I’m sure that a mixed bag of genders/ethnicities/ different political persuasions would ‘protest’ if the wrong sort of owners were touted for our club.
What form of protest that would take is another thing? We’ve had posters saying they’d walk away from supporting the team. Others may actually want to turn up at the ground with placards etc?
Because of the eclectic mix to our fan base no owner will ever be ‘perfect’ for everyone. It’s just a matter of how ‘imperfect’ they are?
1 Like
I think there is one overriding principle which is that everyone should be able to turn up and enjoy the match without fear of prejudice. Of course, there will be people who have prejudices against particular minorities but they need to keep that to themselves and leave it at the turnstiles or, preferably, as soon as they stick that red scarf around their neck.
FSG’s management have generally done a decent job of encouraging that inclusivity. They have reached out to people of racial or religious minorities and to disabled and LGBT fans who may feel otherwise excluded.
What would concern me is whether a new owner would share that outlook. We saw during the World Cup in Qatar that ground staff were doing things like removing a rainbow coloured bucket hat from a Welsh fan. That very much sends out the message that not everyone is welcome.
Any new owner would need to accept that the club is based in the City of Liverpool and those are the cultural norms that they are buying into - not those of the investor’s culture.
6 Likes
Exactly right. 
2 Likes
A bit of perspective really. FSG have done multiple things wrong but you can’t say they haven’t done us right for the most part…
233mil to 701.7mil in 10 years is staggering. That’s a 468mil increase.
1 Like
It’s not just the fact we’re Liverpool. Any owner’s conduct through the club would have to comport with current UK law. Banning gay people or blue people would be met with far more than protests.
2 Likes
Good post and I just want to highlight this part, as it is crucial.
If they are trying to bend fans to their persuasion, it isn’t reasonable.
1 Like
Just want to say our revenues are stunning. Well done FSG. It adds fuel to the argument that we can be self sustaining and continue to compete at the top.
Mind you, Man City being the number one in revenue, while doing it with a much smaller fan base and fake companies, adds fuel to the other side of the argument, and at that point it is understandable if FSG see elite football as crooked and thus they want out.
2 Likes
Nothing like that would happen anyway. It would defeat the point of sportwashing.
It’s why the Saudi ownership group will do nothing about Newcastle fans jumping about with bottles of beer whilst holding the Saudi flag.
2 Likes
That’s quite an interesting double edged sword when you think about it. Must REALLY piss them off.
1 Like
Thats why I say we’re 2nd in the league, they don’t count.
1 Like
Yeah, to see them nr. 1 in there is a total fallacy. And yet no-one calls them out for what they are… 
They should officially rename their smallish club Manchester Cheaters.
But our wages are incentivised. Last season we played 63 games. Won 2 cups, final of the other 2nd in the league.
I don’t think we’ll be paying as much this year.
2 Likes
I’m not having that!
Citeh’s finances are all legit. Just ask Mrs CDO and my mate Bobbeh.
I’d be asking all the fans at their weekly sold out games
The only ones you’ll find will be the away fans 
1 Like
In 2010, Liverpool Football Club was on the brink of administration and several groups made bids to purchase the club. The most notable bidders were:
- New England Sports Ventures (later renamed Fenway Sports Group), which was led by John W. Henry and ultimately succeeded in purchasing the club.
- Singapore businessman Peter Lim.
- Chinese businessman Kenny Huang.
- Dubai International Capital (DIC), which had previously been in talks to purchase the club in 2007.
Mill Financial , a US hedge fund, were also in with a bid
Ambani was also after us in 2010?
They were being linked around the time but how many of them actually submitted a bid and were genuine?
Kenny Huang lied about his financial backing.
Lim says he submitted two bids which would have been higher than FSG’s - However, these were on the day of the court case and after the deadline for bids had passed so the bank had already signed a deal with FSG. At the time he owned several Man Utd theme bars not exactly something that would endear him to those at the club handling the sale and his time at Valencia pretty much suggest we dodged a bullet with him.
I don’t remember DIC being serious about buying LFC by this time. One of the family may have wanted to buy in but I don’t think he had the rest of the organisation behind them and given the state of the global economy and oil prices at the time I’m not sure they were in a position to go ahead with an offer.
1 Like
Ambani has been linked but I don’t recall him making an actual bid.
Mill financial were too closely linked to Hicks weren’t they?
I’m not really sure what this little tangent is about?
FSG got us, and they did well, turning their 300M acquisition into a 3Billion+ asset.
John Henry didn’t play centre forward for us though. Instead, he assembled a great team. Yes, some mistakes were made - like everyone, in all walks of life - but FSG have done well here.
Mike Gordon was the FSG man with the footballing knowledge, and the main link from the club to FSG. Beyond that, we became more professional at every level of the club - analytics, recruitment, income, etc.
Of course FSG benefitted from the opportunity that buying Liverpool at that time presented. But it wasn’t as simple as just having the money. They have done very well from owning LFC, and in turn, we have done well from having them as owners.
Where it all goes next is up for grabs.
5 Likes