Summer 2020 Transfer Thread

[dockers_strike]

1 minute ago, 1892-LFCWasBorn said:

It was a flippant comment, but that said, he would have been a U.S marketing dream. Very unlikely Chelsea get the exposure as we would have done. Don't really care about that aspect anyway. It's about talent, as with Havertz.

It's not being negative. We all know there's a big drop off from our first XI. We've been lucky as fuck for the past 2 seasons with injuries. Look at what happened with Bobby last season. He just about made it for Madrid.

All our front three in fact all our team except van Dijk have picked up injuries. This bullshit that we've been 'lucky' with injuries is just, well, bullshit. It's the bullshit oppo fans spout and the gullible lap up.

[Horus]

29 minutes ago, dave u said:

 

This is what I don 't get. I see this argument all the time about the owners, but I don't really understand what people are accusing them of. I'm not just referring to you here, Horus, it's a general point directed at everyone who thinks FSG are mingebags (there's a lot of you!).

 

They aren't going to put in their own money to fund transfers (personally I wouldn't want or expect them to), and even if they wanted to do that there's this thing called FFP that means they can't (Man City's cheating notwithstanding).

 

So, if we're all agreed on the above, then the accusation must be that they are holding back money that the club has made, right? Personally I don't believe this is the case but if it is then to what end are they doing this?

 

They don't take money out for themselves (or if they do it's only a small dividend) so what benefit is it to them to not spend money any profits that are made? I'm no accountant but I'm sure they'd rather spend it on assets (ie players) than get hit with a big tax bill.

 

So I genuinely don't get these accusations of them holding back funds and depriving Klopp of what he needs.

 

As far as I can see, whatever profits are made are reinvested in the team, either through signings or new contracts.

 

What am I missing here?

My issues are a couple of things; we were always sold the idea of increasing revenues would give us the money to compete, FSG have done unbelievably well in this area, but our net spend (good to bring it back) is decreasing. 2 summers ago when we added AB to Virg and ox, we were also in for Fekir, Lemar etc and since then, the money seems a bit invisible. 

 

The market at the moment is probably era defining, with potential and probable generational players are up for grabs, such as Werner (he gone), Havertz, and Sancho. Klopp said Sancho would look good in a red jersey and then nothing. That's quite a statement for Klopp to come out and say publicly, and united have a free run at him. I don't expect 15 of these players every year, but we desperately need a player with those skills and abilities, and on the back of what we've raked in over 2 years, versus what we've spent over the same period, we're in the shit if we don't have the money because if we don't now, when will we? I get covid turned the world upside down, but only us seem to have already got our excuses in whilst other clubs are busy doing business. I could easily be proved completely wrong here if we end up spending this summer (it's early), not another £20m, but properly. 

 

Werner was a no brainer at that price, he wouldn't have lost any value and if he'd failed here and  we'd have got most of it or a profit selling him in 2 years time. Besides the fact he was whoring himself to us at any and every opportunity and we only want players committed to us, right? We did nothing.

 

I have no idea what is happening to the money or where it is going, but united have been losing revenue and funding massive debt payments, but here they are again. The sniff of CL and they're all in. Roman hasn't given a fuck for a few years, and they've had some good sales, but havertz and werner will either propel them on for the best part of the next decade, or will be sold for bigger profits in 4/5 years. 

 

We're sticking at the completely wrong time with these players in this market. Ambition now, and we have the building blocks for the next decade, sit on our hands, and we'll be back to bridesmaids as soon as Klopp leaves, because as absurd as this sounds, people still don't realise how unrealistic the job he's done to this point has been. 

[El Dangerous]

32 minutes ago, BeefStroganoff said:

Pulisic was a missed opportunity. Its the self proclaimed 'no one is better than our front three' thats holding us back.

Holding us back from signing players who won’t get a game?

[Horus]

1 hour ago, dave u said:

 

The plan would appear to be bring through talented youngsters to offset that, and only spend big where it's necessary. 

