|
|
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,054
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,054 |
Moores sold (or sold out) because he said he wanted someone that could invest in lfc.
He could have done what fsg are doing if he had thought it through before hicks n gillete bought the club.
Revenue up etc...all good but the real investment is break even.
No sentiment...for every pound spent on a player they will have firstly recouped at least £1.50 before doing so.
I also question alot of these so called 40m deals they do for unheard of players...seem over inflated all the time.
No Moores sold because he made good money and if he wanted somebody to invest, he would have sold to the Dubai Sheik Al Makhtoom albeit a little bit cheaper but a deal already negotiated. I think Moores realised with the arrival of Abramovich he could not compete with that level of investment, FSG are now ploughing money into the club, but this is based on a huge TV deal, coroprate and sponsorship deals, clubs did not get these revenues when Moores was in charge.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
Moores sold (or sold out) because he said he wanted someone that could invest in lfc.
He could have done what fsg are doing if he had thought it through before hicks n gillete bought the club.
Revenue up etc...all good but the real investment is break even.
No sentiment...for every pound spent on a player they will have firstly recouped at least £1.50 before doing so.
I also question alot of these so called 40m deals they do for unheard of players...seem over inflated all the time.
No Moores sold because he made good money and if he wanted somebody to invest, he would have sold to the Dubai Sheik Al Makhtoom albeit a little bit cheaper but a deal already negotiated. I think Moores realised with the arrival of Abramovich he could not compete with that level of investment, FSG are now ploughing money into the club, but this is based on a huge TV deal, coroprate and sponsorship deals, clubs did not get these revenues when Moores was in charge. Commercially he could definitely have done better and should have sold to DIC
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,054
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,054 |
Moores sold (or sold out) because he said he wanted someone that could invest in lfc.
He could have done what fsg are doing if he had thought it through before hicks n gillete bought the club.
Revenue up etc...all good but the real investment is break even.
No sentiment...for every pound spent on a player they will have firstly recouped at least £1.50 before doing so.
I also question alot of these so called 40m deals they do for unheard of players...seem over inflated all the time.
No Moores sold because he made good money and if he wanted somebody to invest, he would have sold to the Dubai Sheik Al Makhtoom albeit a little bit cheaper but a deal already negotiated. I think Moores realised with the arrival of Abramovich he could not compete with that level of investment, FSG are now ploughing money into the club, but this is based on a huge TV deal, coroprate and sponsorship deals, clubs did not get these revenues when Moores was in charge. Commercially he could definitely have done better and should have sold to DIC In hindsight he should have sold to DIC, but at the time there were concerns over DIC wanting to buy us to sell-on, letters emerged showing they had a short term plan, no idea how he sold to H&G. I was surprised DIC never came in for us in 2010 when FSG bought us, they had been closing to buying H&G out a few times in the years before.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564 |
Moores was a red at heart, but he is more responsible for us falling behind than any other. He sold us H&G, and that was after 25 years of decline. When he took over in 1991, we were the undisputed most successful and powerful club in the country. And within 5 years we But if you read the quotes of anyone who worked with him, he wasn't bothered with the details of running the club. He liked having his pressbox and having access to the changing rooms, but didn't have a clue about running the club or running a business. He got the job because his family was wealthy and his family previously owned the club. The actual selection of managers aside, the timing and execution of his appointments were bizarre, awkward, and we constantly behaved like an amateur dinosaur, out of our depth. I give him a pass on Souness' appointment, with the Dalglish situation forced by Hillsborough and out of his control. Souness at least tried to drag us into the modern era, but he fought with Souness on every turn, which lead to an incoherent leadership that went out with a wimper.
It gets better with Roy Evans, but Mores can't decide if it's good enough or not and tries to make Houlier joint manager with him. After a little while of that, Evans quits.
And with Houlier, he drags his feet because LFC had never sacked a manager. So he flirts with Benitez and undermines everything until Ged feels the pressure and resigns.
And he shows the same lack of initiative or understanding when picking a successor. He completely failed his due diligence on them.
This was a man out of touch with reality, who as a 21st century businessman admitted to no owning a computer and not having any idea how to use one. Our club site functioned like it was manufactuered in the late 70s, and THIS site existed before it did. While Manchester United was becoming a global fan and reaching out to fans all over the world, we are turning people away from touring Anfield because of our outdated booking system, even after the miracle at Istanbul.
