I'm sick of this Debt bullshit

[ChicagoRed]

Sorry, but I don’t believe you believe your own crap. It’s too obvious. Surely you have some kind of agenda.

 

We all know the basic facts: Moores sold us out to a couple of guys who wanted to make a nice little profit for themselves. So far I must say they’re doing quite OK. They have burdened the club with a 300M £ loan, giving the money back to themselves to pay for the purchase. In effect they’ve not paid a penny for the club, the club has paid for it itself. Smart asses those two suckers, I’d have to agree with you on that.

 

We, the club and it’s fans, are now suffering from that burden. It shouldn’t surprise you much to learn we’re not particularly exited about that fact.

 

 

 

 

If only I could believe that. Well it's worth a try I suppose. Hey listen, mate; there’s a club just 40 miles east of Liverpool that’s really close to fucking rule the world. There’s every chance they’ll stay way ahead of us poor bastards for years to come. May I suggest you take the short trip. You’d love it there, and we wouldn’t miss you – a masterstroke!

 

Just for the record, I have no connection with H + G, never met 'em, have no opinion of them as people or businessmen. My Scouse credentials are as good as any on this forum - born there, schooled there, lived there half my life and get back more than once a year, and family still there.

 

So fuck the pea brains who want to make this a nationality thing! I do know business finance inside out and make a good living out of it.

 

Don't expect H & G to be fans - they are in it for the money - but just like the Glasers, Lerner, Ambramovich et al, they know that the money will come from three sources - a new stadium, success on the field, and new commercial deals.

 

Compare all three with where we were five years ago...........and draw your own conclusion.

 

And by the way, I have not seen LFC's detailed financials, but it seems to me you and a lot of others are confused by the difference between cash flow and profit!

[Anny Road]

In virtually every recent article, I've read Liverpool FC is in debt. Nothing could be further from the truth. Being "in debt" means that your debts exceed your assets. We are carrying debt that is being comfortably serviced by our cash flow. We have a squad that is worth at current transfer values at least three times the net cost of what it took to put it together, and as a business, we are profitable and cash flow positive.

 

Add to that the unrealized potential of a 70,000 capacity stadium that we can sell out with no problems, and the prospect (supported by the recent shirt deal and the impending naming rights deal) of becoming the biggest brand in the game.

 

It makes sense to manage debt prudently - how many of us could live without a mortgage? - and that is what the club is doing.

 

But we are a long way from having debt problems as many in the Press would have us believe.

 

[Red Nick]

 

 

Beat me to it

 

I just thought the guy was a complete idiot but I didnt realise he was a complete and utter cunt as well

[Delmar]

Just for the record, I have no connection with H + G, never met 'em, have no opinion of them as people or businessmen. My Scouse credentials are as good as any on this forum - born there, schooled there, lived there half my life and get back more than once a year, and family still there.

 

So fuck the pea brains who want to make this a nationality thing! I do know business finance inside out and make a good living out of it.

 

Don't expect H & G to be fans - they are in it for the money - but just like the Glasers, Lerner, Ambramovich et al, they know that the money will come from three sources - a new stadium, success on the field, and new commercial deals.

 

Compare all three with where we were five years ago...........and draw your own conclusion.

 

And by the way, I have not seen LFC's detailed financials, but it seems to me you and a lot of others are confused by the difference between cash flow and profit!

 

First things first, anyone bashing a whole nation of people based on disagreement with someone is simply an ignorant bigot. That should not be tolerated anywhere.

 

Then about your post. You seem to have bought in the American way of thinking about everything only as a business. There are several problems with that when it comes to a football club, especially Liverpool FC.

 

You state that you know the business finance, and at the same time you seem to believe that an LBO approach is viable in the situation of LFC. You state that "the money will come from three sources - a new stadium, success on the field, and new commercial deals." The problem with the LBO of LFC was that there is no new stadium and there will not be a new stadium in the next few years. This means that the success on the field will be limited, as the money available will not go towards the team, but towards the interest payment of the loans that enabled the LBO. So two of your three pillars of improvement do not exist. The house is definitely shaky, wouldn't you say?

 

Then there is the other factor, even more important. Liverpool FC is unique in the world. It was reborn with Bill Shankly, and it still lives and breathes his philosophy. I do not need to quote him, it has been done over and over again, but this particular football club belongs to the people of Liverpool, regardless of who the owners are, and regardless of what the brand name is and what the worldwide fan base is like. It is something that should not, and must not, be allowed to be destroyed by some cynical LBO merchants, regardless of where they come from.