 

I'd feel a lot more comfortable about that if we had shit hot forwards coming through. Elliott might be one, but other than him we're probably going to need to buy when it comes to replacing the current front three. 

 

I'm sure they have a plan for that though as I'm sure I've read that they are always looking two summers ahead when planning transfers.

Sancho would have been perfect, as would Havertz, or are we back to gambling on youngsters without pedigree before they break through? Obviously this would be a dream if we could nail it, but how many great 16 year olds turn into great 25 year olds? if that's what their plan actually is.

 

I agree about Eliott, think he'll be class.

[dockers_strike]

7 minutes ago, Horus said:

My issues are a couple of things; we were always sold the idea of increasing revenues would give us the money to compete, FSG have done unbelievably well in this area, but our net spend (good to bring it back) is decreasing. 2 summers ago when we added AB to Virg and ox, we were also in for Fekir, Lemar etc and since then, the money seems a bit invisible. 

 

The market at the moment is probably era defining, with potential and probable generational players are up for grabs, such as Werner (he gone), Havertz, and Sancho. Klopp said Sancho would look good in a red jersey and then nothing. That's quite a statement for Klopp to come out and say publicly, and united have a free run at him. I don't expect 15 of these players every year, but we desperately need a player with those skills and abilities, and on the back of what we've raked in over 2 years, versus what we've spent over the same period, we're in the shit if we don't have the money because if we don't now, when will we? I get covid turned the world upside down, but only us seem to have already got our excuses in whilst other clubs are busy doing business. I could easily be proved completely wrong here if we end up spending this summer (it's early), not another £20m, but properly. 

 

Werner was a no brainer at that price, he wouldn't have lost any value and if he'd failed here and  we'd have got most of it or a profit selling him in 2 years time. Besides the fact he was whoring himself to us at any and every opportunity and we only want players committed to us, right? We did nothing.

 

I have no idea what is happening to the money or where it is going, but united have been losing revenue and funding massive debt payments, but here they are again. The sniff of CL and they're all in. Roman hasn't given a fuck for a few years, and they've had some good sales, but havertz and werner will either propel them on for the best part of the next decade, or will be sold for bigger profits in 4/5 years. 

 

We're sticking at the completely wrong time with these players in this market. Ambition now, and we have the building blocks for the next decade, sit on our hands, and we'll be back to bridesmaids as soon as Klopp leaves, because as absurd as this sounds, people still don't realise how unrealistic the job he's done to this point has been. 

And in that, you havent accounted for increased player wages, repayments on the Main stand and the Kirkby development etc.

 

The club turns over hundreds of millions. It's outgoings are such it made 40 odd million pounds pre tax profit. Profit is what you use to buy with unless you want to put more debt on the club. Debt isnt a bad thing so long as it doesnt get out of hand and grow too big. Debt has to be repaid which means you've less to spend on players, ARE anything else.

 

The club's income has been reduced due to the virus situation so that's less money to spend yet again.When will income return to previous levels? We can only guess but to spend like there was no reduction is just plain daft.

[Megadrive Man]

6 hours ago, torahboy said:

I have a friend who gambles on all aspects of football and he just had a Sky bet of Grealish to Liverpool before 6th of October, at 16/1 turned down. He placed the bet on 'information received'. 

 

Villa want £80 million for him apparently!

 

In normal times that would have been a crazy amount. In these covid times that's beyond insanity! 

[Barrington Womble]

1 minute ago, MegadriveMan said:

 

Villa want £80 million for him apparently!

 

In normal times that would have been a crazy amount. In these covid times that's beyond insanity! 

Good for villa to be honest. He's their best chance of staying up next season..their job isn't to make it easy for the teams trying to buy their best player. 

[3 Stacks]

16 minutes ago, Horus said:

Sancho would have been perfect, as would Havertz, or are we back to gambling on youngsters without pedigree before they break through? Obviously this would be a dream if we could nail it, but how many great 16 year olds turn into great 25 year olds? if that's what their plan actually is.