Mores was never up to the job. And fans celebrated in the streets when he sold up.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628 |
Moores was a red at heart, but he is more responsible for us falling behind than any other. He sold us H&G, and that was after 25 years of decline. When he took over in 1991, we were the undisputed most successful and powerful club in the country. And within 5 years we But if you read the quotes of anyone who worked with him, he wasn't bothered with the details of running the club. He liked having his pressbox and having access to the changing rooms, but didn't have a clue about running the club or running a business. He got the job because his family was wealthy and his family previously owned the club. The actual selection of managers aside, the timing and execution of his appointments were bizarre, awkward, and we constantly behaved like an amateur dinosaur, out of our depth. I give him a pass on Souness' appointment, with the Dalglish situation forced by Hillsborough and out of his control. Souness at least tried to drag us into the modern era, but he fought with Souness on every turn, which lead to an incoherent leadership that went out with a wimper.
It gets better with Roy Evans, but Mores can't decide if it's good enough or not and tries to make Houlier joint manager with him. After a little while of that, Evans quits.
And with Houlier, he drags his feet because LFC had never sacked a manager. So he flirts with Benitez and undermines everything until Ged feels the pressure and resigns.
And he shows the same lack of initiative or understanding when picking a successor. He completely failed his due diligence on them.
This was a man out of touch with reality, who as a 21st century businessman admitted to no owning a computer and not having any idea how to use one. Our club site functioned like it was manufactuered in the late 70s, and THIS site existed before it did. While Manchester United was becoming a global fan and reaching out to fans all over the world, we are turning people away from touring Anfield because of our outdated booking system, even after the miracle at Istanbul.
Mores was never up to the job. And fans celebrated in the streets when he sold up. I would agree with most of that except your last sentence when did that happen ? Fans celebrating in the streets ? My recollection people were quietly glad when he went for all the reasons you gave but Moores cared for the club and was a fan. He was a lousy businessman or rather he was just a rich boy who had grown into wealth. He was probably a decent chairman in another age but football changed. I am no fan of Moores but it's worth noting he financed three new stands while we are getting excited over henrys one. I am not disagreeing with you just setting some perspective
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 |
Moores was a red at heart, but he is more responsible for us falling behind than any other. He sold us H&G, and that was after 25 years of decline. When he took over in 1991, we were the undisputed most successful and powerful club in the country. And within 5 years we But if you read the quotes of anyone who worked with him, he wasn't bothered with the details of running the club. He liked having his pressbox and having access to the changing rooms, but didn't have a clue about running the club or running a business. He got the job because his family was wealthy and his family previously owned the club. The actual selection of managers aside, the timing and execution of his appointments were bizarre, awkward, and we constantly behaved like an amateur dinosaur, out of our depth. I give him a pass on Souness' appointment, with the Dalglish situation forced by Hillsborough and out of his control. Souness at least tried to drag us into the modern era, but he fought with Souness on every turn, which lead to an incoherent leadership that went out with a wimper.
It gets better with Roy Evans, but Mores can't decide if it's good enough or not and tries to make Houlier joint manager with him. After a little while of that, Evans quits.
And with Houlier, he drags his feet because LFC had never sacked a manager. So he flirts with Benitez and undermines everything until Ged feels the pressure and resigns.
And he shows the same lack of initiative or understanding when picking a successor. He completely failed his due diligence on them.
This was a man out of touch with reality, who as a 21st century businessman admitted to no owning a computer and not having any idea how to use one. Our club site functioned like it was manufactuered in the late 70s, and THIS site existed before it did. While Manchester United was becoming a global fan and reaching out to fans all over the world, we are turning people away from touring Anfield because of our outdated booking system, even after the miracle at Istanbul.