[RedLiberation!]

Look lad you sound like a 14 year old kid getting his knickers in a twist over a youtube vid.

 

Leave it out.

 

Look lad, YOU leave it out.

Instead of crying like a victim, or giving dogshit like Chicago Cunt, the oxygen of publicity, I'm actually taking steps to rid this club of its cancers.

 

Duckenfield, Cohen, McKenzie, Hicks, Gilette, Chicago Twat, they're all the same sort of cocksuckers.

 

And I stand by my comments about that American piece of shit.

He needs a kicking. AND a ban.

[silverlining]

Look lad, YOU leave it out.

Instead of crying like a victim, or giving dogshit like Chicago Cunt, the oxygen of publicity, I'm actually taking steps to rid this club of its cancers.

 

Duckenfield, Cohen, McKenzie, Hicks, Gilette, Chicago Twat, they're all the same sort of cocksuckers.

 

And I stand by my comments about that American piece of shit.

He needs a kicking. AND a ban.

 

A well-balanced, forceful and intelligently debated argument.

[The 5th Benitel]

Look lad, YOU leave it out.

Instead of crying like a victim, or giving dogshit like Chicago Cunt, the oxygen of publicity, I'm actually taking steps to rid this club of its cancers.

 

Duckenfield, Cohen, McKenzie, Hicks, Gilette, Chicago Twat, they're all the same sort of cocksuckers.

 

And I stand by my comments about that American piece of shit.

He needs a kicking. AND a ban.

 

The sad thing is i bet you wouldn't have a clue that you're doing more harm than good.

[JustTosh]

Just for the record, I have no connection with H + G, never met 'em, have no opinion of them as people or businessmen. My Scouse credentials are as good as any on this forum - born there, schooled there, lived there half my life and get back more than once a year, and family still there.

 

So fuck the pea brains who want to make this a nationality thing! I do know business finance inside out and make a good living out of it.

 

Don't expect H & G to be fans - they are in it for the money - but just like the Glasers, Lerner, Ambramovich et al, they know that the money will come from three sources - a new stadium, success on the field, and new commercial deals.

 

Compare all three with where we were five years ago...........and draw your own conclusion.

 

And by the way, I have not seen LFC's detailed financials, but it seems to me you and a lot of others are confused by the difference between cash flow and profit!

 

New stadium.

As far away today as it was 5 years ago isn’t it? Or do you know something I don’t?

Success on the field.

5 years ago we brought in a new manager to rebuild our team. We instantly got better in Europe. That season 5 years ago, with luck on our side, we won the Champions League. Now our manager has had his time to rebuild. Yet, we’re now experiencing our worst start of the season for more than 40 years. Progress? What have I missed?

New commercial deals.

Following Moores and Parry it was technically impossible not to improve. Apart from a new shirt deal, I do fail to see, however, what we’ve really achieved. But OK, there might be progress somewhere. We’re still miles behind our competitors though.

 

You're on very thin ice mate.

 

As far as confusion cash flow/profits is concerned let me assure you: There’s no confusion. Cash flow is obviously lower now with the interest we’re paying for the new loans. The problem is there’s absolutely no reason to argue that those loans could help increase our future profits, or more likely decrease our future deficits.

[piscinin]

The house is definitely shaky, wouldn't you say?

 

There are three answers to this question aren't there? In the short-term? In the medium-term? And in the long-term?

 

Which one is he looking at? Which one are you looking at?

[Delmar]

Cash flow is obviously lower now with the interest we’re paying for the new loans.

 

No, the cash flow is higher than before. However, what the cash flow has to cover is way higher than before. The "way" part makes this model not feasible.

[Delmar]

There are three answers to this question aren't there? In the short-term? In the medium-term? And in the long-term?

 

Which one is he looking at? Which one are you looking at?

 

The owners, being LBO specialists, will look at this in the short term, medium term at best. Their cash flow based model will be covered, however at the cost of success on the field.

 

I look at LFC as a football club, not as a business. It is run as a business, yes, but certain models of running a business do not belong in football, and especially the LFC. And I look at it in the long term. About the OP, what do I know, he just hasn't grasped the basics.

