Houllier's spending - a critical analysis

[Rashid]

Got this from a lad on KopTalk called: Mr_Creosote

 

There has been a lot of argument and counter-argument about the amount of money spent by Houllier. I have decided (betraying my nerdy roots! ) to settle these arguments by totting up the amount Houllier has spent and the amount he has recouped...

 

In total, during his reign, Houllier has spent £117,150,000 on bringing players in. This begins with Jean-Michael Ferri on the 6th January 1999 and goes up to Harry Kewell in 2003.

 

During that same period, Houllier has recouped £50,965,000 by selling players meaning that the total 'loss' since the beginning of 1999 has been £66,185,000.

 

Furthermore, there have been 13 purchases during that time period who have since been either sold or released by the club (including Houllier's very first purchase). In total, the club has lost £10,125,000 on these players - that is, the difference between what we bought them for and what we sold them on for. The two biggest losses being incurred with Nicky Barmby (bought for £6m, sold for £2.75m) and Bernard Diomede (bought for 3m and released).

 

Breaking down the transfers into a yearly basis, we can see the following:

 

YEAR----SPENT------RECOUPED---DIFFERENCE

1999----£30.85m----£22.34m----£8.51m (-)

2000----£32.25m----£14.3m-----£17.95m (-)

2001----£19.05m----£11.1m-----£7.95m (-)

2002----£20.5m-----£3.225m----£17.275m (-)

2003----£14.5m-----£0m--------£14.5m (-)

 

As you can see, after recouping over £47m over the first three years in charge by selling off players that were, in the main, no longer part of his plans, Houllier has only recouped £3,225,000 over the last two years while - at the same time - spending £35m.

________________________________________

 

Basic mathetmatics.

 

1. Houllier inherited a team that had finished 3rd and took them to 5th last year after spendng near on £120M.

 

2. He has recouped £50M from player sales, but most of that money was from players who were already here. Fowler, Matteo, Wright, Thompson etc were all FREE from our youth system.

 

3. Of the master stroke purchases he has made he has a transfer DEFICIT of over £10M. Indeed the only profit he has made were from players here before he came.

 

5. Now, after 5 years in charge and loads of ins and outs we are worse off than in 1998.

 

 

[Guest GraemeMc]

That "Critical" analysis does not include the increased revenue after the treble year and champions league participation which is a hard figure to judge.

 

Apart from after we finished second and bought that crap from France i think Houllier has made some great moves in the transfer market. I think it is his current motivational skills that are the problem. Also, when he first came he was hailed as a tactical genius and results proved this, i wish this was still the case. His illness really has affected his whole judgement.

[Guest bugle]

I think its fair enough to say Houllier has bought some poor players who been way off the mark and will never be fit to wear the Liverpool shirt, but we must remember some of the players he has bought. No-one can argue about Le Tallec, Pongolle, Kewell etc, even when we bought Heskey he was a quality player and not many people argued with him.

All of this "How much Houllier has spent" business is basically another way to get on the managers back, rather than actually supporting him while he is in charge. Fair enough we travel the country, i myself have not missed a game now for a few years and it kills me when we dont perform, but constanly getting on the back of the managers critisising everything he does from who he buys to what he eats is pathetic.

I agree with Graeme's comment, ever since his illness his judgement etc does seem to be somewhat different and "strange" in some cases, but talking figures is pathetic, we cant turn the clock back.

[aws]

Rashid - why not apply some basic accountancy to your basic mathematics?You're dealing with the sale and disposal of capital assets so gains and losses are irrelevant unless you also compare the overall remaining asset value of the squad today against its value in 1998 (taking into account the general state of the transfer market on the two dates).

I've no idea what the answer to that comparison would be but if you ignore it the stats quoted are a fairly meaningless yardstick to criticise (or praise)GH's financial performance.

[Uncle Travelling Matt]

We certainly are NOT in a worse position than when Ged took over. If and when he goes, the new manager will be extremely excited at the talent he has at his disposal. The biggest loss he has made on a player was £3.25m on Barmby, weigh that up against the loss the Mancs made on Veron.............