 

I agree about Eliott, think he'll be class.

Sancho would indeed be perfect. That one annoys me, but if Werner at 50m + massive wages is too expensive when we don't have a hole at forward in the starting 11, than 100m + massive wages is definitely too expensive. It is what it is. That's just what the finances dictate. 

 

 

[Horus]

Just now, dockers_strike said:

And in that, you havent accounted for increased player wages, repayments on the Main stand and the Kirkby development etc.

 

The club turns over hundreds of millions. It's outgoings are such it made 40 odd million pounds pre tax profit. Profit is what you use to buy with unless you want to put more debt on the club. Debt isnt a bad thing so long as it doesnt get out of hand and grow too big. Debt has to be repaid which means you've less to spend on players, ARE anything else.

 

The club's income has been reduced due to the virus situation so that's less money to spend yet again.When will income return to previous levels? We can only guess but to spend like there was no reduction is just plain daft.

FSG could have done the main stand on them in line with FFP, as that is something that will affect the price they can get when they sell, because it speaks to on-going revenues. It was a choice to put that straight on to us. I don't remember H&G getting a free pass when they use the improved contracts line, and no, I'm not comparing FSG to those cunts, but when did we become such a placid fanbase? 

 

We. Spent. Nothing. Last. Year.

 

Again, for the nth time, no one is saying they need to go out and get 25 players each costing £100m, but I'm saying the squad needs something new and generational players are available this summer, and they're being bought by clubs in exactly the same market that we operate in, and only us are waiting for these players to be signed by our direct competitors as we twiddle our thumbs.

[Aventus]

I suspect that the mysterious money pit is just the new stand and training ground. 

 

With a bit of pocket change saved up for when we need to replace half the first team in a couple of years. 

[1892-LFCWasBorn]

24 minutes ago, Horus said:

We're sticking at the completely wrong time with these players in this market. Ambition now, and we have the building blocks for the next decade, sit on our hands, and we'll be back to bridesmaids as soon as Klopp leaves, because as absurd as this sounds, people still don't realise how unrealistic the job he's done to this point has been. 

This all fucking day long.

[No2]

1 hour ago, BeefStroganoff said:

You tell me Dave.

 

All these partnerships grow the business, but where does that money go? Does acquiring a partner go towards the business as a whole and does that mean if they sell, those monies go into the pockets of the investors?

 

We pocketed 150 million for coming second last year plus 100 million for the CL win. We are supposedly picking up 175m for being winners (according to various media) so thats 425m in prize money in just two seasons. We haven't bought anyone for three or is it four windows? Ok Minamino at 7 million.

 

Now because of a few months of no fans at the stadium, we don't have any cash? But we still have online stores and merchandise, new global partners being announced and a bumper kit deal. I mean the world keeps turning doesn't it? The TV revenue will still come in next season for televised games, maybe even more so now.

 

Nothing makes sense, unless they do use the money for Red Sox maybe? And their strategy is to invest in both Clubs with monies earned every few years to prop each one up as and when needed?

 

baffles me.

The money Liverpool FC make belongs to Liverpool FC. It's not John Henry's or Tom Werner's, if they want money for the Red Sox then they need to take it out of Liverpool first. They haven't done that, 10 years ago they said they wouldn't and they haven't. It is so dopey it makes everything else you say null and void.

[Horus]

1 minute ago, 3 Stacks said:

Sancho would indeed be perfect. That one annoys me, but if Werner at 50m + massive wages is too expensive when we don't have a whole at forward in the starting 11, than 100m + massive wages is definitely too expensive. It is what it is. That's just what the finances dictate. 

And this is when the circle comes back around. Werner wanted us, he would have accepted a wage in line with what we pay, so I don't think the massive wages he gets at chelsea are relevant, because that's what it cost them for him to go there. I think Covid gave FSG the easy out to say no.