Mores was never up to the job. And fans celebrated in the streets when he sold up. Can't argue with much of that red, other than to say you make a good case for keeping up with the ever present change in the marketplace - if you're standing still you're going backward, and that's what happened. I'd say the same is happening now with regard to infrastructural development - unless one considers a Mickey Mouse tart of an outdated stadium as progress! I certainly don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564 |
Moores was a red at heart, but he is more responsible for us falling behind than any other. He sold us H&G, and that was after 25 years of decline. When he took over in 1991, we were the undisputed most successful and powerful club in the country. And within 5 years we But if you read the quotes of anyone who worked with him, he wasn't bothered with the details of running the club. He liked having his pressbox and having access to the changing rooms, but didn't have a clue about running the club or running a business. He got the job because his family was wealthy and his family previously owned the club. The actual selection of managers aside, the timing and execution of his appointments were bizarre, awkward, and we constantly behaved like an amateur dinosaur, out of our depth. I give him a pass on Souness' appointment, with the Dalglish situation forced by Hillsborough and out of his control. Souness at least tried to drag us into the modern era, but he fought with Souness on every turn, which lead to an incoherent leadership that went out with a wimper.
It gets better with Roy Evans, but Mores can't decide if it's good enough or not and tries to make Houlier joint manager with him. After a little while of that, Evans quits.
And with Houlier, he drags his feet because LFC had never sacked a manager. So he flirts with Benitez and undermines everything until Ged feels the pressure and resigns.
And he shows the same lack of initiative or understanding when picking a successor. He completely failed his due diligence on them.
This was a man out of touch with reality, who as a 21st century businessman admitted to no owning a computer and not having any idea how to use one. Our club site functioned like it was manufactuered in the late 70s, and THIS site existed before it did. While Manchester United was becoming a global fan and reaching out to fans all over the world, we are turning people away from touring Anfield because of our outdated booking system, even after the miracle at Istanbul.
Mores was never up to the job. And fans celebrated in the streets when he sold up. Can't argue with much of that red, other than to say you make a good case for keeping up with the ever present change in the marketplace - if you're standing still you're going backward, and that's what happened. I'd say the same is happening now with regard to infrastructural development - unless one considers a Mickey Mouse tart of an outdated stadium as progress! I certainly don't. I call moving from the 15th richest club in the world to the 8th progress. I call moving from the 50th ranked club in Europe to the top 20 progress. I call increasing our revenue by 100 million and majorly slashing our debt progress. I call setting records on fees paid by centre halves and keepers, and watching that immediately give us the tightest defense in England progress. So we didn't get a shiny new stadium, fair enough, but our capacity is the third largest in the country, and we've seen new stadium build severely hinder West Ham, Arsenal and Spurs. The stadium is only a piece of the equation though. Getting tunnel vision on that and only that is dinosaur logic.
Last edited by redordead13; 14/11/18 05:56 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,595
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,595 |
Moores was a red at heart, but he is more responsible for us falling behind than any other. He sold us H&G, and that was after 25 years of decline. When he took over in 1991, we were the undisputed most successful and powerful club in the country. And within 5 years we But if you read the quotes of anyone who worked with him, he wasn't bothered with the details of running the club. He liked having his pressbox and having access to the changing rooms, but didn't have a clue about running the club or running a business. He got the job because his family was wealthy and his family previously owned the club. The actual selection of managers aside, the timing and execution of his appointments were bizarre, awkward, and we constantly behaved like an amateur dinosaur, out of our depth. I give him a pass on Souness' appointment, with the Dalglish situation forced by Hillsborough and out of his control. Souness at least tried to drag us into the modern era, but he fought with Souness on every turn, which lead to an incoherent leadership that went out with a wimper.
It gets better with Roy Evans, but Mores can't decide if it's good enough or not and tries to make Houlier joint manager with him. After a little while of that, Evans quits.
And with Houlier, he drags his feet because LFC had never sacked a manager. So he flirts with Benitez and undermines everything until Ged feels the pressure and resigns.
And he shows the same lack of initiative or understanding when picking a successor. He completely failed his due diligence on them.
This was a man out of touch with reality, who as a 21st century businessman admitted to no owning a computer and not having any idea how to use one. Our club site functioned like it was manufactuered in the late 70s, and THIS site existed before it did. While Manchester United was becoming a global fan and reaching out to fans all over the world, we are turning people away from touring Anfield because of our outdated booking system, even after the miracle at Istanbul.