[Guest Dancing Dave]

The lengths (and lies) some of these potherbs will go to to make a point. Here's a newsflash Rashid, you don't like it, don't come. Plenty of real reds ready to sit in your seat. Alright Herpes? Thought you were ignoring me....lol!!:whistle:

[goatboy59]

LOL? No, not really.

 

It should also be pointed out that few, if any managers, are greeted by free talent of the calibre of Owen, Gerrard, Carragher and yes, even Fowler post-1998. I could also say Matteo and Thompson at a push, but pass on Macca because he obviously wanted to go anyway. That must have saved at least £60m in transfer fees.

 

Liverpool's next manager will not be greeted by a team capable of finishing third before he arrived - that much is evident (if thou hast eyes to see, which some don't).

[Stu Monty]

If we are talking about expensive players depreciating we also have to talk about the value of the assets we have not sold off.

 

How much did we pay for Hyypia, Henchoz, Riise, TLT, Pongolle, Kewell etc?

 

Kewell's worth about £15M Minimum on his own!

 

He has also resurected Murphy's career....that's another 4-5m probably.

 

Factor in the fact that we have are going to have one of the greatest keepers the country has ever seen, and we will.

 

Starts to look like a very shaky position

[dave u]

If Houllier sold Henchoz he wouldn't get more than he paid for him (age, injuries & the way the market has gone), ditto Riise. As for the others, yes he would make money.

 

But the original post does hold a lot of water, although there are some holes in it too.

[Rashid]

If Houllier sold Henchoz he wouldn't get more than he paid for him (age, injuries & the way the market has gone), ditto Riise. As for the others, yes he would make money.

 

But the original post does hold a lot of water, although there are some holes in it too.

 

Do we have your approval then? :tease:

 

By the way Kewell apart, none of the others mentioned would fetch that much, even Hyypia would struggle to get us £5M.

[Guest Bellflower]

Got this from a lad on KopTalk called: Mr_Creosote

 

There has been a lot of argument and counter-argument about the amount of money spent by Houllier. I have decided (betraying my nerdy roots! ) to settle these arguments by totting up the amount Houllier has spent and the amount he has recouped...

 

In total, during his reign, Houllier has spent £117,150,000 on bringing players in. This begins with Jean-Michael Ferri on the 6th January 1999 and goes up to Harry Kewell in 2003.

 

During that same period, Houllier has recouped £50,965,000 by selling players meaning that the total 'loss' since the beginning of 1999 has been £66,185,000.

 

Furthermore, there have been 13 purchases during that time period who have since been either sold or released by the club (including Houllier's very first purchase). In total, the club has lost £10,125,000 on these players - that is, the difference between what we bought them for and what we sold them on for. The two biggest losses being incurred with Nicky Barmby (bought for £6m, sold for £2.75m) and Bernard Diomede (bought for 3m and released).

 

Breaking down the transfers into a yearly basis, we can see the following:

 

YEAR----SPENT------RECOUPED---DIFFERENCE

1999----£30.85m----£22.34m----£8.51m (-)

2000----£32.25m----£14.3m-----£17.95m (-)

2001----£19.05m----£11.1m-----£7.95m (-)

2002----£20.5m-----£3.225m----£17.275m (-)

2003----£14.5m-----£0m--------£14.5m (-)

 

As you can see, after recouping over £47m over the first three years in charge by selling off players that were, in the main, no longer part of his plans, Houllier has only recouped £3,225,000 over the last two years while - at the same time - spending £35m.

________________________________________

 

Basic mathetmatics.

 

1. Houllier inherited a team that had finished 3rd and took them to 5th last year after spendng near on £120M.

 

2. He has recouped £50M from player sales, but most of that money was from players who were already here. Fowler, Matteo, Wright, Thompson etc were all FREE from our youth system.

