Go fuck yourselves FSG

[an tha]

An interesting take....

 

https://www.thisisanfield.com/2022/11/liverpool-in-limbo-as-era-of-success-threatens-to-be-torn-down/

[El Dangerous]

Coaches and admin staff come and go all the time, who actually gives a fuck? We got the main man and that’s all that matters. Give him some money you cuntbags.

[niallers]

12 minutes ago, El Dangerous said:

Coaches and admin staff come and go all the time, who actually gives a fuck? We got the main man and that’s all that matters. Give him some money you cuntbags.

This could be on an Xmas or birthday  card.

[VladimirIlyich]

1 hour ago, niallers said:

This could be on an Xmas or birthday  card.

It is. Ulla's card to John Henry.

[Baltar]

How hard is this job anyway? Mo's contract is running out, what shall we do? Hmm. Let's offer him a new deal! Done. Easy. We need a striker, who has played well against us, is young, and liked by the manager already? Darwin Nunez. Done and done. Give me the job, I'll be handing out new contracts and delivering new strikers each week. Easy peasy. 

[suzy]

It’s all rather unsettling. 

[Scott_M]

Urgh.

 

 

To me, we are a smarter buy / investment than the mancs.

 

Firstly, they’ll be more expensive, likely to the tune of >£1bn.

 

Our ground is more or less done. They need to spend a lot of money to tart up Old Trafford.

 

Same for the training ground. Ours is state of the art brand new, theirs hasn’t changed in 15+ years.

 

Our side doesn’t need as much work. Undoubtably it needs some work, not close to as much the mancs still need. 
 

While I get they might bring in more money, we’re closing the gap on that all the time. 
 

Still, I’d much, much, much prefer it not to be Saudi’s. 

[joe_fishfish]

That would be beyond shit. Fuck that right off. Would actually make me stop following football entirely.

[No2]

29 minutes ago, Scott_M said:

Urgh.

 

 

To me, we are a smarter buy / investment than the mancs.

 

Firstly, they’ll be more expensive, likely to the tune of >£1bn.

 

Our ground is more or less done. They need to spend a lot of money to tart up Old Trafford.

 

Same for the training ground. Ours is state of the art brand new, theirs hasn’t changed in 15+ years.

 

Our side doesn’t need as much work. Undoubtably it needs some work, not close to as much the mancs still need. 
 

While I get they might bring in more money, we’re closing the gap on that all the time. 
 

Still, I’d much, much, much prefer it not to be Saudi’s. 

In fairness to the Saudis (probably the first time I've ever written that) that headline is very misleading. He said if private investors from Saudi where interested then the government would be supportive of the idea.

[Scott_M]

5 minutes ago, Harrison Booth said:

In fairness to the Saudis (probably the first time I've ever written that) that headline is very misleading. He said if private investors from Saudi where interested then the government would be supportive of the idea.

What would PIF be classed as? 

[Trumo]

If we got taken over by the Saudis, Daisy wouldn't be allowed to call them cunts.

[No2]

1 minute ago, Scott_M said:

What would PIF be classed as? 

State investment, they literally invest the resources of the state into businesses for the benefit of Saudi Arabia. 

 

 

What was said is no different than Rishi Sunak saying he would be supportive of Richard Branson buying Man Utd. The big difference of course is how close the ties are between big business in Saudi and their government compared to countries that don't dice and bag dissenters.

 

[HBenn]

32 minutes ago, Scott_M said:

Urgh.

 

 

To me, we are a smarter buy / investment than the mancs.

 

Firstly, they’ll be more expensive, likely to the tune of >£1bn.

 

Our ground is more or less done. They need to spend a lot of money to tart up Old Trafford.

 

Same for the training ground. Ours is state of the art brand new, theirs hasn’t changed in 15+ years.

 

Our side doesn’t need as much work. Undoubtably it needs some work, not close to as much the mancs still need. 
 

While I get they might bring in more money, we’re closing the gap on that all the time. 
 

Still, I’d much, much, much prefer it not to be Saudi’s. 

It will be interesting to see how easily the Glazers sell Utd. 

