Catching up with the so called bigger teams & our global appeal

[Roger Hunt]

To me Liverpool Football Club, is one of the worlds biggest sporting institutions, however I feel this is a title that one day we will no longer be able to use. At the end of every trophy less season another chunk falls off the name Liverpool Football Club and i honestly fear for us as a club.

 

We can look back now to the dominance of the 70's, 80's and we have to say the club just didn't push themselves like the way Manchester United did and therefore 20 years on we are failing miserably.

 

Today I have read 2 articles in a newspaper such as this "Ultimately though, Liverpool accept the decision on Suarez’s future will rest with the player himself, and that the chance to join a huge, world-renowned club that can guarantee him Champions League football will be a powerful temptation" Mirror 21/05/13. I think the highlighted bit says it all really, that just shows you what we are now considered, ignore the Champions League part.

 

Also Manchester City agreeing a deal to become a partner of New York City FC plus their 72 million pound deal with Nike, it has to be said we are seriously lagging. 3 years ago City were nothing, no trophies in the cabinet, but now we look to them for inspiration as to our way forward.

 

Clearly ownership issues have not help our course and our current owners, just appear invisible with them playing to much on financial fair play, no news on the ground and nothing really that pushes the name LFC to become a more dominant name once again.

 

Whats the way forward here now with our club, obviously a sugar daddy would do us no harm, but thats cheating. Surely we can put those falling bits back on the name Liverpool Football Club but how?

 

Myself personally have to thank the current owners for saving our club, but i think it's now time that the reigns we're passed over to somebody or something more in the same league as Liverpool FC. We are a champagne football club however we have lemonade owners and as each day passes by, we fall back that little bit more.

[Jose Jones]

We just have to get back to winning things.

We are a huge, world renowned club. A few years back we were a huge, world renowned club who could guarantee Champions League football.

 

We can go either mental - spend hundreds of millions of spondoolies to bash straight back into the top 4 and winning things, and get a top class manager to do it.

Or slowly - appoint promising manager, aim to get players just before they get expensive and hope like monkeys it works out.

 

Owners have obviously gone for Option B. If it works then that is great, and you are building from a more stable base. But the chance is smaller.

[SlugTrail]

We just have to get back to winning things.

We are a huge, world renowned club. A few years back we were a huge, world renowned club who could guarantee Champions League football.

 

We can go either mental - spend hundreds of millions of spondoolies to bash straight back into the top 4 and winning things, and get a top class manager to do it.

Or slowly - appoint promising manager, aim to get players just before they get expensive and hope like monkeys it works out.

 

Owners have obviously gone for Option B. If it works then that is great, and you are building from a more stable base. But the chance is smaller.

 

the problem with that lies when you are spending that sort of money, £5m players become £15m players, £10m players become £25m players, and if you make mistakes like a keane or aquilani then the wheels fall off and you are then left to rebuild.

 

i would much rather we took the build a solid base route, then later on add the odd stellar signing.

[Guest San Don]

I hate it when people talk about Liverpool then mention the 'big' clubs. WTF? I saw loads of people from Singapore(?) at Anfield on Sunday.

 

Anyone want to tell me what other clubs in Europe, never mind England, have as big a fanbase as us? There's one or two clubs in England and Spain who can achieve that. Italy and Germany? I dont think so however big Bayern or Milan may be.

 

We completely fucked up for some reason when sponsorship came in. We were the first English (UK?) club to wear a sponsors name on our shirts. When we went out with Hitachi on them, it was truely a momentus moment in British football.

 

Other clubs may have mocked us. Their fans certainly did but, we saw an opportunity to do something no other club had done. It should have opened the floodgates for this club but for whatever reason it actaully slammed them shut.

 

We could have pushed on with all sorts of sponsorship deals but didnt. We were then slow to recognise fans wanted to buy club merchandising for anything with LFC on it.

 

All this is a massive disappointment to me and is the real reason the club is where it finds itself today. Massive but clinging on by its fingernails to the worlds 'mega' clubs.