 

3. Of the master stroke purchases he has made he has a transfer DEFICIT of over £10M. Indeed the only profit he has made were from players here before he came.

 

5. Now, after 5 years in charge and loads of ins and outs we are worse off than in 1998.

 

 

 

To be honest it doesn't really matter how much he has spent. What DOES matter is we aren't getting what he paid for, with very few exceptions. No real point in buying a Ferrari if you don't know how to start it......

[Uncle Travelling Matt]

LOL? No, not really.

 

It should also be pointed out that few, if any managers, are greeted by free talent of the calibre of Owen, Gerrard, Carragher and yes, even Fowler post-1998. I could also say Matteo and Thompson at a push, but pass on Macca because he obviously wanted to go anyway. That must have saved at least £60m in transfer fees.

 

Liverpool's next manager will not be greeted by a team capable of finishing third before he arrived - that much is evident (if thou hast eyes to see, which some don't).

You honestly believe we are in a worse position now than when GH took over? I'd be surprised if any L'pool fan really thinks that. Our first 11 is a different class to the team of 5 years ago, the fact that we had the ability to finish 3rd back then was more a reflection on the rest of the league than the quality of the team we had. IMO that team would struggle to stay up in this league.....Houlliers problem for me is motivating his players to perform, if he cracked that, we definitely have the ability to become a force.

[Rashid]

You honestly believe we are in a worse position now than when GH took over? I'd be surprised if any L'pool fan really thinks that. Our first 11 is a different class to the team of 5 years ago, the fact that we had the ability to finish 3rd back then was more a reflection on the rest of the league than the quality of the team we had. IMO that team would struggle to stay up in this league.....Houlliers problem for me is motivating his players to perform, if he cracked that, we definitely have the ability to become a force.

Reflection on the rest of the league? We have had relegation form this year and yet we are near 4th! The league is utter sh*t this season.

[Uncle Travelling Matt]

We have had relegation form? We have lost 6 games Rash, thats hardly relegation form. I am talking about the league as a whole, it is much stronger than 5 years ago. The fact that any 3 teams from say 14 could go down shows that the league is strong. Maybe the top 3 have broken away this season but everyone else are constantly beating each other and I believe thats because teams like Birmingham, Fulham, Bolton, Southampton & Charlton have become alot stronger, more resilient and capable of beating anyone on their day.......

Although its been hyped as a bad excuse from GH, the fact is, if we had a full strength team for the last 3 months, we'd be at least 9 points better off and therefore up there and still in with a shout of challenging. Things maybe bad at the moment but talking 'relegation form' is just plain stupid.

[goatboy59]

Chelsea have joined the other two at the top - that's about it as far as "strength" is concerned.

 

67 points got Leeds 4th spot in 1999, Gerard's first full season. I'll be absolutely amazed if 2004's 4th best team gets close to that!

 

And I love how 3rd doesn't reflect how good we were in 1998 (we were worsethan that, apparently) and 5th doesn't reflect how good we were in 2003 (we were better than that, apparently). Manipulation of figures - Gerard's arse-kissers wrote the book!

[goatboy59]

ps about "relegation form"

 

We've got 4 wins from the last 12 league games, and 7 from 18. Let's assume (since we've lost at Chelsea on the last 8 visits) than we don't win the 19th next week and multiply up.

 

12 from 39 (sic) or 14 from 38. Now that may not strictly speaking be "relegation form" but it's pretty damn shite.

 

Assumptions are being made about an improvement being made in part 2 of the season. What, like last season you mean when we won 9 of the last 26 league games?

 

Evans '96 - 71 points, not bad.

Evans '97 - 68 points, slight fall backwards

Evans '98 - 65 points, another fall back and goodbye.

 

 

Houllier: 80, 64, ?? (but probably less than 64).

 

Join the dots.

[Guest Saint Michael]

The league is utter sh*t this season.

You've been watching too much TV and listening to too many cr*ppy pundits again Rashid, haven't you. Tut, tut.