 

 

 

The advantages they have are the size of ground (even if it needs updating) and supposedly the fanbase size. I read that it is supposedly over a billion but I cannot believe it is really that much bigger than ours. 

 

The training ground needs modernising but again that is small beer isn't it? £50m in a transaction of £4bn plus. 

 

I think it will come down to who is the greediest of the two personally.

 

Currently the suggestion is that the Glazers are looking at what £5-6bn for them? Ok, that maybe a bit of brinkmanship but if they really are looking at that sort of number and don't get it then the shit could really hit the fan for them. Could be reminiscent of us with Hicks where he just saying no out of greed. 

 

They have taken all manner of shit from the fans and not battered an eyelid so will be interesting to see how much they dig in now. I may well be proven wrong but I don't think FSG will operate in the same way. 

[FrenchEyeGlass]

No proof FSG have withheld funds from Jurgen they told us. 
 

@JamesPearceLFC:

It has not all been plain sailing for Julian Ward. #Liverpool were dealing with a midfield injury crisis in August and FSG was reluctant to commit significant funds, so Ward ended up signing Juventus’ Arthur on loan on deadline day

[Barnesey]

The population of the planet has just passed 8bn. 1 in 8 support Utd? Unlikely, I would have thought

[gkmacca]

On 17/11/2022 at 22:25, Red_or_Dead said:

The fat fucking nonce looks like he's been crying his eyes out.

He moves his mouth like a failed ventriloquist. And he is as insightful about football as a failed ventriloquist, too.*

 

 

 

*waits fatalistically for my 83rd ban from DJ Sydney

[Scott_M]

2 minutes ago, HBenn said:

It will be interesting to see how easily the Glazers sell Utd. 

 

 

 

The advantages they have are the size of ground (even if it needs updating) and supposedly the fanbase size. I read that it is supposedly over a billion but I cannot believe it is really that much bigger than ours. 

 

The training ground needs modernising but again that is small beer isn't it? £50m in a transaction of £4bn plus. I

While I agree with all that, it all adds up.

 

Likely at least an extra billion in the purchase.

 

For arguments sake, to update Old Trafford & Carrington, let’s say they need to spend what we spent on the Main Stand, ARE & Kirkby (£115m + £80m + £50m).

 

Playing squad is obviously up for more debate, I still think they need to strengthen more than we do. 
 

So it all adds up. That’s an extra >£1.25bn, at least, when we are closing the figures on revenue all the time - last figures show the mancs were $663m and we were $654m.

 

Obviously whatever new owners will look to grow the club further, is spending >£1.25bn more worth an extra $9m income? 

[Scott_M]

11 minutes ago, FrenchEyeGlass said:

No proof FSG have withheld funds from Jurgen they told us. 
 

@JamesPearceLFC:

It has not all been plain sailing for Julian Ward. #Liverpool were dealing with a midfield injury crisis in August and FSG was reluctant to commit significant funds, so Ward ended up signing Juventus’ Arthur on loan on deadline day

Define significant funds.

 

There might well have been £40m there to buy, for example, Neves. There might not have been the £100m to buy Bellingham. 
 

Who knows. Some of us will read one thing from that, some will read another. 

[HBenn]

2 minutes ago, Scott_M said:

While I agree with all that, it all adds up.

 

Likely at least an extra billion in the purchase.

 

For arguments sake, to update Old Trafford & Carrington, let’s say they need to spend what we spent on the Main Stand, ARE & Kirkby (£115m + £80m + £50m).

 

Playing squad is obviously up for more debate, I still think they need to strengthen more than we do. 
 

So it all adds up. That’s an extra >£1.25bn, at least, when we are closing the figures on revenue all the time - last figures show the mancs were $663m and we were $654m.

 

Obviously whatever new owners will look to grow the club further, is spending >£1.25bn more worth an extra $9m income? 

Don't really disagree with you. I am struggling to understand though why they think they can even justify that number in the first place? 

Will their revenue jump significantly if they get back in CL? 

