The Owners - FSG

[RedOverTheWater]

Do you have an answer to the questions posed? Which alternate owner?

Under FSG we have won every trophy and seen a fantastic Liverpool side, for a cycle, under one of the best managers in the world, if not the best. Were it not for a cheating Man City the trophy haul would be much larger.

Under FSG we have seen the stadium upgraded and expanded. It was talked about for years, but nobody else was able to work through the numerous issues.

There is a sense in which it is now in limbo a bit, as the goalposts have probably moved, and the rules based order they came in under may now have fallen by the wayside. What happens with Man City’s 115 charges will be telling.

With all that said, we have still seen the bones of the next great Liverpool side start to emerge in the last few windows - MacAllister, Szoboszlai, Gakpo, Nunez, Diaz, Konate.

More work needs to be done on that, and hopefully we will see other additions before this window closes. Proper teams, playing by the rules, can’t build a new side overnight.

FSG are not the best thing since sliced bread. They have been solid owners, for all the reasons above, and ideally I’d like to see them do a bit more to fund the team.

There are a lot worse ownership possibilities out there, so if FSG is to be rejected, this is a serious question for the purpose of discussion:

Who is the alternate owner you would like to see at Liverpool? Or if not a name, what is the alternate ownership model you would like to see?

[Hope.in.your.heart]

Yeah, and it’s fair to suggest that in the current financial environment, it will prevent us from being absolute top dogs. I for one expect a top four finish this season, because we have a good enough squad for that. Last season was a blip with all the injuries.

We know that FSG work on getting in investment from the outside for the club, so maybe we’ll have a bit more financial muscle with time, but anyway, we could have much more financial muscle, and we’d still not compete with Abu Dhabi, SA etc. in terms of spending. Especially with FFP now a distant memory of the past.

[The-AllMightyReds]

A fan asking another fan “what owners if not FSG” isn’t a fair question by any stretch, simply because we’re not in that world of knowing about billionaire organisations who don’t already own FC’s and which billionaires out there would even be interested in taking over such a massive entity.

If @FadeToBlack simply answered with Jeff Bezos, Jim Radcliffe or I don’t know…Richard Branson. Would that be seen as a fair response? Or what if he had said a consortium led by GSK for example? For those saying the only type of owners “better than FSG would be oil money”, do you guys really know what you’re talking about?

[RedArmada]

@FadeToBlack

The amount complacency on here is depressing.

On the other hand, you come off as arrogant. Assuming that anyone who disagrees with you is a FSG apologist and indifferent to the team treading water. No one supports FSG more than Liverpool. No one supports FSG period. Conglomerates do not have fans and are not interested in acquiring them.

The difference is that some are patient enough to wait for the transfer window to close before casting the first stone. And if we do end up with just two signings after losing 7 first teamers, there’s going to be a hail of them. But not before there’s actually something to blame them for.

[Sithbare]

Not an FSG fan but appreciate what they have done since buying the club for the club.

Doesn’t mean they haven’t made mistakes.

[Hope.in.your.heart]

You missed the point completely. My question was: what type of ownership?

Beyond state-ownership or an oligarch-style ownership, I honestly can’t see who’d be able to compete in terms of transfer funding, player salary etc. Some fans aren’t happy because we can’t attract the likes of ‘sexy’ players like Bellingham or Mbappe. But even if fsg invested the last of their pennies in this club, they’d still not be able to get them here. That’s a reality we have to accept.

So, unless we are happy for LFC to be a sportswashing machine for a state-owned fund or an oligarch, what other options are out there for us which would allow us to go into the transfer market for the absolute top dogs? I don’t think it’s an unfair question at all.

Anyway, all of this is just about a few fans losing their nerves prematurely, as @RedArmada put it above.

[1972]

@Hope.in.your.heart

You missed the point completely

Wouldn’t be the first time. Definately won’t be his last time either.

[rab]

@The-AllMightyReds

A fan asking another fan “what owners if not FSG” isn’t a fair question by any stretch, simply because we’re not in that world of knowing about billionaire organisations who don’t already own FC’s and which billionaires out there would even be interested in taking over such a massive entity.

If @FadeToBlack simply answered with Jeff Bezos, Jim Radcliffe or I don’t know…Richard Branson. Would that be seen as a fair response? Or what if he had said a consortium led by GSK for example? For those saying the only type of owners “better than FSG would be oil money”, do you guys really know what you’re talking about?

People don’t want to answer this question because the answer invariably boils down to “one who’ll spend their own money on transfers” and they don’t want to admit that because that’s basically all this anti FSG stuff comes back to.

And aside from that mad twat at Chelsea, which owners are pumping money into their clubs for transfers from their own pockets? PSG, City, Newcastle. United fans wetting themselves of the Qatari’s doing the same for them. Anyone else?

