Interesting discussion. I’m broadly with @AnfieldRdDreamer on most of this and I do remember from TIA him being a staunch defender of the owners so his views shouldn’t be easily dismissed. FSG did much better in the summer transfer window than I expected them to, bar getting a CB, but I expect there was a trade off made there i.e. you can have a CB or Thiago but not both, or a variation on that. That’s OK. I’m sure JK is used to that by now. Jota was a great buy. Had he not been injured in a meaningless game I doubt we’d have so much trouble scoring goals lately. No one was complaining about Thiago and Tsimakis is a decent understudy at LB.
The issue with FSG is their lack of flexibility. We should have had a CB lined up ready to go on Jan 1st. Were they really happy to gamble on Matip for the rest of the season? They were lucky he was injured 2 days before the end of the transfer window and not one day after because we’d have been totally fucked. It was inevitable he’d be injured at some stage. I’m not convinced that Ben Davies was ever a serious attempt to plug the CB gap. More like someone we thought we could pick up cheap and make a bit of money on long term.
So, yes, they’ve done a lot of good and there are far worse out there but as ARD points out everything has been achieved on a very low risk basis and has relied heavily on the genius of JK and Edwards. You find out how good your leaders are in a crisis, not when everything is going well and this season, in our first real crisis for five years, they’ve been found wanting.
Neither you, nor I have any idea what Liverpool might sell for if it came onto the market. I have already shown that Forbes valuations have little or no credibility. So, on what do you base your valuation?
The only value that counts, the only value that represents reality, is the value a buyer places on the asset and is prepared to pay when push comes to shove.
You might believe your asset has doubled in value, but unless you can find a buyer ready and willing to match your valuation, it means nothing.
And just how many individuals / institutions do you think there are that have >£1 billion going spare, that they / it are prepared to invest in an asset with no track record or prospects of generating a return on investment?
Of course an assets value can never be true until it’s crystalised, but, I’m sure when financing the new training ground the financiers weren’t using a figure of 10 quid as a value for the club.
As for people with the ability to finance a billion dollar purchase… I don’t think that field has thinned out in recent times to be honest…
Harsh words. You seem to forget that they expanded the main stand as well, and built a brand-new training facility, uniting Melwood and Kirkby on their way. Both things were deemed impossible under the two previous ownerships.
Concerning squad reinforcement: as Mascot said, you tend to separate Klopp and his staff from the owners. That contradicts everything we’ve heard since five years about the way they work together. I’m quite sure that Klopp would have walked since long if fsg weren’t fully backing him. He’s not the man to stay long if feeling betrayed.
Stay assured, Klopp and fsg are one single thing, and that is the club LFC. There are no divisions at all, at least not as far as anyone outside the inner circles of the club can tell. Everything coming out of these inner circles confirms a strong unity, and everyone pulling on the same rope.
So, let’s not make things up artificially, just because of a few defeats due to the worst injury jinx ever seen. It’s really not worth it.
Have they? For me, the jury is still out. However, as I wrote in my previous post, next summer will be interesting.
Normally I would agree except for the fact that the club’s income has plummeted and that on the 1st of January the team was a few days removed from putting 7 past Crystal Palace.
Not everyone will agree but surely it’s obvious that they were justified to at least try to make it work with whomever was available?
As I’ve said in previous posts I’m usually labelled as “Pro FSG”, for a long time I was even accused of being a plant. And 80-90% of what they have done has been really stellar work, or at least good. But everything apart from what was pointed out above has been from LFC revenue and everything that has been achieved since 2014. Build up the revenue via internal work and then look to use that revenue in the best possible way.
Yes that’s great, its admirable, but every now and again on squad building they’ve been unambitious and flat. Reactive to easily predictable problems (relying on Matip availability for half a season when we arguably already needed a CB as a classic example).
Recently, due to absolutely incredible over achieving by Klopp and Edwards (100% perfect appointments by FSG), we’ve found ourselves hitting the top pinnacle of the pyramid. There’s been a window of opportunity there to really nail our colours to the mast and own that. Unlike City and even Chelsea we are a club that can legitimately be amongst those very elite clubs. We start having sustainable success on the pitch and we enter the revenue streams of Real Madrid, Barcelona and United Territory.