 

[dockers_strike]

7 minutes ago, Horus said:

FSG could have done the main stand on them in line with FFP, as that is something that will affect the price they can get when they sell, because it speaks to on-going revenues. It was a choice to put that straight on to us. I don't remember H&G getting a free pass when they use the improved contracts line, and no, I'm not comparing FSG to those cunts, but when did we become such a placid fanbase? 

 

We. Spent. Nothing. Last. Year.

 

Again, for the nth time, no one is saying they need to go out and get 25 players each costing £100m, but I'm saying the squad needs something new and generational players are available this summer, and they're being bought by clubs in exactly the same market that we operate in, and only us are waiting for these players to be signed by our direct competitors as we twiddle our thumbs.

On here we go again, when FSG come to sell! They could have done the stand in line with FFP?! What makes you think it hasnt? And it still has to be paid for unless you're the type who think our club should be run like city and chelsea, the plaything of the mega rich, no thanks.

 

We spent nothing last year. Yeah, remind me how last year went again? Listen to jurgen again, 'We have bills to pay.'

 

You say people arent saying they should go out and buy 100m players. Really? They're saying we should have signed Werner, £53m, Havertz, £90m, Sancho, £109m. Sorry but yes, people are saying spend 100m.

[BeefStroganoff]

3 minutes ago, No2 said:

The money Liverpool FC make belongs to Liverpool FC. It's not John Henry's or Tom Werner's, if they want money for the Red Sox then they need to take it out of Liverpool first. They haven't done that, 10 years ago they said they wouldn't and they haven't. It is so dopey it makes everything else you say null and void.

Is it really so out of the realms of possibility? No, no it isn't. They own both Clubs. Its theirs to do as they please as long as they please. Why people can't get their heads around that God only knows.

 

And so much defence for a bunch of U.S businessmen. Its fucking staggering. You all should be asking questions, but because of the genius of one man you are all happy to tow the party line. Well our genius will be gone soon and we will probably ask Stevie G to run the team on less than Bournemouths transfer budget.

[BeefStroganoff]

4 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

On here we go again, when FSG come to sell! They could have done the stand in line with FFP?! What makes you think it hasnt? And it still has to be paid for unless you're the type who think our club should be run like city and chelsea, the plaything of the mega rich, no thanks.

 

We spent nothing last year. Yeah, remind me how last year went again? Listen to jurgen again, 'We have bills to pay.'

 

You say people arent saying they should go out and buy 100m players. Really? They're saying we should have signed Werner, £53m, Havertz, £90m, Sancho, £109m. Sorry but yes, people are saying spend 100m.

There is no FFP you moron.

[Barrington Womble]

10 minutes ago, Horus said:

FSG could have done the main stand on them in line with FFP, as that is something that will affect the price they can get when they sell, because it speaks to on-going revenues. It was a choice to put that straight on to us. I don't remember H&G getting a free pass when they use the improved contracts line, and no, I'm not comparing FSG to those cunts, but when did we become such a placid fanbase? 

 

We. Spent. Nothing. Last. Year.

 

Again, for the nth time, no one is saying they need to go out and get 25 players each costing £100m, but I'm saying the squad needs something new and generational players are available this summer, and they're being bought by clubs in exactly the same market that we operate in, and only us are waiting for these players to be signed by our direct competitors as we twiddle our thumbs.

The real issue that many seem afraid to ask is if we can't afford a player after we've been 2ndnthen 1st in both the CL and PL when can we afford them? What has klopp got to achieve for this virtuous circle to work? 

[Horus]

1 minute ago, dockers_strike said:

On here we go again, when FSG come to sell! They could havedone the stand in line with FFP?! What makes you think it hasnt? And it still has to be paid for unless you're the type who think our club should be run like city and chelsea, the plaything of the mega rich, no thanks.

 

We spent nothing last year. Yeah, remind me how last year went again? Listen to jurgen again, 'We have bills to pay.'