 

Despite all this, Im not sure the club can get to the highest peaks an more. We've a long way to go and to be honest, clubs with mega rich benefactors can just kick on beyond what we could ever achieve from a financial perspective.

[MajesticSuarez]

There is too sides to this arguement.

Yes Liverpool have left it late to go into the commercial side. However the money is more plentiful now than it was 20 years ago when Manchester United decided to market aggressively.

 

It was actually Hicks and Gillett due to their overall greed and stupidity that brought Liverpool kicking and screaming into the 21st century. Moores and Parry were in the dark ages. In 2005 when we could easily have made a commercial killing having been crowned kings of Europe. Moores had the club shop shut.

 

Liverpool in market speak are a ''cash cow that needs to be milked''. The commercial potential is enormous. Look at the deals we're tying up whilst not being in the champions league? What sort of deals can we tie up when we're back in it?

 

There is two crucial issues that need to be solved. Getting back in the CL is one and the other is the stadium project. Should we do that, and with Man City and Chelsea( non global clubs) being hamstrung by the FFP, and Man United hampered by leveraged debt. We could blow the lot out of the water. Only Manchester United are our equal as a brand.

 

However the positives are, we can make a killing without being hampered by the debt Manchester United are. FSG must spend the cash to get us to a level where we're powerful and equipped to sweep all before us. Then the money will roll in.

[xerxes]

Anyone want to tell me what other clubs in Europe, never mind England, have as big a fanbase as us?

 

The twenty whose home average attendance exceeds ours?

[xerxes]

This example from Man City is what "flexing the brand" means.

 

 

BBC Sport - Manchester City form MLS franchise with New York Yankees

[MajesticSuarez]

This example from Man City is what "flexing the brand" means.

 

 

BBC Sport - Manchester City form MLS franchise with New York Yankees

 

You're forgetting something, first of all you need a brand to flex. Manchester City a no-mark club in Stockport don't have a brand. There is only two clubs in England that have a brand, and these are Liverpool and Manchester United.

 

Arsenal are the biggest club in North London that nobody gives a flying fuck about south of Watford. Chelsea are a small club in Fulham, and Spurs are the the second biggest club in North London that nobody gives a flying fuck about south of Watford.

[DooooodekNo5]

Stop wasting money buying and paying the wages of shit football players.

 

Spend money on good football players.

 

The end.

[xerxes]

You're forgetting something, first of all you need a brand to flex. Manchester City a no-mark club in Stockport don't have a brand. There is only two clubs in England that have a brand, and these are Liverpool and Manchester United.

 

Arsenal are the biggest club in North London that nobody gives a flying fuck about south of Watford. Chelsea are a small club in Fulham, and Spurs are the the second biggest club in North London that nobody gives a flying fuck about south of Watford.

 

I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that the power of LFC when it comes to monetise our worldwide support is a fading illusion. In relation to our peers we have peaked, and are running on empty.

 

LFCtv’s overseas subscriptions are negligible. We do still sell shirts and merchandise on the strength of past glory, but that cannot continue.

 

Commercial sponsorship is tied into TV appearances and competition challenges. Kids in Kuala Lumpar and Bejing want the shirts of stars with Euro exposure on their backs, not nostalgia kit.

 

Chelsea may be a small club in Fulham- but they sell more shirts than us.

 

 

 

 

http://www.soccerbible.com/news/football-shirts/archive/2012/10/09/the-world-s-best-selling-club-football-shirts.aspx

[Guest San Don]

The twenty whose home average attendance exceeds ours?

 

You're so fucking thick, it's unbelievable.

[VladimirIlyich]

 

You're forgetting something' date=' first of all you need a brand to flex. Manchester City a no-mark club in Stockport don't have a brand. There is only two clubs in England that have a brand, and these are Liverpool and Manchester United.

 

Arsenal are the biggest club in North London that nobody gives a flying fuck about south of Watford. Chelsea are a small club in Fulham, and Spurs are the the second biggest club in North London that nobody gives a flying fuck about south of Watford.[/quote']

 

I think you mean North of Watford.

[MajesticSuarez]

I think you mean North of Watford.

 

Whatever.

