Go fuck yourselves FSG

[Tony Moanero]

[dockers_strike]

27 minutes ago, Doctor Troy said:

The Echo are supposed to be the local paper but lots of foreign fans read the web version and use it as a source of information rather than the national press who stick the boot in whenever they can.

 

They do some ok articles, especially when they do articles about past players. They have done some good articles about about Clemence and Ian St John who have both passed away recently. 

 

I dont even click on the stories about FSG apart from one the other day which I posted about. But the arselicking articles are pathetic and it's not about the club itself, it's about how great the owners are and rehashing the same things over and over again. I don't mind reading about the players in the u18s and U23s as long as it isn't because the owners just want to push the "let's save some money". 

 

Every time they want to put it out there that there's no money or whatever excuse for not spending they brief the lackeys in the local press are happy to oblige. That Melissa Reddy was comical saying FSG sorted Liverpool's centre back problem with a shrewd last minute spend of £1m when she should have been asking why they didn't have a proper plan in place to get a centre back in as soon as VVD was injured. 

 

I know we are going to disagree as you think the owners are great and I think that they are blag artists. 

 

The Echo is still written by journalists in the offices based in Liverpool, it is printed in Oldham. 

 

 

 

 

You see, this is where assumptions are made that are incorrect. I consider the owners are better than a lot of people are prepared to admit. Would I describe them as great? No. But like I repeatedly keep saying, I dont want an Abramovich \ Mansour \ PSG model of ownership.

 

As for the Echo, like I said, it's not called the 'manc' Echo for nothing. How can anyone be embarassed by what a fucking 3rd party writes about the club?

 

So what if Melissa fucking Reddy writes shit? Shit is shit. What's that got to do with the club?

 

Who the fuck is 'embarassed' by what other fucking eejit fans think about the Echo's stories on Liverpool? Most of these are the same eejits who call us murderers or where shouting null and void at the top of their lungs last year.

[Scott_M]

This thread should be renamed “Go fuck yourselves The Echo”. 

[Scott_M]

Without all the sniping about FSG, this 10% £536 investment and adding Lebron as a partner is interesting stuff.

 

In my opinion any way. 
 

Firstly, as we’re part of that FSG umbrella, will any of that £536m find itself filtering down to us? I’ve no idea on the answer but you’d assume the investors will want a return on their money, and the best way to do that is by having winning teams.

 

Similarly, with Lebron, he’ll be wanting to maximise his investment (he was “given” 2% rather than buying in wasn’t he?) but I see he’s done Nike promo shoots with Mbappe before. Haaland also wears Nike.

 

Not for 1 second am I saying we’ll be signing those two players or whatever, but it’s certainly makes you think what the overall strategy and objective is.
 

I know the responses will be “Sell the club for the maximum profit”, which very well be true, but the only way to sell for a maximum profit is to grow and grow the business (sorry for that term) and the best way to grow is to be successful. 

 

I clearly don’t have an answer to any of the above and I’m just throwing shite up really, but it feels like interesting plans are afoot. 

[Megadrive Man]

33 minutes ago, Scott_M said:

I know the responses will be “Sell the club for the maximum profit”, which very well be true, but the only way to sell for a maximum profit is to grow and grow the business (sorry for that term) and the best way to grow is to be successful. 

 

FSG paid around 300 million for the club and we are now worth around 1.7 billion. How much more can this club realistically grow and also who would buy a football club at that sort of price? 

 

One one hand I do think that FSG have lit a ceiling in terms of success with us, but on the other I worry that our next owners would just use us the way that the Glazers have with United.  

 

[dockers_strike]

5 minutes ago, MegadriveMan said:

 

FSG paid around 300 million for the club and we are now worth around 1.7 billion. How much more can this club realistically grow and also who would buy a football club at that sort of price? 

 

One one hand I do think that FSG have lit a ceiling in terms of success with us, but on the other I worry that our next owners would just use us the way that the Glazers have with United.  

 

I think the club has plenty of growing to do with continued success on the pitch which in turn results in increased sponsorship deals. We're probably at the growth point the mancs were at sometime around 2000 give or take a year or two.

 

[Barrington Womble]

9 hours ago, Ronnie Whelan said:

That kind of shite is just insulting to us. Yeah he may be an incredible talent but doing it at senior level is a whole different thing especially at a club that has aspirations to win trophies. 