[Red Nick]

For the idiots and americans amongst us in Chicago Reds instance it means both

 

Covered by Johnny H but in very simple terms here goes

 

Our operating profit is 30m

 

Unitl the last 3 transfer windows we were averaging net spend of 20m per season and that to the 30m in debt repayments means the club was losing 20m a year or making 0 spend in the transfer market thus taking us backwards in relation to our competitors

 

The second an most important is most people have mortages over 25 years and as long as they pay there monthly payment the bank cant do anything to make them reduce there mortgage amount other than the monthly reducing payment. However these Bozos entered into a one year mortgage which means at the end of the year they have to ask the bank to lend the same amount of money again and if they dont you have massive problems. So if at the end of this year they ask for the debt to be reduced to 125m the Owners have no choice but either to refinance with another bank for the outstanding loan, sell the business or most likely of the 3 sell some assets of the business to raise the difference in what the bank wants reduced from the original debt. Now if the idiots had negotiated a 5 year mortgage then they wouldnt have had to reduce the debts thus avoiding the need to either sell the business or its major assets.

 

Hopefully thats clear to everyone.

[JustTosh]

There are three answers to this question aren't there? In the short-term? In the medium-term? And in the long-term?

 

Which one is he looking at? Which one are you looking at?

 

Short term. Not that bad, really

Medium term. Depends on whether we qualify for the CL and whether we're able to keep our key players. Looks shaky to me, not good at all.

Long term. Looks bad, no new stadium, no investment in the team, really bad indeed.

[piscinin]

The owners, being LBO specialists, will look at this in the short term, medium term at best. Their cash flow based model will be covered, however at the cost of success on the field.

 

I look at LFC as a football club, not as a business. It is run as a business, yes, but certain models of running a business do not belong in football, and especially the LFC. And I look at it in the long term. About the OP, what do I know, he just hasn't grasped the basics.

 

I wasn't talking about the owners. I was trying to work out why I agree with bits and pieces of what you are both saying.

 

I look at Arsenal and it seems to me that is the path we are heading down not the leeds one so I can't buy into the doom and gloom.

 

I agree that the LBO is unfortunate, but that's history now, that was the stupid tax we had to pay for Moores and Parry. Add that on to the money we should have earned while they were doing who knows what and those two have probably cost us anywhere up to a billion quid.

[Delmar]

I look at Arsenal and it seems to me that is the path we are heading down not the leeds one so I can't buy into the doom and gloom.

 

That is an optimistic point of view, and also the only way out that I can see, as long as the two nice old gentlemen are in charge. That would, however, require stability in the management of the club, just as there has been at Arsenal. Are our fans ready for that? Are the owners ready for that?

[JustTosh]

I look at Arsenal and it seems to me that is the path we are heading down

 

Arsenal took their borrowed money, together with some they made available through profits, and used it all on a new stadium. How I wish we were heading down that path. Well, surprise mate, we’re not.

[piscinin]

Short term. Not that bad, really

Medium term. Depends on whether we qualify for the CL and whether we're able to keep our key players. Looks shaky to me, not good at all.

Long term. Looks bad, no new stadium, no investment in the team, really bad indeed.

 

Interesting I see it the opposite way round.

 

Short-term 1 year. Shite, can't even cover the interest payments, have to steal from transfer funds, how the hell can an LBO specialist not work out income - expense must exceed interest payment. Transfer Fund = Net 0.

 

Medium Term 2-5 years. Dodgy. Purslow has at least got a plan that recognizes the reality of the financial situation. Income is growing, interest payments are covered, excess goes to stadium fund. Transfer fund = net 0. On field success depends on academy and reserves players coming through. Missing out on the CL means stadium fund grows slower. New investment = pay down debt further, interest savings go to stadium/transfer fund.

 

Long Term 5+years. Stadium Fund + Naming Rights + Commercial deals = New Stadium. Stadium income up 60m, stadium payments=20m. Transfer fund=20m+commercial income growth. Debt paydown=20m. Increased income from sale of licenced jest hats = 5m :yes:

 

This is what happened at Arsenal and I don't see any appreciable difference other than the fact their debt was all legitimate.

[piscinin]

That is an optimistic point of view, and also the only way out that I can see, as long as the two nice old gentlemen are in charge. That would, however, require stability in the management of the club, just as there has been at Arsenal. Are our fans ready for that? Are the owners ready for that?