Mores was never up to the job. And fans celebrated in the streets when he sold up. Can't argue with much of that red, other than to say you make a good case for keeping up with the ever present change in the marketplace - if you're standing still you're going backward, and that's what happened. I'd say the same is happening now with regard to infrastructural development - unless one considers a Mickey Mouse tart of an outdated stadium as progress! I certainly don't. I call moving from the 15th richest club in the world to the 8th progress. I call moving from the 50th ranked club in Europe to the top 20 progress. I call increasing our revenue by 100 million and majorly slashing our debt progress. I call setting records on fees paid by centre halves and keepers, and watching that immediately give us the tightest defense in England progress. So we didn't get a shiny new stadium, fair enough, but our capacity is the third largest in the country, and we've seen new stadium build severely hinder West Ham, Arsenal and Spurs. The stadium is only a piece of the equation though. Getting tunnel vision on that and only that is dinosaur logic. Yeah they're good on the financials red, and I've always given them credit for that. However that's all short term progress, which is their main focus, and something they'll profit from when they cash in. Infrastructural development, on the other hand is longterm, and will benefit both the club and the city when they're long gone.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564 |
Moores was a red at heart, but he is more responsible for us falling behind than any other. He sold us H&G, and that was after 25 years of decline. When he took over in 1991, we were the undisputed most successful and powerful club in the country. And within 5 years we But if you read the quotes of anyone who worked with him, he wasn't bothered with the details of running the club. He liked having his pressbox and having access to the changing rooms, but didn't have a clue about running the club or running a business. He got the job because his family was wealthy and his family previously owned the club. The actual selection of managers aside, the timing and execution of his appointments were bizarre, awkward, and we constantly behaved like an amateur dinosaur, out of our depth. I give him a pass on Souness' appointment, with the Dalglish situation forced by Hillsborough and out of his control. Souness at least tried to drag us into the modern era, but he fought with Souness on every turn, which lead to an incoherent leadership that went out with a wimper.
It gets better with Roy Evans, but Mores can't decide if it's good enough or not and tries to make Houlier joint manager with him. After a little while of that, Evans quits.
And with Houlier, he drags his feet because LFC had never sacked a manager. So he flirts with Benitez and undermines everything until Ged feels the pressure and resigns.
And he shows the same lack of initiative or understanding when picking a successor. He completely failed his due diligence on them.
This was a man out of touch with reality, who as a 21st century businessman admitted to no owning a computer and not having any idea how to use one. Our club site functioned like it was manufactuered in the late 70s, and THIS site existed before it did. While Manchester United was becoming a global fan and reaching out to fans all over the world, we are turning people away from touring Anfield because of our outdated booking system, even after the miracle at Istanbul.
Mores was never up to the job. And fans celebrated in the streets when he sold up. Can't argue with much of that red, other than to say you make a good case for keeping up with the ever present change in the marketplace - if you're standing still you're going backward, and that's what happened. I'd say the same is happening now with regard to infrastructural development - unless one considers a Mickey Mouse tart of an outdated stadium as progress! I certainly don't. I call moving from the 15th richest club in the world to the 8th progress. I call moving from the 50th ranked club in Europe to the top 20 progress. I call increasing our revenue by 100 million and majorly slashing our debt progress. I call setting records on fees paid by centre halves and keepers, and watching that immediately give us the tightest defense in England progress. So we didn't get a shiny new stadium, fair enough, but our capacity is the third largest in the country, and we've seen new stadium build severely hinder West Ham, Arsenal and Spurs. The stadium is only a piece of the equation though. Getting tunnel vision on that and only that is dinosaur logic. Yeah they're good on the financials red, and I've always given them credit for that. However that's all short term progress, which is their main focus, and something they'll profit from when they cash in. Infrastructural development, on the other hand is longterm, and will benefit both the club and the city when they're long gone. They've redeveloped the main stand and they've been working on the Anfield Road end as well, and our stadium revenue has increased without increasing prices. It is now the 3rd highest capacity in the country. More importantly, they've completely redeveloped Kirkby to house both teams and turned it into one of the most complete and modern training facilities in the world. I don't want a new stadium if it means we become unable to compete for transfers like Arsenal or Spurs.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628 |
FSG Have improved things but they are marginal at an era when big changes were needed. And increasing revenue is hardly an achievement with the TV money poring into the premiership all clubs revenue has soared
IF YOU WANT TO BE HEARD SPEAK SOFTLY - BOB PAISLEY
|
|
|
|
|