It's just part of the shite the echo do and when we don't buy a forward in the summer, it'll be because we don't want to block this kids path. They can't get away with that if they haven't been hyped to fuck 1st. 

1 hour ago, Scott_M said:

Without all the sniping about FSG, this 10% £536 investment and adding Lebron as a partner is interesting stuff.

 

In my opinion any way. 
 

Firstly, as we’re part of that FSG umbrella, will any of that £536m find itself filtering down to us? I’ve no idea on the answer but you’d assume the investors will want a return on their money, and the best way to do that is by having winning teams.

 

Similarly, with Lebron, he’ll be wanting to maximise his investment (he was “given” 2% rather than buying in wasn’t he?) but I see he’s done Nike promo shoots with Mbappe before. Haaland also wears Nike.

 

Not for 1 second am I saying we’ll be signing those two players or whatever, but it’s certainly makes you think what the overall strategy and objective is.
 

I know the responses will be “Sell the club for the maximum profit”, which very well be true, but the only way to sell for a maximum profit is to grow and grow the business (sorry for that term) and the best way to grow is to be successful. 

 

I clearly don’t have an answer to any of the above and I’m just throwing shite up really, but it feels like interesting plans are afoot. 

Would you expect any of that money to filter to any parts of FSG? It'll either go in the current partners pockets or they'll use it to invest and expand their empire. The echo never stop banging on about them doing a red bull, so it would be no surprise to see them buy another couple of no mark clubs. Or maybe even some type of US soccer franchise. 

[Red_or_Dead]

1 hour ago, Scott_M said:

Firstly, as we’re part of that FSG umbrella, will any of that £536m find itself filtering down to us? I’ve no idea on the answer but you’d assume the investors will want a return on their money, and the best way to do that is by having winning teams.

 

Similarly, with Lebron, he’ll be wanting to maximise his investment (he was “given” 2% rather than buying in wasn’t he?) but I see he’s done Nike promo shoots with Mbappe before. Haaland also wears Nike.

 

Not for 1 second am I saying we’ll be signing those two players or whatever, but it’s certainly makes you think what the overall strategy and objective is.
 

I know the responses will be “Sell the club for the maximum profit”, which very well be true, but the only way to sell for a maximum profit is to grow and grow the business (sorry for that term) and the best way to grow is to be successful. 

 

I clearly don’t have an answer to any of the above and I’m just throwing shite up really, but it feels like interesting plans are afoot. 

No.

 

[Salou]

2 hours ago, Scott_M said:

Without all the sniping about FSG, this 10% £536 investment and adding Lebron as a partner is interesting stuff.

 

In my opinion any way. 
 

Firstly, as we’re part of that FSG umbrella, will any of that £536m find itself filtering down to us? I’ve no idea on the answer but you’d assume the investors will want a return on their money, and the best way to do that is by having winning teams.

 

Similarly, with Lebron, he’ll be wanting to maximise his investment (he was “given” 2% rather than buying in wasn’t he?) but I see he’s done Nike promo shoots with Mbappe before. Haaland also wears Nike.

 

Not for 1 second am I saying we’ll be signing those two players or whatever, but it’s certainly makes you think what the overall strategy and objective is.
 

I know the responses will be “Sell the club for the maximum profit”, which very well be true, but the only way to sell for a maximum profit is to grow and grow the business (sorry for that term) and the best way to grow is to be successful. 

 

I clearly don’t have an answer to any of the above and I’m just throwing shite up really, but it feels like interesting plans are afoot. 

The Boston Globe article makes it clear that the majority (600 million out of 750 million) goes to the existing partners

 

The RedBird cash infusion will give the firm an 11 percent stake of FSG, which will have an enterprise value of approximately $7.35 billion. FSG will have $600 million-$700 million in debt, with more than $600 million cash going out to existing partners.

[Scott_M]

On 18/03/2021 at 20:20, Barrington Womble said:

Would you expect any of that money to filter to any parts of FSG? It'll either go in the current partners pockets or they'll use it to invest and expand their empire. The echo never stop banging on about them doing a red bull, so it would be no surprise to see them buy another couple of no mark clubs. Or maybe even some type of US soccer franchise. 