But lets say it’s not one of the oil states. Say they sell to Jim Ratcliffe, or Bezos or Branson. There’s no guarantees they’ll pump their own money into the bottomless pit that is the transfer market anyway. Hell, they might be more frugal than FSG. And they’d not be buying us because they love the club that’s for sure. They’d be wanting a return on their investment in the future which is a stick FSG get beaten with regularly too.

So it’s more than fair to ask what type of owners people would want FSG replaced with because the reality is it’s highly likely it’s going to either be some oil state looking to wash their reputation and turn us into their play thing or it’ll be some billionaire/investment fund types who’ll want to make money out of us in one way or another and therefore won’t likely be funding huge transfer investment out their own pockets without expecting it back in some way, shape or form in the future.

So maybe we don’t need a persons name or an organisation but people should be honest enough to say what they really want out of a new owner. Nine times out of ten that’ll be more money for transfers which kind of steers you towards the answer being a certain type of owner, one we’ve often criticised other clubs for having.

[redfanman]

@rab

And aside from that mad twat at Chelsea, which owners are pumping money into their clubs for transfers from their own pockets? PSG, City, Newcastle. United fans wetting themselves of the Qatari’s doing the same for them. Anyone else?

Are they even really pumping their own money into the clubs though?

The money Chelsea are spending I think comes from their investment funds, not the pockets of the new owners doesn’t it?

The money City and Newcastle spend comes from assets their owners can influence but don’t necessarily own themselves.

[koptician]

@rab

that’ll be more money for transfers which kind of steers you towards the answer being a certain type of owner, one we’ve often criticised other clubs for having.

Well then we’d best be prepared to have our slice of humble pie.

Can’t have it both ways. Can’t want FSG to stay on board yet moan about their methods.

The flip side of that, though, is that after Jürgen hangs up his clipboard we’re likely to progressively attract fewer and fewer top class recruits as they’ll want that bit more chance of success and higher wages (thanks a lot Saudis )

[rab]

@redfanman

Are they even really pumping their own money into the clubs though?

The money Chelsea are spending I think comes from their investment funds, not the pockets of the new owners doesn’t it?

The money City and Newcastle spend comes from assets their owners can influence but don’t necessarily own themselves.

Well yes. I mean all owner investment is capped anyway. Whether it’s policed or not is another thing.

But ultimately it’s money being injected into the club rather than earned by the club and that’s what people who aren’t happy with FSG seemingly want.

We all love a good transfer and they are exciting but my god I wouldn’t want our owners acting like Chelsea’s are. Massively overpaying, stupidly long contracts, no cohesive plan. And worst of all it seems like part of the way they’re managing to do this is by selling on their youth products in favour of the flavour of the month foreign signing. Bank all those proceeds as profit on the books here and now and then spread out the cost the player they’ve bought over the maximum period allowed. Somewhere they are going to get badly stung. Either when they run out of good youth products to sell or half these players flop and they can’t get rid of them or have to fork out huge sums for them to leave.

[koptician]

@rab

Either when they run out of good youth products to sell or half these players flop and they can’t get rid of them or have to fork out huge sums for them to leave.

My question is…how do they get away with this!!

[rab]

@koptician

Well then we’d best be prepared to have our slice of humble pie.

Can’t have it both ways. Can’t want FSG to stay on board yet moan about their methods.

That’s the point. If FSG sell up we’d be getting either a City/Newcastle/PSG type owner or another FSG type. We’re either a play thing for some nation state or a money making venture for some billionaire or hedge fund type group.

What we aren’t getting is some squeaky clean owner/ownership group who’ll invest billions into us for the love of the club and expect nothing out of it.

Pick your poison.

[koptician]

For purely stability’s sake I wouldn’t want another FSG because that would mean yet another eventual sale

[redfanman]

@rab

Well yes. I mean all owner investment is capped anyway. Whether it’s policed or not is another thing.

No, I’m not talking about policing, I’m talking from the perspective that spending ‘lottery windfalls’ or other people’s money is always easier than spending money that is ‘earned’.

[odin_telamon]

came on here and saw 30 odd posts thinking oh we’ve been sold/have investment news.

I’ll have a go, finds random billionaire name …Larry Ellison? …wasn’t there rumours a few years ago he was looking to buy from/invest in FSG?

[Limiescouse]

@odin_telamon

Larry Ellison

Larry Ellison is a MAGA booster and borderline fascist.

But I guess that is part of the point being made.

[koptician]

@rab

What we aren’t getting is some squeaky clean owner/ownership group

There is no such thing as “squeaky-clean” billionaires.

[odin_telamon]

Howard Hughes was wasn’t he ?

[redalways]

No but I WANT TRANSFERS SIGN ALL THE PLAYERS WE NEED TO WIN THE TRANSFER WINDOW MY PEEPEE IS THE BIGGEST IN THE WORLD

Or something like that. I prefer to look at results and be realistic. If not for cheating, we’d have been the most successful club in the country by a mile since 2017.