The fact of the matter is, Liverpool have a global fanbase whilst those clubs don't. It may have something to do with Liverpool being English footballs most decorated club and English footballs most successful in Europe.

[xerxes]

You're so fucking thick, it's unbelievable.

 

It's your ignorance about anything outside four white lines which is your most predictable,and amusing, trait.

 

A fanbase at twenty first in Europe when it comes to paying to see the team at the turnstiles, or buys fewer shirts than Chelsea, or buys a handful of LFCtv subscriptions abroad, is not quite what you had in mind, is it?

 

We were the about the most famous team in the world, now Man City outgrossed our turnover last year, Chelsea sell more shirts, Sunderland have a bigger stadium, Newcastle can muster bigger home crowds. Turn your eyes from towards the pitch to the stands and the balance sheets.then you will start to believe.

[xerxes]

Whatever.

The fact of the matter is, Liverpool have a global fanbase whilst those clubs don't.

 

What does that mean in terms of revenue?

 

Where is it appearing on the bottom line?

[Guest San Don]

What does that mean in terms of revenue?

 

Where is it appearing on the bottom line?

 

LOL!

 

No fucking idea, have you?

[Guest San Don]

It's your ignorance about anything outside four white lines which is your most predictable,and amusing, trait.

 

A fanbase at twenty first in Europe when it comes to paying to see the team at the turnstiles, or buys fewer shirts than Chelsea, or buys a handful of LFCtv subscriptions abroad, is not quite what you had in mind, is it?

 

We were the about the most famous team in the world, now Man City outgrossed our turnover last year, Chelsea sell more shirts, Sunderland have a bigger stadium, Newcastle can muster bigger home crowds. Turn your eyes from towards the pitch to the stands and the balance sheets.then you will start to believe.

 

Oh, so a 'fan base' is only the 45000 (less the visiting fans of course) who cram into Anfield on matchdays, is it?

 

You've no fucking idea.

[xerxes]

Oh, so a 'fan base' is only the 45000 (less the visiting fans of course) who cram into Anfield on matchdays, is it?You've no fucking idea.

 

First law of holes San Don, when you are in one stop, digging.

 

Your definition of a fan base could be anything, no-one would argue with you, I certainly wouldn't.

 

What is tangible are gates, club media subscriptions, and merchandise sales. Our overall income is seeing us slip down to 9th in the Euro money league, that is likely to fall further as our competiion performance, and TV exposure, declines.Those are facts.

 

"Fan bases" are fickle. Here is a list for the TV money distribution, directly relating to appearance (reach in fan base terms).

Where the money went: Premier League prize and TV payments for 2012-13 « Sporting Intelligence

[The Acolyte]

Get a manager who can entice excellent young potential and top class players to the club.

Thats not Brendan.

He maybe the one but how long, if ever, before he finds this blend? The quality we do have will either be gone or retired by then.

If we start off badly next season FSG will push the button and don't hink for one minute that they won't.

[Lee909]

Barring a Hodgson style collapse he will be here all next season and rightly so.

[Gym Beglin]

Luis Suarez has his price, admits Liverpool boss Brendan Rodgers | Metro News

 

I understand what he's saying to be fair, and I'd agree, if we got a silly offer for him then you've got a duty to consider that if you're a responsible club.

 

That said, with his disciplinary issues, I don't think anybody will offer a rediculous amount, and by that I mean £70m+. I wouldnt sell for £50m, I think he's worth it to the club in terms of us reaching the Champions League and the remuneration that follows over a couple of seasons.

 

My fear is that FSG's silly amount starts a bit lower than mine, and they'll take a £40m bid. And that would be rediculous logic, when you consider that United earned £45m from the CL last season. One season.

 

£70m would make amends for that, enabling us to bring in two or three brilliant young talents, and I'm thinking James Rodriguez, Kevin Strootman, Christian Eriksen. But anything below that amount is tantamount to fiscal suicide.

[ChrisM]

Get a manager who can entice excellent young potential and top class players to the club.

Thats not Brendan.

 

Well you're quite clearly talking bollocks with regards to your first point. Are you aware of our January signings?