 

If some of the money came to us, then I would fully expect some of the money to go to go to the Red Sox, the Nascar team and whoever else.

 

As you've mentioned though, and somebody posted from the Boston Globe further down, it's going back to investors anyway, so it's a moot point.

 

Getting back to the Lebron James stuff, it's certainly interesting what plans they have for him. He's never played for the Celtics (I know FSG don't own them anyway), I haven't seen him having any links to baseball in the same way Michael Jordan did and I've no idea about Nascar at all. 

 

There is a big thing on him in the club shop at Anfield. It might be something as simples as us selling Lebron stuff in the club shops, but I'd hope it would work both ways and we get some similar exposure & benefits off the back of it as well.

 

I've no idea if the any of the other big Nike clubs have other sports men or women attached. Obviously, say Barcelona, operate having the basketball, handball etc teams under their umbrella, and for example, basketball is very popular on the continent, but I've no idea if any of their players are as well known as Lebron or have the same global pull - I'd suspect not, but I could be wrong.

 

Again, I've no idea what any of this means really and am only really thinking out loud, but to me, it feels like it could be something beneficial for us. 

[Scott_M]

On 18/03/2021 at 19:38, MegadriveMan said:

 

FSG paid around 300 million for the club and we are now worth around 1.7 billion. How much more can this club realistically grow and also who would buy a football club at that sort of price? 

 

One one hand I do think that FSG have lit a ceiling in terms of success with us, but on the other I worry that our next owners would just use us the way that the Glazers have with United.  

 

 

Re-do the Anfield Road End, clubs having their own streaming TV deals, expanded Champions League or European Leagues...

 

There are definitely ways they can continue to expand. But for all the above to be maximised, they need to continue to be successful on the pitch.

[Barrington Womble]

3 hours ago, Scott_M said:

 

If some of the money came to us, then I would fully expect some of the money to go to go to the Red Sox, the Nascar team and whoever else.

 

As you've mentioned though, and somebody posted from the Boston Globe further down, it's going back to investors anyway, so it's a moot point.

 

Getting back to the Lebron James stuff, it's certainly interesting what plans they have for him. He's never played for the Celtics (I know FSG don't own them anyway), I haven't seen him having any links to baseball in the same way Michael Jordan did and I've no idea about Nascar at all. 

 

There is a big thing on him in the club shop at Anfield. It might be something as simples as us selling Lebron stuff in the club shops, but I'd hope it would work both ways and we get some similar exposure & benefits off the back of it as well.

 

I've no idea if the any of the other big Nike clubs have other sports men or women attached. Obviously, say Barcelona, operate having the basketball, handball etc teams under their umbrella, and for example, basketball is very popular on the continent, but I've no idea if any of their players are as well known as Lebron or have the same global pull - I'd suspect not, but I could be wrong.

 

Again, I've no idea what any of this means really and am only really thinking out loud, but to me, it feels like it could be something beneficial for us. 

There was a throw away paragraph in one of the million fsg articles in the echo this week which suggested the money will be used to buy other companies - it might be another club(s), but could be in adjacent verticals. I think it could go either way. 

 

3 hours ago, Scott_M said:

 

Re-do the Anfield Road End, clubs having their own streaming TV deals, expanded Champions League or European Leagues...

 

There are definitely ways they can continue to expand. But for all the above to be maximised, they need to continue to be successful on the pitch.

100% there's more room for growth, although we may well see a plateau for a cycle while things recover from covid. I'm not sure the Annie road is anything significant, but certainly TV/streaming, competition restructure and sponsorship has loads of opportunity.

 

In 10 years I think all games will be streamed (or there'll be an option to do it legally), there'll be a completely different looking European competition , there'll be the  FIFA world club cup in a much larger format than today and with the likes of this new Benelux league on the way, I think there'll be a level of domestic restructuring to help keep it fresh for viewers - I think perhaps we may well see the charity shield dumped, a drive for 18 club league and replaced with some type of competition with the top sides which moves globally each year - maybe the top 8 and it'll be a part of an extended pre-season. 

[Scott_M]

3 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

100% there's more room for growth, although we may well see a plateau for a cycle while things recover from covid. I'm not sure the Annie road is anything significant, but certainly TV/streaming, completion restructure and sponsorship has loads of opportunity.