There was a window, who knows how long but at least 2 summers and 2 winters where we could have siezed the initiative. Put some significant moves down and fixed what deficiencies existed in the squad. What we did this summer was great work but well overdue by several seasons. It could have been done the year before when we made more in sales than spent on purchases.
It would have meant FSG telling Klopp and the recruitment team in 2019 “hey we know it isn’t a gamble, you’ve proven yourselves, do what ever business you need/want to and if needed next year we will find a way to finance what you want then”! Instead of Klopp and the guys feeling like they need to spread things out and make every penny count.
I just don’t see how the finances made available to us since the CL win and the timing this winter can be seen as anything other than a failure to support the sporting project. Yes this summer and winter plans and finances had to be adjusted to the new situation but I haven’t actually got a problem with the AMOUNT that was spent this summer or the amount that was bid on the likes of Caleta-Car this winter.
What my problem is is the lack of being proactive. The lack of flexibility provided to the recruitment team. Its clear that Klopps frustration showed through this January with the constraints they were operating under admitting he’d made recommendations that the people who make the decisions weren’t listening to. It took the (predictable) Matip injury for them to listen and change their minds.
We got to the top of the hill and right when we needed to kick on we made a profit on squad building instead. We were still rolling, it took awhile to start faltering, and maybe without winning the league so early last season we wouldn’t have faltered so hard towards the end. And maybe without unprecedented injuries this season we’d still be rolling along at the top of the league.
But I just think what we’ve seen since the restart is kind of predictable due to the reactive nature and financial restrictions we operate under, all that’s happened is its happened quicker and harder because of what has happened.
For this situation Paisley was the best manager or the set up when he was manager was the best or whatever. He knew that you needed to make the improvements when you were at your strongest. Not wait till things had started faltering and then try and fix them when you’re stumbling along.
I get your arguments, but how do you know that it wasn’t Klopp who told the fsg guys that he was happy with the squad and wanted to bring them forwards further? I remember reading an interview during which he said that they were a tight-knit group and wanted to continue enjoying being together and fighting for further trophies. If I remember well, that was during the summer 2019 you refer to.
To be fair, we wouldn’t have this discussion if our injury levels had more or less stayed the same than during the two previous seasons. What has hit us this season is…
No, I don’t think they were justified. VVD and Gomez out for the season. Matip unable to go 2 games in a row without getting injured. Fabinho our best DM playing every single game because there are no rotation options. They were seriously expecting Matip to stay fit for the remainder of the season?
It was obvious we needed another CB. They were expecting too much of JK. Yes, up until Jan 1st we were doing OK but the injuries were piling up. All the lights should have been flashing red, but they only seemed to notice there was a problem when Matip was ruled out of the season. Two days before the end of the window. The wheels were already coming off by then. No, sorry, I think they failed miserably on this one.
I’m not missing any problem mate,i know exactly where you’re coming from and totally understand what you’re saying (i’d agree with you if we were Man city rich,but we are not), the point is,you’re looking at us being able to compete and spend money like our competitors or spend cash from future revenues by putting the club in some sort of debt,when FSG don’t work like that.
We need to work like this because It’s that type of thinking outside the box and playing it clever in the transfer market,thats got our first 11 in place and where we are today,making us able to compete and even beat the cash rich clubs like United,Chelsea and City,with the added bonus of having to work around FFP.
You talk about us being among the elite clubs and in the revenue streams of United,Real and Barca but what your forgetting is,those figures were only starting to take off properly after the CL win and increasing last year.Now all that money made,saved and not spent is gone,due to covid,we never had 2 summers or 2 winter windows to sieze the inititive and make significant moves to build our squad.
We don’t have to be Man City rich. Why are the only options people seem to accept A what we do (£8 million net spend in two years) and B what City do (£180 million net spend in the two years)? There’s a whole load of activity between those two extremes.
The season before and season of 2019 between them we declared a combined pre tax profit of £167m. That includes operating costs and payments towards infrastructure work and the academy that are freebies with FFP and under FFP you are allowed to make losses if the owners cover them.
We had a huge opportunity to kick on. We didn’t take it. We saved for tomorrow. As can always happen tomorrow never came.