 

And as for your second point, FSG have made it quite clear their policy is to invest in youth / potential with re-sale value, not buy already established top class players and paying through the nose for them.

 

That's not Rodger's fault is it?

[Guest San Don]

First law of holes San Don, when you are in one stop, digging.

 

Your definition of a fan base could be anything, no-one would argue with you, I certainly wouldn't.

 

What is tangible are gates, club media subscriptions, and merchandise sales. Our overall income is seeing us slip down to 9th in the Euro money league, that is likely to fall further as our competiion performance, and TV exposure, declines.Those are facts.

 

"Fan bases" are fickle. Here is a list for the TV money distribution, directly relating to appearance (reach in fan base terms).

Where the money went: Premier League prize and TV payments for 2012-13 « Sporting Intelligence

 

Its a great laugh that you issue such pontification about stop digging when in a hole yet, you continue to dig yourself.

 

Your posts make out that 'fan base' is based on the 'twenty or so clubs' with bigger attendances than us. Now, you shift the goal posts yet again claiming it is 'fickle.'

 

You also hint that your definition of 'fan base' should include tv money distribution.

 

Like I said, you've no fucking idea, no consistency and full of double speak. You are good for a laugh though, I'll give you that.

[Guest San Don]

Get a manager who can entice excellent young potential and top class players to the club.

Thats not Brendan.

He maybe the one but how long, if ever, before he finds this blend? The quality we do have will either be gone or retired by then.

If we start off badly next season FSG will push the button and don't hink for one minute that they won't.

 

The owners strategy appears to be one of buying young players with potential. They dont seem to have one of buying top class players over 24 (Toure would be a bosman if he does sign).

 

I really dont see how Rodgers or any other manager we have will change that when it comes from the top.

 

Put simply, the club wont win a title packed with inexperience.

 

Luis Suarez has his price, admits Liverpool boss Brendan Rodgers | Metro News

 

I understand what he's saying to be fair, and I'd agree, if we got a silly offer for him then you've got a duty to consider that if you're a responsible club.

 

That said, with his disciplinary issues, I don't think anybody will offer a rediculous amount, and by that I mean £70m+. I wouldnt sell for £50m, I think he's worth it to the club in terms of us reaching the Champions League and the remuneration that follows over a couple of seasons.

 

My fear is that FSG's silly amount starts a bit lower than mine, and they'll take a £40m bid. And that would be rediculous logic, when you consider that United earned £45m from the CL last season. One season.

 

£70m would make amends for that, enabling us to bring in two or three brilliant young talents, and I'm thinking James Rodriguez, Kevin Strootman, Christian Eriksen. But anything below that amount is tantamount to fiscal suicide.

 

Irrespective of any price we get if Suarez is sold (highly debateable, I know), just because we'd get say £45m, £50m or more, other clubs will up the fee they want for any player as NUFC did with Carroll.

 

But, more pertinently, will those players, currently playing in the CL with their clubs or challenging for domestic trophies with their club, come to Liverpool who are neither in the CL nor challenging for domestic trophies?

 

I think its wishful thinking that just because we get a big fee for a player, our intended targets will be available for their initial fee and, would join the club languishing around 7th as we are.

[stringvest]

Its a great laugh that you issue such pontification about stop digging when in a hole yet, you continue to dig yourself.

 

Your posts make out that 'fan base' is based on the 'twenty or so clubs' with bigger attendances than us. Now, you shift the goal posts yet again claiming it is 'fickle.'

 

You also hint that your definition of 'fan base' should include tv money distribution.

 

Like I said, you've no fucking idea, no consistency and full of double speak. You are good for a laugh though, I'll give you that.

 

what is the point you're trying to make SD? Unfortunately, the ever-more-mythical fan base means nothing if they are not supporting - financially - the club.

 

What 'clout' do you think it gives us? What advantage does it give us as a club? We may get a few more games on Sky because we pull a bigger audience in; we may do a little better through advertising and sponsorship, but if other clubs are realising more revenue through things like shirt sales, you can bet the other revenue streams will follow in pretty short order