 

You say people arent saying they should go out and buy 100m players. Agreed. They're saying we should have signed Werner, £53m, Havertz, £90m, Sancho, £109m. Sorry but yes, people are saying spend 100m.

So you think FSG stumping up for a stand that would benefit a future sale price more than it ever would benefit our transfer windows, would make us like city? That's insane as it's specifically a part of FFP allowances. Its on our accounts that we're paying for it. I'm not saying they absolutely should have, but they got a distressed asset, that is worth nearly x10 what they paid, and part of that valuation is our new capacity, and our future increased capacity.

 

£100m over 2 seasons isn't a huge amount to ask for for the reigning euro, world, league champs, especially when Klopp has done this on the same transfer budgets we had 10-15 years ago. 

 

Let's never spend another penny and win the league every year. Piece of piss.

[ManéMan]

We should be generating enough income to be able to refresh the squad. I get the idea about being self sustaining but these lot seem to have taken it to a whole new level of the playing squad being self sustaining I.e. any incoming has to be balanced by outgoings and wage savings.

 

In comparison to the rest of the top clubs in the league we're not even paying the players as much. How can the likes of Bayern afford Sane without hesitation and be able to pay Coutinho's wages whereas we seem to be struggling to give Gini a new contract.

[Horus]

1 minute ago, The Gaul said:

The real issue that many seem afraid to ask is if we can't afford a player after we've been 2ndnthen 1st in both the CL and PL when can we afford them? What has klopp got to achieve for this virtuous circle to work? 

This is exactly it. If we're skint now when our competitors aren't, when will we ever have cash?

 

 

[Barrington Womble]

9 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

On here we go again, when FSG come to sell! They could have done the stand in line with FFP?! What makes you think it hasnt? And it still has to be paid for unless you're the type who think our club should be run like city and chelsea, the plaything of the mega rich, no thanks.

 

We spent nothing last year. Yeah, remind me how last year went again? Listen to jurgen again, 'We have bills to pay.'

 

You say people arent saying they should go out and buy 100m players. Really? They're saying we should have signed Werner, £53m, Havertz, £90m, Sancho, £109m. Sorry but yes, people are saying spend 100m.

Actually sorting the stadium was an agreement of sale. They accepted when they arrived they had to resolve the stadium issue it was the one thing they promised. It wouldn't have been too earth shattering for them to pay for it. It's not like they'd be giving it to the fans as a gift. They'd still own it. So fucking pay for it. And the road end? Nothing but pretty pictures after 10 years. 

[dockers_strike]

6 minutes ago, BeefStroganoff said:

There is no FFP you moron.

You moron, it was someone else who mentioned FFP!

[cloggypop]

Where's the Red Sox money, John?

[dockers_strike]

Just now, The Gaul said:

Actually sorting the stadium was an agreement of sale. They accepted when they arrived they had to resolve the stadium issue it was the one thing they promised. It wouldn't have been too earth shattering for them to pay for it. It's not like they'd be giving it to the fans as a gift. They'd still own it. So fucking pay for it. And the road end? Nothing but pretty pictures after 10 years. 

Sorting the stadium wasnt an agreement of sale. RBS did not stipulate that and the court case didnt hinge on it. It was an owner aspiration, nothing more.

 

What previous owner of Liverpool paid for any part of the ground development? Answer none, the fans did together with other footballing income from Europe and cup runs.

[Horus]

Just now, dockers_strike said:

Sorting the stadium wasnt an agreement of sale. RBS did not stipulate that and the court case didnt hinge on it. It was an owner aspiration, nothing more.

 

What previous owner of Liverpool paid for any part of the ground development? Answer none, the fans did together with other footballing income from Europe and cup runs.

The club was sold with a commitment to 60k. I specifically remembered because they negotiated that down from a new stadium. I'm actually glad they did that for 2 reasons; one because it's Anfield, and two, because we'd need to sell players every year to even survive if we extrapolate our current transfer approach out.