You know, given how keen you are to put a 20/20 hindsight spin on this and ignore the devastating impact a global pandemic has had on our form, plans, revenues etc I propose bookmarking your posts.
Something tells me that in a year to 18 months time, when clubs who haven’t been as fiscally prudent as ours, start falling into significant crisis and potentially going under…these criticisms of FSG are going to come across fairly badly.
I understand the point you are making - in normal times you’d absolutely want to strengthen whilst you are strong. That’s the time to keep adding fresh players, when you are financially strong and where you are at your most attractive to potential targets due to your onfield success and your ability to reward them proportionately. But these are not normal times. They haven’t been for over 12 months.
Now you have chosen to focus on the lack of spending in 2019. There is more than a hint of convenience in doing so because you know that any criticism of what we have spent since the pandemic dropped would be considered unreasonable in the circumstances. So you’ve chosen to go after 2019. When our team was good and our financials strong. We didn’t spend.
But you are fully aware that we plan our signings up to 2 years in advance. We were fully entitled to look at our team, one that had just won the Champions League (in back-to-back finals), attained 97 pts in the league (the third most in history), lost one league game all season, had just overtaken Man City as the no.1 ranked team in the world (according to clubelo) and felt that there were not many areas upon which they could easily improve.
You have no idea as to what the plans had been for the summer of 2020 (that would already have been sketched out the summer before). Whatever those plans were (or even those being considered for summer 2021) have been significantly compromised by something that simply could not have been foreseen in August/September 2019, no matter how much you pretend otherwise.
So let’s hold fire on our retrospective criticism for a while, eh? Let’s revisit this in 18 months, 2 years’ time, and judge whether, on reflection, our prudence was sensible and actually gave us stronger foundations than others from which to move forward once more.
Otherwise, it just feels very convenient/opportunistic to take advantage of this precise moment where we’re struggling as a team but the reality as to just how deleterious the pandemic has been (not just for Liverpool) is not yet tangible.
Something tells me we’ll be looking at everything in a hugely different light.
The way you’re talking we have to be Man City rich,plus we have to spend every summer to our maximum limit,like every other club in our position,it’s you who doesn’t seem to grasp that it’s not as black and white as you think it is.
Luckily we saved that £167mill profit then cos it’s just covered our losses from covid.
Perhaps our current situation is also an eye-opener for how lucky (as well as good, yes, but still lucky) we were to win the title by choosing to “go again” with the same group.
I don’t think so. I believe it is a true reflection of the hard realities of business.
You are confusing two different issues; securing funding for a new asset for a business as opposed to valuing a business e.g. a football club for sale. These are not the same things and require different methodologies.
When financing a new asset e.g. the Main Stand, the lender will secure the loan against the capital value of the asset i.e. the value of land and cost of construction and will usually require the owner to demonstrate his capacity to repay the loan as well as providing addition surety by way of a capital contribution to the project and to act as guarantor for repayment of the loan.
So, in the case of the redeveloping the Main Stand (I believe the new training facility was not funded with a new loan) the cost of the asset and the buyers capacity to repay of the loan were taken into account. The saleable value of the club as a whole was not a factor in securing the loan and would not have entered into the lenders calculations.
When it comes to estimating the value of a business as a going concern, this is a much more complex matter.
Normally the capacity of a business to generate a return on investment, and the potential for improved performance are factors driving valuations.
However this does not appear to apply in football where few if any clubs generate a return. Here purchases tend to be more for reasons of vanity than for commercial gain and most of the normal valuation metrics simply do not work.
In the final analysis it all revolves around the buyer’s desire to own a trophy asset, rather than upon any desire to make money so, as a consequence, the valuation depends upon what a buyer is prepared to pay, rather than any intrinsic value in the club.
Interesting discussion, some good intelligent well reasoned argument.
If match revenues don’t return next season, all non benefactor clubs are up the creek given their fixed overheads.
I haven’t the time nor inclination to look at our financials, but without match revenue we’re loss making surely, so it’s then just a case of what can be spent on players to sustain prize money from within loss making revenues.
That’s when maybe it just being good enough to get top four will drive everything. Problem with that is what kind of incentive is that for the manager or our top players?
The likes of City will mop up, they’ll get players cheaper in a depressed market, without the hit of player sale revenues being depressed, which will affect clubs that partly sell to buy as we do. Their wage offer will also become relatively much better.
