Jump to content

  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Go fuck yourselves FSG

Neil G

By Neil G,
in FF - Football Forum

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 14k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Mil-ing Around
Mil-ing Around

Controversial to many on here but I think they've been good owners. Some real shady cunts tried to buy us from Tom & Jerry.   FSG came in, stabilised us, kept us at Anfield and redevelop

dave u
dave u

Based on replies to my tweet about this, the defence seems to be that because the club pays tax they're entitled to do this. Another argument is that there are wealthier businesses doing the same and

Grinch
Grinch

Same old cuck banging the FSG drum. Shame the French coppers didn’t give him a good kicking.

Posted Images

Moo Veteran

Moo

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, TD_LFC said:

Because City are at the extreme end.

 

There's an assumption that everything this clubs does is unique (for better or worse) when it isn't the case, we aren't the only club who leaves a transfer window needing more, we aren't the only club that has internal or external debt, we aren't the only club that funds infrastructure projects using loans etc etc

 

You can argue the degree's to which those things happen, you can argue whether there are better solutions, but at least do it from a position of knowing what actually happens and how it correlates with standard business practice/how other clubs approach the same problems and argue the rights and wrongs from there instead of some of the made up shit you often see.

 

Otherwise it all get's very Trumpian where what you say and who you get validation from is more important than the content of what's said.

 

I don't think anyone thinks those things are unique.  I'd say we're fairly unique in the sense that a club of our stature, with it's current successes, with the best manager in the world, with the resources we have, with the appeal we have, with the revenues we have, spends it's time penny pinching.

 

Separately, I've been meaning to ask an open question.  How does FSGs net spend in their time here compare to the rest of modern Liverpool's history? Moores sold up because we couldn't compete financially, even taking City out of the equation we still can't, apparently.  And yet this is the most successful "modern" LFC has ever been.

If not now, when?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TD_LFC Grand Master

TD_LFC

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, Moo said:

I don't think anyone thinks those things are unique.  I'd say we're fairly unique in the sense that a club of our stature, with it's current successes, with the best manager in the world, with the resources we have, with the appeal we have, with the revenues we have, spends it's time penny pinching.

Purely on transfers alone there's been plenty of comments how we're always the club that leave ourselves short during a window (I'd imagine you'd struggle to find a club or fanbase that doesn't think they should do more, #EduOut was trending last night with Arsenal one of the the biggest spenders over the last few years)

 

Or take a tweet posted earlier in the week, stripped of any context, that FSG are the only club in 5 years to pay down a loan, which quickly became on here 'FSG paying themselves back during COVID instead of leaving money in the club'. The payback didn't go to FSG to cover COVID losses and in the same amount of time Man Utd's owners had taken 130 million plus out of the club in dividends which is why they didn't pay back any loans.

 

Argue they should do more (they should), argue they should take more calculated risks (they should), argue there are better ways to fund project X, Y or Z (there probably are), argue that, for the example above, FSG didn't need to draw down the external credit facility and could have found another way through COVID (they could have).

 

But if we're making shit up about things that aren't true when there are plenty of things you can question them on (either through ignorance or intentional) then it all seems a bit pointless.

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
VERBAL DIARRHEA Grand Master

VERBAL DIARRHEA

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, TD_LFC said:

Purely on transfers alone there's been plenty of comments how we're always the club that leave ourselves short during a window (I'd imagine you'd struggle to find a club or fanbase that doesn't think they should do more, #EduOut was trending last night with Arsenal one of the the biggest spenders over the last few years)

 

Or take a tweet posted earlier in the week, stripped of any context, that FSG are the only club in 5 years to pay down a loan, which quickly became on here 'FSG paying themselves back during COVID instead of leaving money in the club'. The payback didn't go to FSG to cover COVID losses and in the same amount of time Man Utd's owners had taken 130 million plus out of the club in dividends which is why they didn't pay back any loans.

 

Argue they should do more (they should), argue they should take more calculated risks (they should), argue there are better ways to fund project X, Y or Z (there probably are). 

 

But if we're making shit up about things that aren't true when there are plenty of things you can question them on (either through ignorance or intentional) then it all seems a bit pointless.

 

 

 

Linda’s latest red number didn’t look cheap, break it down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Moo Veteran

Moo

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, TD_LFC said:

 

Argue they should do more (they should), argue they should take more calculated risks (they should), argue there are better ways to fund project X, Y or Z (there probably are). 

 

 

In response to me you could have just left it there. I've not said the things you are arguing against.

So yes, while we probably disagree on the extent, it does appear we agree that FSG are not doing enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TD_LFC Grand Master

TD_LFC

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

Watch this space. I dont think we are though. He'll sign for Real in my opinion.

I'll go Man City to be different, on the assumption that this is Bernardo Silva's last year and they'll have a bit of a reshuffle (also I wonder if there's more to the Akanji signing than people think).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Moo Veteran

Moo

Posted
Posted

Not a cat in hell's chance on Bellingham, we won't pay him the necessary wages.

I'm gonna say if Ten Hag looks like he's improving them and if they qualify for the CL then he'll go to the Mancs.  Years ago when he was breaking through I thought it was widely known he supported them.

We'll see anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SlugTrail Veteran

SlugTrail

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, MegadriveMan said:

If we haven't got the Bellingham deal pretty much sewn up then it makes it even baffling that we haven't signed a midfielder this summer.

Very much so, I know people will say we should always wait for our number 1 target but Virgil was locked in so he didnt really count and Naby was paid for a year in advance. I cant think of another where we have had to wait for our number 1 target.

 

If we are always looking that far down the road for transfers and you base your whole strategy around that then we will always be unable to react to short and even medium term problems.

 

Not every signing has to be "here for 10 years". If we are backing players to come through the academy then let's start getting players in who we can keep for 3 years and play regularly whilst the youngsters cut their teeth and see if they can hack it (spoiler alert, most of them wont).

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Daisy Veteran

Daisy

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, No2 said:

Out of the half billion Chelsea, Utd and Everton splurged what player would you welcome here? 

 

Going through them all I'd say Casemiro and Sterling. The former is a total non runner for any functioning football club and Sterling wasn't needed.

 

If you asked supporters of those clubs would they take Carvalho and Nunez and they would snap your hand off.

You've seen Salah the past year right?

 

Antony would be the first out of any of them I'd have. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TD_LFC Grand Master

TD_LFC

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Daisy said:

You've seen Salah the past year right?

 

Antony would be the first out of any of them I'd have. 

Since the start of last season

 

Salah - 57 games, 34 goals, 19 assists 

 

Antony - 36 Games, 14 Goals, 12 Assists

 

That Antony?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...