There is an assumption that FSG are putting their fingers in the ears and going ‘no’ to all centre back talk.
Personally I think if there was a stopgap signing available for a few million and Klopp felt they could help, FSG wouldn’t say no to that. Which makes me suspect that such a signing is not available.
A lot of hand-wringing about the impact of COVID on our financials (not forgetting that just about every other club in Europe is in an even worse position) but not so much on the impact of us missing out on CL football next season, which is now a possibility. That means loss of revenue, impacts on our ability to attract new players to the club, means players here now get unsettled. Going from the world’s best team to Europa League also-rans in just over a year will seem negligent.
We’re fans, not bean counters, so the right thing to do shouldn’t even be a matter of debate. The club employs people who do nothing else all day but identify players who might be suitable for us. The idea that there isn’t a single player out there who can’t be brought to the club without sending us over the edge into financial oblivion and who is a better option than poor Rhys Williams is laughable.
It would be a very hard sell to begin with and based on past history FSG would have to make a very quick 180. Selling Anfield’s naming rights would be a step too far. One of the reasons Liverpool fans associate themselves with the club is exactly because it isn’t another run of the mill ‘franchise’ with no history and tradition. Besides the fact that Anfield’s mystique has its own value in itself, LFC’s ties with the community and its fanbase are worth far more than any monetary gain. The one exception that I can see is if the very existence of the club were at stake.
Simply put we are not Man City playing at a ground called Etihad.
I suspect naming rights are also going to worth a fraction of what they were. There will be an enormous amount of caution in most markets about making major commitments of capital.
Hell no, Thunderdome of Arminius
i think youve nailed it here where as its looking likely its mostly a business decision but obviously a footballing decision underlies it as the right players seem to be tucked away and unavaliable.
the only variable is the way you can frame the footballing arguement.
yes, we can concentrate solely on the next three months and workout what that means if a new face is bought in now, or we can expand the cycle a bit, you can go a bit into the past and suggest this squad and football department has kept its (pre covid) powder dry for just these situations, and the effort and focus to get to the dominant position we WERE in deserves the business department to figure out how to support it, and you can cast your timeline further out than three months…as a playing squad, they MAY understand the implications of the finances, infact, they probably do, theyd probably even knock back a pay cut if it was put to them that the only way the squad would be improved is by sacrafices, but make no mistakes, sitting in that dressing room theres a real chance that these guys have a sense of betrayal(over dramatic word but i cant think of a better one just now) that with everything theyve done in the face of all the obstacles, that having to play with midfielders and teenagers at centre back is like the club not living up to thier end of the moral bargain.
ive also seen mentioned that any signing may not hit the ground running, which is true of any period we sign a player, so if we truely want a good run at NEXT season, and who knows how far away Gomez and VVD are, isnt it absolutely critical to upgrade the squad now to give us these next few months playing together?
let me finish off by saying some of the mudslinging in here hasnt been in line with the debate, qite a few sarcastic barbs and upfront insults have been thrown out there when it truely has been a pretty decent debate without extreme ignorance.
the next time we are faced with this level of discussion as a forum, lets all try to step back a bit, give each other the benefit of the doubt that we arent as stupid as being tried to make out and enjoy the opposite opinions.
FWIW, i cant see anything happening in the next few days, so despite my feeling that FSG could inject some capital and a club somewhere out there without or good fundamentals would be willing to play ball, i accept im probably wrong and obviously not all the ducks could be lined up.
lets get behind Williams…im 100% behind the #Williamsisbetteranyway movement now…
Yup. I don’t take money from the slavery trade. 
I expect the club to sell sponsorship of branding the players forehead or any skin that can be exposed. Should bring in the millions
Like for example, shampoo giants P&G can advertise on Fabinho’s head with the tagline “This could have been hair”.
Or when Firmino smiled, the word COLGATE can be on each individual tooth
Good Post Redbj…
At the end of the day, we all care about LFC and that is what matters most
That, and proving your right ( and ard) on the Internet.
A quick question, if this merger took place and if LFC float on the stock exchange, what does this mean?
Is it favorable for our club?
Has any football club been on the stock exchange?
I haven’t got a scooby-doo how the finance sector works
Man United
ManU is a traded stock. Good or bad is hard to say, because a lot will depend on majority control - which would remain with FSG.
FSG have said in the past that they are looking for the sort of intvestor/investment you are suggesting. And while it would be an attractive proposition for FSG, there are a number of factors which might make it less appealing for potential investors.
Firstly the new investors would have to be prepared to accept zero revenue return on their investment. There have been no dividends paid to date; there would be no guaranteed dividend payments in future. The only return/profit the new investors might expect on their investment would be a capital gain as and when the club was sold.
This then leads to the another potential problem; the new investors would have no say on any potential sale of the club. In your scenario, where an investment of £200 million acquired 10% shareholding, what if FSG subsequently decided to sell the club for less than £2 billion. The new investors would be left out of pocket, but would be powerless to prevent the sale.
Then there is the question of how might the new investors liquidate their shares / withdraw their capital, should the need / desire arise. They would be at the mercy of FSG with regards to whether they (FSG) would sanction a buy back, and the price they would be prepared to pay.
The new investors, as minority shareholders, would have little or no say on how their capital was utilised. FSG might simply use it to pay off the clubs existing loans, leaving very little for player acquisitions and / or further stadium developments. They would have little say, for example if FSG decided to sell additional shares through a rights issue, which would further dilute their shareholding without additional investment.
This brings us onto the final problem. The disparity in capital invested and the percentage of the shares held. The new shareholder would hold 10% of the allocated shares at a cost of £200 million. FSG would hold 90% of the allocated shares at a total cost of about £300 million (£230.351 million for the initial acquisition of the club and £68.889 million in additional equity). Would potential new investors find such unequal terms acceptable?
Obviously non of these are insurmountable obstacles. The club could change its articles of association to give greater protection to minority shareholders, or the club could go public with its shares traded on the stock exchange.
FSG might agree to increase its equity stake to match that of the new investment, and/or cancel the clubs debts by converting them into equity.
And so on, and so forth.
However, the fact that FSG have failed so far to find new investors / investment demonstrates that it is not a simple or straightforward option.
My sense is that the next two years finding that kind of investor will be akin to looking for unicorns. In the past three months, I have been involved in two deals. One is admittedly high-risk, but has a very large potential return somewhere in a five year horizon - dividends would be perhaps 7 years out. The other is frankly mediocre, it is a decent, well-run business, but shows limited growth potential. However, it managed to grow revenues by ~3% in 2020, and has stable positive cash flow.
A few years ago, people were looking for the first type and bored by the second. Not now.
I’m glad i’m not on Twitter cos BS spreading nonsense by lying cunts like this would be getting it both barrels off me.
He’s obviously trying to get clicks and rile up LFC fans who want a new CB and turn them against the clubs owners for not spending money,money suposedly made from a 4th kit that doesn’t exsist and to top it off,mix in a bit of more lying by basicaly saying the pandemic hasn’t kicked FSG in the clubs financial bollox and we have money to spend.
Someone give this guy a slap.
He’s probably not even a Liverpool fan, more likely a bitter.