? Things are changing and FSG better get their transfer and negotiations skills together as we potentially can be a big winner in the next 18mths.


Be nice to think so I wish I shared your optimism


IF YOU WANT TO BE HEARD SPEAK SOFTLY - BOB PAISLEY
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,886
Under 23 Player
Under 23 Player
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,886
Originally Posted By: Stanley Park
The last two posters are correct the club is in the business of profits not winning trophies

The optimum profitability is probably being 5th or 6th and spending little keeping the wage bill down and milking the large fan base for as many years as they can.

It's been clear for some time that's their plan

To qualify for champions league would incur disprortionate expenditure relative to the revenue / risk algorithm


Agree with that Stan, however with the deals being done we may get to a point where the commercial income allows Rogers a lot more money for players -granted you have to accept that FSG are here to reinvest and win trophies.

The self sustaining club bit is without question the model but there is an obvious conflict with the worldwide fan base who want it now not in 2 or 3 years.


Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.

George Washington
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,387
Under 23 Player
Under 23 Player
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,387
Originally Posted By: Top4
Originally Posted By: Stanley Park
The last two posters are correct the club is in the business of profits not winning trophies

The optimum profitability is probably being 5th or 6th and spending little keeping the wage bill down and milking the large fan base for as many years as they can.

It's been clear for some time that's their plan

To qualify for champions league would incur disprortionate expenditure relative to the revenue / risk algorithm


Agree with that Stan, however with the deals being done we may get to a point where the commercial income allows Rogers a lot more money for players -granted you have to accept that FSG are here to reinvest and win trophies.

The self sustaining club bit is without question the model but there is an obvious conflict with the worldwide fan base who want it now not in 2 or 3 years.


If there is any conflict with the worldwide fan base it's because they want success and trophies. Nothing to do with being self sustaining.

Trust me mate, being self sustaining will never win an argument in a pub when you are trying to defend your club against a team that has just won a trophy, title or champions league.

In this city, if we wanted to support a team that's self sustaining but win feck all then we'd jog across Stanley Park and start supporting the blue shyte!

At the end of it all, I just can not see us winning anything under FSG unless they invest. They could operate this way for the next 2 decades and we'll never have success (not unless the academy can produce an SG every season) and I think that when they eventually do go, all they will have cost us is a lot of wasted time.

At least when Hicks and co went, we had trophies, Istanbul and a 2nd place in the title race to look back on.

Last edited by TrueRed; 04/02/14 02:03 PM.
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,307
M
Under 23 Player
Under 23 Player
M Offline
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,307
Originally Posted By: TrueRed
Originally Posted By: Top4
Originally Posted By: Stanley Park
The last two posters are correct the club is in the business of profits not winning trophies

The optimum profitability is probably being 5th or 6th and spending little keeping the wage bill down and milking the large fan base for as many years as they can.

It's been clear for some time that's their plan

To qualify for champions league would incur disprortionate expenditure relative to the revenue / risk algorithm


Agree with that Stan, however with the deals being done we may get to a point where the commercial income allows Rogers a lot more money for players -granted you have to accept that FSG are here to reinvest and win trophies.

The self sustaining club bit is without question the model but there is an obvious conflict with the worldwide fan base who want it now not in 2 or 3 years.


If there is any conflict with the worldwide fan base it's because they want success and trophies. Nothing to do with being self sustaining.

Trust me mate, being self sustaining will never win an argument in a pub when you are trying to defend your club against a team that has just won a trophy, title or champions league.

In this city, if we wanted to support a team that's self sustaining but win feck all then we'd jog across Stanley Park and start supporting the blue shyte!

At the end of it all, I just can not see us winning anything under FSG unless they invest. They could operate this way for the next 2 decades and we'll never have success (not unless the academy can produce an SG every season) and I think that when they eventually do go, all they will have cost us is a lot of wasted time.

At least when Hicks and co went, we had trophies, Istanbul and a 2nd place in the title race to look back on.


what trophies would they be?

Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,387
Under 23 Player
Under 23 Player
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,387
Originally Posted By: Maxi88
Originally Posted By: TrueRed
Originally Posted By: Top4
Originally Posted By: Stanley Park
The last two posters are correct the club is in the business of profits not winning trophies

The optimum profitability is probably being 5th or 6th and spending little keeping the wage bill down and milking the large fan base for as many years as they can.

It's been clear for some time that's their plan

To qualify for champions league would incur disprortionate expenditure relative to the revenue / risk algorithm


Agree with that Stan, however with the deals being done we may get to a point where the commercial income allows Rogers a lot more money for players -granted you have to accept that FSG are here to reinvest and win trophies.

The self sustaining club bit is without question the model but there is an obvious conflict with the worldwide fan base who want it now not in 2 or 3 years.


If there is any conflict with the worldwide fan base it's because they want success and trophies. Nothing to do with being self sustaining.

Trust me mate, being self sustaining will never win an argument in a pub when you are trying to defend your club against a team that has just won a trophy, title or champions league.

In this city, if we wanted to support a team that's self sustaining but win feck all then we'd jog across Stanley Park and start supporting the blue shyte!

At the end of it all, I just can not see us winning anything under FSG unless they invest. They could operate this way for the next 2 decades and we'll never have success (not unless the academy can produce an SG every season) and I think that when they eventually do go, all they will have cost us is a lot of wasted time.

At least when Hicks and co went, we had trophies, Istanbul and a 2nd place in the title race to look back on.


what trophies would they be?


Oh dear, and I thought you knew where a fan.

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,307
M
Under 23 Player
Under 23 Player
M Offline
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,307
So no trophies?

Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,387
Under 23 Player
Under 23 Player
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,387
Originally Posted By: Maxi88
So no trophies?


Be careful, you're really in danger of making a d1ck of yourself.

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,307
M
Under 23 Player
Under 23 Player
M Offline
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,307
So you're saying that we did win trophies with H&G in charge?

Page 11 of 14 1 2 … 9 10 11 12 13 14

Moderated by  KopTalk Team 

Link Copied to Clipboard
ShoutChat
Comment Guidelines: Do post respectful and insightful comments. Don't flame, hate, spam.
Advertisements
Liverpool FC Discussion