Quantcast
Go fuck yourselves FSG - Page 207 - FF - Football Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content
Neil G

Go fuck yourselves FSG

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, BeefStroganoff said:

The truth is its exhausting all this banging heads in here. I hate them, I always have done, my stance has not changed over the years, I'm very wary of them as owners. All good when the sun is shining but their stewardship will come under scrutiny when Jurgen leaves we will then see just how instrumental he has been, I'm hoping its not a Ferguson moment. I also get why people like them as success must mean they are doing something right to people.

 

I just don't think it is hard to see why people are polarised over them. As frencheyeglass said its constant mixed messages of how clever and great we are regarding finances, whilst crying poverty and being prudent on the flip side. 

 

I had an argument with that plum Gorst the other day about our winnings, he thought it was ridiculous that I was suggesting we were getting 175million for winning the Prem And this is our local Club correspondent. As I've said before maybe the problem lies with our 'connected' journalists, constantly spinning out contradictory content, but no doubt at all in my mind that its coming directly from the club, which in turns winds up the fanbase.

 

I liked it better when you just discovered we'd signed someone in the paper in the 80s!

Surely that's the time to deal with it then, right?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Jose Jones said:

Ah, I never look at the Echo, so there you go. 

The only claims of revenue I've ever noticed are from the Deloitte type stuff, like this one: https://www.forbes.com/sites/chriswilliams/2020/01/14/liverpool-and-manchester-city-close-the-gap-manchester-united-at-risk-deloitte-football-money-league-2020/#2ce34eb44959

 

It does mention us (and Man City) being primed to overtake the red Mancs based on predicted revenues for this year.  Which will obviously be all a bit down the toilet now. 

 

If you go and look at the actual Deloitte report though, the revenue has nothing to do with player sales, as per your previous post, it's split up into Matchday, Broadcast and Commercial.

 

Our split is:

Commercial - 35% (£185.9)

Broadcast - 49% (£263.8)

Matchday -  16% (£83.3)

 

The Mancs is:

Commercial - 45% (£279.6)

Broadcast - 38% (£241.2)

Matchday - 17% (£106.3)

 

If you look at other clubs in the top 10 revenues, most of them do have a larger percentage commercial revenue than us - Real & Barca are 46% revenues through commercial. Bayern are even higher (54%), which I guess is a case of needs must, as their TV revenue is less.  Juventus have the same commercial revenue as us (£185 million) but it's a bigger proportion of their income.

 

In the prem, Chelsea have exactly the same commercial revenue as us (£185 million) but smaller from broadcast and matchday, so it makes a larger amount of their revenue too.

Spurs and Arsenal have way less commercial revenue than us, Spurs £133.9 (29%) and Arsenal £110.9 (28%).

 

So I guess my reading of it is that we have a fair bit of ground to make up on the Mancs, along with Real, Barca and Bayern on the commercial deals side.  The club are performing OK, but we're in a second tier group with Juventus and Chelsea, rather than at the very top table.

 

You would think that over the last couple of years we would have been pretty enticing as a commercial partner being fucking great and all over the telly.

Maybe the Nike deal will work out, but the loss of Western Union as the sleeve sponsor with no-one looking lined up to replace them, and no sponsor for the training ground, doesn't look like the club has been that great at maximising the cash opportunities.

 

Mind you we'd have probably been moaning if the training ground or Main Stand had been named after some company.

 

 

so i have no doubt we are in the 2nd tier. But as I say, some of the FSG cheerleaders at the echo (and other publications) never cease to remind us how we are about to "overtake" the mancs. I have read that forbes article when it was out (I don't have the time now to go back to it) but iirc, it was heavily caveated. 

 

But as I say the key here is about the people who seem to think FSG are superheroes. My point is not how we compare to city and chelsea (city weren't really a thing at that point) but how we have compared to man united over the entire ownership of FSG. That tweet triggered this discussion. 

 

I also think it is very difficult to compare us to teams from oversees, while we obviously compete with them (both on the pitch and for commercial revenue), the fact we are an english team, provides a level of exposure surpassed by no domestic league, so FSG's ability to raise income through sponsorship is significantly improved because we are english. So that leaves me with the teams who should be the benchmark and commercially in this country that has been manchester united for 30 years. Yet we were closer to that benchmark in 2010 under H&G and Ian Ayre driving commercial revenues than we have been under the entirety of the FSG's ownership, with the majority of that time our commercial revenues were driven by Billy Hogan the new CEO. 

 

I think it is pretty fair to be able to question both the quality of the job he has done and the quality of the job FSG have done (considering Hogan is an FSG hire, one of "their boys") when we are further behind our direct rivals than we were when most of our fan base believe we were "run like a corner shop".  

 

We are at a point where the message coming out of the club for 2 seasons running is "we can't afford to enter the transfer market at a significant level" and we were only able to do it previously because we sold Coutinho (confirmed by Klopp). As you point out our broadcast revenues are great - we can thank the Premier League and UEFA for that, coupled with the brilliance of Klopp and his team. We are behind in both commercial and matchday. They made a commitment to provide a 60k stadium which they have only half met which explains some of the shortfall in match day revenues - 10 years and we have just a pretty picture of the road end, having already thrown away a previous picture. Our commercial revenues are completely in their hands and I have covered that. So when we ask why we have no money to compete in the transfer market, is it not fair to ask could both our matchday and commercial revenues be better?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, FrenchEyeGlass said:

 

To be honest mate, I don't think anybody would give a fuck as long as we saw the money invested into the team. 

