Good post. I will try an answer. I don’t wish for FSG to leave as such. They are the ones who have said they are selling up, in whole or in part, however that pans out.
So from my perspective I don’t feel as though I have initiated the potential break up with owners. I’m not trying to oust them and I’m not a pitchfork in hand type of person. THEY are the ones who are making a move in the direction of decoupling from LFC.
OK, it might yet be partial investment, and we need to see what happens. But FSG have made the move to dilute or leave, hence the whole conversation.
My preference would be FSG staying in a rules based order, and being fully engaged to maximize the team’s prospects.
Two issues there - it is not a rules based order, and teams have trampled over weak financial parameters. The governing authorities have let us down, badly.
Second, the owners do not appear to be fully engaged. I’m not naive to think that they would be die hard lifelong reds, but they have stepped back. I don’t know when we last saw John Henry, and since the failed Super League he seems to have checked out. Even if I’m being unfair and he was never going to be more of a hands on owner, or at least present, then FSG did have a key man to do that. Mike Gordon. Stakeholder in FSG. Key representative between ownership group and footballing operation. Apparently a very clever fella. Seemed to have a great relationship with all the key people - Jurgen, Edwards, Ward.
But Gordon has stepped back from that in order to concentrate on investment and/or sale.
In addition to this, key people at the club are leaving. I don’t know the degree to which some of it is natural churn in a professional environment, but it feels like more than that.
So, my preference would be an engaged FSG, grabbing hold of it and making it happen, but it very much feels like they are in a holding pattern, and in top level football you are either building it up or going backwards. We have the feel of the latter, right now.
So… who would I rather have?
If there is a new owner or group who can give us the strengths of FSG, PLUS a little more willingness to invest into the squad - not via cheating or illicit means, but within the financial parameters set forth - then that’s the owner I would like to see.
Assuming FSG have decided to leave.
Beyond that, if it is someone like Qatar Investment Authority, I would not like it one bit, but I suspect I would hold my nose and continue to support the team.
I would hate what the game has become - for many reds that feeling has been growing over the years - but I would try to concentrate on supporting the team, and the manager, while not really thinking of the owners.
Arguably there would be a certain cognitive dissonance in that, but truthfully for me, I don’t know that I could walk away if we get an owner I disapprove of.
In many ways we already have that, with hedge fund managers buying a distressed asset and getting themselves a 10x payday, if they sell. We already have owners who culturally and politically are far removed from the ethos of much of the city of Liverpool. If they sold to someone like QIA it would be another step to widen that gap.
Anyway, I’m rambling!
Summary:
-
FSG have initiated the break up, or dilution
-
My preference would be for them to stay, in a rules based order
-
Failing that, someone like FSG, bringing their calm, bringing their business savvy, but with more willingness to invest in the squad - not cheating or doping, but going farther into the permissible parameters than the current owners.
-
If such a group does not emerge, and FSG decide to sell to someone like QIA, I wouldn’t like it, but would still probably support the team and manager, while disapproving of the owners.