I expect that United will find a way, they’re a financial monster, whilst Everton, Chelsea and Leicester are benefactor clubs.
I think we’ve got a good squad, but it will need attention. Of a first team senior outfield squad of 21 players who started the season plus Davies (Kabak not purchased yet), we have at least five very injury prone players (Matip, Gomez, Shaqiri, Oxlade, Keita) and another who isn’t able to contribute much (Origi).
There are some big contracts there which are millstones if the player can’t play much, offer much, or be moved on.
So, in short, it could be pretty bad for us, as benefactor clubs will be given a huge advantage to compete beyond their natural support based size, whilst our own support base is neutralized through restrictions.
I’m not sure, I think we spent the summer before that window (and the season) securing a good portion of our top players to new contracts. Something we have continued to do, retain and reward. We turned Anfield into a final destination, rather than that stepping stone.
As others have pointed out, we committed to the new training facilities and we made huge progress in confirming we’d expanding the ARE. I really do think Klopp is an utter romantic, he has fallen in love with this club, if he was given the option of both those huge developements which would help us sustain success for 10+ years, even when he was gone he would have sanctioned them ahead of signing players every single time asked.
I also think that we were looking to spending big the summer just gone, I’m talking Mbappe levels signing. If you are offered a Mbappe level signing the summer after, but only if you don’t sign anyone this window. What do you chose?
So that summer we evaluated the squad and decided it had everything needed to go again, but knowing big re-inforcements were earmarked for the next window. So I don’t think we were lucky, I think it was a squad assembled over several windows, allowed to grow together and hit peak at the same time and stay at a peak for a couple of years before major re-workings were required. We rode the high of the CL into hitting the Premiership early with the same core and never looked back.
Obviously COV19 happened, so our 2-3 year plans pretty much got ripped up yet we still managed to bring 3 players I’d argue were exactly what we required. I still maintain Klopp was offered a Lovren replacement, or getting Thiago and Fabinho would act as 4th choice center half. He made that call, at that point why wouldn’t you?
Should we have acted sooner in January 100%, but that’s based on understanding zero of what we were actually doing behind the scene. We will never know if we had deals lined up for Sarr for example.
I guess for comparrison, City signed 2 players Rodri (£63m, Atletico Madrid) and Joao Cancelo (£60m, Juventus). A net spend of around £40mil on 2 positions they were needing to re-inforce.
One thing our owners have to think long and hard about is how they deal with the clear and obvious campaign of biased, if not corrupt, refereeing that is now threatening to cost the club its top four place.
They have a billion dollar asset that is being devalued by the actions of referees.
They built that asset to what it is now with considerable help from the support base, and we all know that LFC is crucial for morale in the red half of the city, that it directly employs people locally, and that it contributes massively to tourism for the city.
It is a scandal that referees from other parts of England can act in a way that destroys shareholder value, causes people to lose jobs, and hits a local economy.
FSG are quite within their rights to maybe conclude that LFC has too big an issue to contend with in respect of bias and corruption within English football authorities to be worth bothering with.
But they ought to take their responsibilities to the city into account too.
If I was them I’d use my connections within the US authorities to launch a corruption investigation, as a US owned asset is seeing value destroyed by the actions of English referees.
In these dark times, it would give a lot of light relief to see Martin Atkinson, Andre Marriner, Kevin Friend and Anthony Taylor found to be taking bribes, extradited and paraded in orange jumpsuits before being taken off to their cells to be used as playthings.
I start to ask myself if this isn’t the ‘reward’ from the PL for us, as fsg were among the main drivers of the European League project… maybe they’ve decided to make an example out of this club.
Otherwise, it might be Abu Dhabi distributing bribes among the refs, who knows…
I think there has definitely been a sense that winning the league by 20 points last season, and effectively destroying it as a spectacle from about November, was bad for ‘the product’. I’m pretty sure a lot of the early season shithouse decisions were motivated by that. But there could be some Project Big Picture payback too.
I still don’t understand the reaction to it. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to suggest that teams like Sheffield United, Norwich and West Brom who can’t stay in the division shouldn’t have the same right to shape it as Liverpool, Utd, Everton, etc.