 

I don't thinks it's an over-exaggeration to say to date under FSG, we've seen commercial deals continually hyped up, sponsors up the fanny, and not a single resultant inflation of net investment in the playing squad. 

I am pretty sure the only reason we don't have a name on the stand is because they found it more lucrative to allow people to sponsor individual lounges. One of the club officials is on record saying this (I think it may have been Moore), but considering all of those sponsors are existing sponsors, it would suggest that was used to try and increase the revenue from those sponsors. It seems a perfectly legitimate way to do it  as long as you can genuinely value it. One thing is for sure, FSG haven't left a sponsors name off the main stand to keep fans happy. They've done it as there's just different ways to skin a cat. 

6 hours ago, No2 said:

The sleeve thing is a little weird. My guess is we had something lined up and ready to sign and then the world changed. Western Union were paying 5m a year iirc, matching or beating that wouldn't have been a problem.

 

Based on the link below we were hoovering up partners so would have had no problem selling the sleeves, again only guessing here but I suspect we will wait and see the lay of the land before signing any deals of this nature.

  

https://www.sportbusiness.com/news/liverpools-commercial-revenue-is-fastest-growing-2018-19-income-stream/

I would suggest we had an automatic rise in the deal should we become champions and WU were allowed to exit rather than paying the increased sum. It seems pretty clear from their statement today it was their wish to walk away. 

2 hours ago, WhiskeyJar said:

If Jurgen has no issues with the owners then I don't see we as fans should want them out. He has said, time and time again, on record too how the owners have played a big part in our recent success.

 

One could argue he is saying that to keep the peace and to deflect any negative criticism aimed at FSG but to be honest, Jurgen doesn't strike me as that kind of personality. If there was something wrong, he would be the first to speak up, I would have thought.

 

From my view there is a sort of synergy between the administrators of the club and the team, which its great to see. They are getting the work done on and off the pitch.

I don't quite understand this argument. Klopp is an employee. And while he's clearly become a fan of the club while doing his job, I would suggest his job is not to hold the ownership to account. Quite the opposite in fact. As fans I think it is only right we do this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Echo's trumpeting of all things Liverpool is a bit cringeworthy. They run some stories and get fans hopes up. A few years back, it was the club had 200m to spend on transfers. When it didnt happen, people blame the club.

 

Im not sure what the club is supposed to do and I dont know of any local paper that doesnt bull it's local club(s) up in exchange for having 'leaks' fed to it.

 

The club's income is clearly increasing. Success on the pitch is the quickest way to increased financial revenues. The news that the PL clubs have decided they all get the full amounts due this season is a sound logical one considering the rebates they are going to have to pay back tv rights holder, the loss of match day revenue since late March and the fact that no one knows when fans are going to be allowed back.

 

That said, while the gap to united might be closing, I expect the speed it's closing will slow somewhat with how things are now. But again, you have the Echo trumpeting this gap narrowing all the time and building expectations. Financially, united are a behemoth and it's partly their lack of success that is enabling us to 'catch up.'

 

They've fallen in a bucket of shit and come out smelling of roses again thanks to leicester's implosion, 20 odd penalties across the season that has seen them limp into the CL and be in with a chance of winning the EL.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, The Gaul said:

so i have no doubt we are in the 2nd tier. But as I say, some of the FSG cheerleaders at the echo (and other publications) never cease to remind us how we are about to "overtake" the mancs. I have read that forbes article when it was out (I don't have the time now to go back to it) but iirc, it was heavily caveated. 

 

But as I say the key here is about the people who seem to think FSG are superheroes. My point is not how we compare to city and chelsea (city weren't really a thing at that point) but how we have compared to man united over the entire ownership of FSG. That tweet triggered this discussion. 

 

I also think it is very difficult to compare us to teams from oversees, while we obviously compete with them (both on the pitch and for commercial revenue), the fact we are an english team, provides a level of exposure surpassed by no domestic league, so FSG's ability to raise income through sponsorship is significantly improved because we are english. So that leaves me with the teams who should be the benchmark and commercially in this country that has been manchester united for 30 years. Yet we were closer to that benchmark in 2010 under H&G and Ian Ayre driving commercial revenues than we have been under the entirety of the FSG's ownership, with the majority of that time our commercial revenues were driven by Billy Hogan the new CEO. 

 

I think it is pretty fair to be able to question both the quality of the job he has done and the quality of the job FSG have done (considering Hogan is an FSG hire, one of "their boys") when we are further behind our direct rivals than we were when most of our fan base believe we were "run like a corner shop".  