 

I am an optimist and you are right about the stability that's why I think Purslow is the single most important person at the club at the moment. He's the only one can ensure that what we are doing is coherent and realistic.

[piscinin]

Arsenal took their borrowed money, together with some they made available through profits, and used it all on a new stadium. How I wish we were heading down that path. Well, surprise mate, we’re not.

 

I know, but that was Moores' and Parry's parting gift what can we do other than deal with it? We'll accumulate profits more slowly because of it, but maybe better commercial deals/naming rights will help to compensate.

[JustTosh]

Long Term 5+years. Stadium Fund + Naming Rights + Commercial deals = New Stadium. Stadium income up 60m, stadium payments=20m. Transfer fund=20m+commercial income growth. Debt paydown=20m. Increased income from sale of licenced jest hats = 5m :yes

 

We borrow 300M £ we could’ve used to start build a stadium. We don’t, actually we don’t invest any of it. So now we take our running profits of 20M a year to pay off 30M a year interest, spend nothing on transfers, expect to still be top 4, and start saving up for a new stadium. Brilliant, give this man a Nobel Price in economy. Toss in the maths price as well.

[Delmar]

Interesting I see it the opposite way round.

 

Short-term 1 year. Shite, can't even cover the interest payments, have to steal from transfer funds, how the hell can an LBO specialist not work out income - expense must exceed interest payment. Transfer Fund = Net 0.

 

Medium Term 2-5 years. Dodgy. Purslow has at least got a plan that recognizes the reality of the financial situation. Income is growing, interest payments are covered, excess goes to stadium fund. Transfer fund = net 0. On field success depends on academy and reserves players coming through. Missing out on the CL means stadium fund grows slower. New investment = pay down debt further, interest savings go to stadium/transfer fund.

 

Long Term 5+years. Stadium Fund + Naming Rights + Commercial deals = New Stadium. Stadium income up 60m, stadium payments=20m. Transfer fund=20m+commercial income growth. Debt paydown=20m. Increased income from sale of licenced jest hats = 5m :yes:

 

This is what happened at Arsenal and I don't see any appreciable difference other than the fact their debt was all legitimate.

 

The thing you do not take into account is that Arsenal could afford all that based on the on field successes they had had earlier. That provided the foundation for the long-term investment at the cost of trophies in the short term.

 

We do not have that luxury, in fact the situation is the opposite. With every loss we, the fans, demand blood, be it the players' or the manager's. The owners will give in at some stage, as they (quite logically) will not fall on their swords.

[piscinin]

The thing you do not take into account is that Arsenal could afford all that based on the on field successes they had had earlier. That provided the foundation for the long-term investment at the cost of trophies in the short term.

 

I did take it into account. I just see that a different mix of profits+naming rights+commercial sponsorship is possible. I also see that if profits are lower it just means shit accumulates more slowly as opposed to not at all.

 

We do not have that luxury, in fact the situation is the opposite. With every loss we, the fans, demand blood, be it the players' or the manager's. The owners will give in at some stage, as they (quite logically) will not fall on their swords.

 

And while tv revenue, sponsorship and gate money continues to roll in you will be ignored. You might be able to get the manager sacked, you might be able to disenchant the odd player, but you will not change the one thing that matters; their greed > your hate. Sorry.

[piscinin]

We borrow 300M £ we could’ve used to start build a stadium. We don’t, actually we don’t invest any of it. So now we take our running profits of 20M a year to pay off 30M a year interest, spend nothing on transfers, expect to still be top 4, and start saving up for a new stadium. Brilliant, give this man a Nobel Price in economy. Toss in the maths price as well.

 

Whoops, seems like I mistook you for someone who wanted to have a sensible discussion. Bye!

[RedLiberation!]

Turds like Chicago Twat and his alternate usernames should be ignored and banned.

 

What are we gonna have next ?

"David Duckenfield and Kelvin McKenzie - why Scousers are Scum"?

[Dicko]

Turds like Chicago Twat and his alternate usernames should be ignored and banned.

 

What are we gonna have next ?

"David Duckenfield and Kelvin McKenzie - why Scousers are Scum"?

 

You are completely beyond help, if you put the current owners on the same level as Duckenfield & Mckenzie, in fact it it's fucking utterly disrespectful to use Hillsborough in any reference.