 

 

Maybe not but it does stick another 6000 bums on seats, which at £50 each is £5.4m over a league season. Plus extra additional corporate revenue it generates. All these little bits added together makes the overall pie larger.

 

Or something. 

[Barrington Womble]

2 minutes ago, Scott_M said:

 

Maybe not but it does stick another 6000 bums on seats, which at £50 each is £5.4m over a league season. Plus extra additional corporate revenue it generates. All these little bits added together makes the overall pie larger.

 

Or something. 

Yeah, but that money will go back out of the door to pay for it. It'll bring in more money than that though, I don't think there's much intention to do 50 quid tickets. My understanding is they've been waiting to see how that junior level hospitality that spurs have done went, where you pay about 3 times the normal price for a ticket and it gives you access to buy a pint in a bar and some higher quality take away food you can eat in your bar. LFC have had massive success selling full hospitality to regular fans (where it's an all inclusive sit down meal and booze, which made up for failing to sell to corporates), so this is a step in between (and probably less value!). 

[dockers_strike]

Getting another 6000 fans into the stadium isnt anything significant?

 

David Moores had us stuck at 45000 for fucking years and the capacity of the ground will have been increased by a third since then when this development is complete.

[No2]

Le Bron has done in his ankle. He gets us.

[Barrington Womble]

21 hours ago, dockers_strike said:

Getting another 6000 fans into the stadium isnt anything significant?

 

David Moores had us stuck at 45000 for fucking years and the capacity of the ground will have been increased by a third since then when this development is complete.

Financially it won't make any difference at all as it'll have to pay for itself. In fact it'll give them more excuses not to spend in the mean time. The revenues and value of the club (which we're talking about) 6000 more fans is a drop in the ocean. 6000 more sests is about giving access to games for more people to see the team in the flesh. It just isn't about revenue. Which is why it's still a drawing and we don't have planning permission after more than 10 years. If there was anything to be gained for increased capital value (like the hospitality in the main stand) it would be built by now. 

[dockers_strike]

1 hour ago, No2 said:

Le Bron has done in his ankle. He gets us.

Our reach and influence is world wide!

[Megadrive Man]

On 20/03/2021 at 10:16, Scott_M said:

 

Re-do the Anfield Road End, clubs having their own streaming TV deals, expanded Champions League or European Leagues...

 

There are definitely ways they can continue to expand. But for all the above to be maximised, they need to continue to be successful on the pitch.

 

TV streaming is the only way I can see a significant rise now. 

 

Tifo/The Athletic made a video on it a while ago. Either one of the tech giants buys up all the rights for both national and International broadcasting and blows Sky/BT out of the water or the Premier League create and sell their own streaming service. 

[DJLJ]

50 minutes ago, MegadriveMan said:

 

TV streaming is the only way I can see a significant rise now. 

 

Tifo/The Athletic made a video on it a while ago. Either one of the tech giants buys up all the rights for both national and International broadcasting and blows Sky/BT out of the water or the Premier League create and sell their own streaming service. 

This is already the case in most countries, the only real untapped area is the UK and they won’t get anything like blown out by that amount. We are getting fairly close to the ceiling in my opinion. 

[Megadrive Man]

2 hours ago, DJLJ said:

This is already the case in most countries, the only real untapped area is the UK and they won’t get anything like blown out by that amount. We are getting fairly close to the ceiling in my opinion. 

Here's a link to the video which suggests otherwise;

 

 

 

 

[Halcyon Days]

25 minutes ago, MegadriveMan said:

Here's a link to the video which suggests otherwise;

 

 

 

 

Hence why FSG are going nowhere.

[VladimirIlyich]

6 hours ago, dockers_strike said:

Our reach and influence is world wide!

It was his reach that caused the problem.

[Barrington Womble]

See how fucking clever we are part 6781

 

Danny Ings and Man City could be about to make Liverpool millions

 

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/liverpool-man-city-danny-ings-20231192#ICID=Android_LFCEchoNewsApp_AppShare

[Scott_M]

12 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

See how fucking clever we are part 6781

 

Danny Ings and Man City could be about to make Liverpool millions

 

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/liverpool-man-city-danny-ings-20231192#ICID=Android_LFCEchoNewsApp_AppShare

 

Shouldn't this be in a "Go Fuck Yourselves The Echo" thread?