I mean based on what you have said above you would think it's a no-brainer. I think Forbes kind of agreed with what you said and valued then at £3.9bn compared to our £3.6bn (even that seems a bit of a too big a gap). On top of that how does their £500m debt Vs our £150m debt play into it all?

 

Is the argument that they have more potential? I.e. If they played every match and got to a CL final their revenue would dwarf ours? We are getting £600m and they are still getting more having not even been in CL? If so, still feels a hefty premium based on potential. 

[Scott_M]

6 minutes ago, HBenn said:

Don't really disagree with you. I am struggling to understand though why they think they can even justify that number in the first place? 

Will their revenue jump significantly if they get back in CL? 

I mean based on what you have said above you would think it's a no-brainer. I think Forbes kind of agreed with what you said and valued then at £3.9bn compared to our £3.6bn (even that seems a bit of a too big a gap). On top of that how does their £500m debt Vs our £150m debt play into it all?

 

Is the argument that they have more potential? I.e. If they played every match and got to a CL final their revenue would dwarf ours? We are getting £600m and they are still getting more having not even been in CL? If so, still feels a hefty premium based on potential. 

 

I was thinking that about the CL but they have still been qualifying for it, although not every season. 
 

18/19 they got to the Quarter Finals.

 

20/21 they went out in the Groups. 

 

21/22 they went out in the Last 16. 
 

So although big areas of improvement possible, I’m not as sure it’s that huge.

[HBenn]

19 minutes ago, FrenchEyeGlass said:

No proof FSG have withheld funds from Jurgen they told us. 
 

@JamesPearceLFC:

It has not all been plain sailing for Julian Ward. #Liverpool were dealing with a midfield injury crisis in August and FSG was reluctant to commit significant funds, so Ward ended up signing Juventus’ Arthur on loan on deadline day

The rhetoric coming from the journalists yesterday was interesting. All seemed to be on the same page in that they said there is an acknowledgement within the club that the current model doesn't work anymore (no shit Sherlock) but then there was a difference in how some described it. 

 

Some were saying there is an acknowledgement that the self sufficiency model doesn't work and I think one even said that there was an acknowledgement that looking to pretty much break even every summer can work no longer. 

 

Like Scott M said things can be interpreted different ways. If they are saying that the club didn't want to spend significant amounts that is open to interpretation. If the club have really been operating to a model of looking to pretty much break even on transfers every summer no wonder we are getting into a mess. If they are working to a model of the club being self sufficient then that is not necessarily the same thing 

[HBenn]

1 minute ago, Scott_M said:

 

I was thinking that about the CL but they have still been qualifying for it, although not every season. 
 

18/19 they got to the Quarter Finals.

 

20/21 they went out in the Groups. 

 

21/22 they went out in the Last 16. 
 

So although big areas of improvement possible, I’m not as sure it’s that huge.

Yes, fair point. 

 

Part of me thinks the Glazers are in for a bit if a rude awakening. Part of me thinks I maybe though as I was surprised how much Chelsea went for considering he was in such an apparent weak negotiating position. 

 

Ideally though ours is sufficiently advanced that it has very little impact. 

[Megadrive Man]

That report saying United had 1.1 billion fans worldwide has already been debunked! 

 

It was done by polsters and they did a small sample, then scaled it up! 

It would mean 1 in 7 people in the world support United, when we know that not even 1 in 7 people in England do!

[Scott_M]

1 minute ago, HBenn said:

Yes, fair point. 

 

Part of me thinks the Glazers are in for a bit if a rude awakening. Part of me thinks I maybe though as I was surprised how much Chelsea went for considering he was in such an apparent weak negotiating position. 

 

Ideally though ours is sufficiently advanced that it has very little impact. 

 

Chelsea definitely feel over priced, especially considering the circumstances of its sale.

 

Also, Chelsea might have good revenues but they lose a fortune each season. 

[Scott_M]

3 minutes ago, MegadriveMan said:

That report saying United had 1.1 billion fans worldwide has already been debunked! 

 

It was done by polsters and they did a small sample, then scaled it up! 

It would mean 1 in 7 people in the world support United, when we know that not even 1 in 7 people in England do!

I doubt 1:8 people in Salford support Man Utd!