 

We are at a point where the message coming out of the club for 2 seasons running is "we can't afford to enter the transfer market at a significant level" and we were only able to do it previously because we sold Coutinho (confirmed by Klopp). As you point out our broadcast revenues are great - we can thank the Premier League and UEFA for that, coupled with the brilliance of Klopp and his team. We are behind in both commercial and matchday. They made a commitment to provide a 60k stadium which they have only half met which explains some of the shortfall in match day revenues - 10 years and we have just a pretty picture of the road end, having already thrown away a previous picture. Our commercial revenues are completely in their hands and I have covered that. So when we ask why we have no money to compete in the transfer market, is it not fair to ask could both our matchday and commercial revenues be better?  

 

Exactly my thoughts.

 

One additional point - they made a commitment that they would invest in stadium expansion - it was a condition of sale, partly because whoever bought us back then was literally getting us for fuck all.

 

What they've actually done is loan us 100m or so and then made the club pay it back immediately. That's why we don't have any money. We're servicing low/little-to-no interest loans in rapid fashion. Why is that the case? There's fuck all interest on the loan, why are FSG pulling from our revenue with such immediacy?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, FrenchEyeGlass said:

What they've actually done is loan us 100m or so and then made the club pay it back immediately. That's why we don't have any money. 

Oh aye, got the figures on that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Nummer Neunzehn said:

Oh aye, got the figures on that?

I'll pull them when I get a chance but per our last annual accounts we've started paying back the $110m loan (I believe we paid back $11m) and the interest on the loan was doubled from 1.2% to 2.5% by FSG in 2018-19.

 

We'll see what happens in our next accounts (due soon enough)

 

EDIT: FYI, all infrastructure investment (I.e. stadium expansion and training ground investment) is excluded from FFP. I'm not sure why we should be okay with paying for it ourselves when they bought us for fuck all and committed to further investment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, FrenchEyeGlass said:

I'll pull them when I get a chance but per our last annual accounts we've started paying back the $110m loan (I believe we paid back $11m) and the interest on the loan was doubled from 1.2% to 2.5% by FSG in 2018-19.

 

We'll see what happens in our next accounts (due soon enough)

 

EDIT: FYI, all infrastructure investment (I.e. stadium expansion and training ground investment) is excluded from FFP. I'm not sure why we should be okay with paying for it ourselves when they bought us for fuck all and committed to further investment.

I'm completely okay with us paying for it via an intercompany loan. I just query your statement that we have no money because of the loans they're recalling immediately. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finances just blows my mind.  You buy a company, you then own the company but you lend it money and charge it interest to pay yourself back what you lent yourself.

 

Like with borrowing money to buy a business that easily pays off the borrowed money. Its like everything is free shit when your loaded.

 

Like I said I've no fucking clue what I'm on about.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

Finances just blows my mind.  You buy a company, you then own the company but you lend it money and charge it interest to pay yourself back what you lent yourself.

 

Like with borrowing money to buy a business that easily pays off the borrowed money. Its like everything is free shit when your loaded.

 

Like I said I've no fucking clue what I'm on about.

You'd be suprised at the number of companies that have subsidiaries and loan them money at commercial interest rates.

 

Im not certain whether the loan on the Main Stand is a pure intra company loan or, a loan taken by FSG which the club is repaying. In any event, Liverpool's accounts show the interest rate is below commercial rates. Neither is it an 'on demand' repayment as might be made out.

 

The deal was the club repaid money as and when. As the Main Stand's income has exceeded expectations, the club has made repayments. Neither is there anything wrong or sinister in that. The quicker a loan is paid off, the less interest in total is paid making the loan cheaper than ordinary repayment terms over say 10 or 15 years.

 

There's this notion that the fans are paying for the stand. That is true and nowadays includes the hospitality element. Same as we did for the Kemlyn road rebuild, 1970 main Stand extension, Centenary Upper and Kop via tickets. It's not something that's just happened for the first time on FSG's watch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, BeefStroganoff said:

The truth is its exhausting all this banging heads in here. I hate them, I always have done, my stance has not changed over the years, I'm very wary of them as owners. All good when the sun is shining but their stewardship will come under scrutiny when Jurgen leaves we will then see just how instrumental he has been, I'm hoping its not a Ferguson moment. I also get why people like them as success must mean they are doing something right to people.

 

I just don't think it is hard to see why people are polarised over them. As frencheyeglass said its constant mixed messages of how clever and great we are regarding finances, whilst crying poverty and being prudent on the flip side. 

 

I had an argument with that plum Gorst the other day about our winnings, he thought it was ridiculous that I was suggesting we were getting 175million for winning the Prem And this is our local Club correspondent. As I've said before maybe the problem lies with our 'connected' journalists, constantly spinning out contradictory content, but no doubt at all in my mind that its coming directly from the club, which in turns winds up the fanbase.

 

I liked it better when you just discovered we'd signed someone in the paper in the 80s!

Then why continue with it ?

I'm sure there are posters in here who are equally fucked off seeing you constantly bleating about the owners.

You hate them - we get the message.

Do you really have to ram the message home on here several times a day ?

I get where you're coming from but you're labouring the same point over and over, and it's fucking tedious.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nummer Neunzehn said:

I'm completely okay with us paying for it via an intercompany loan. I just query your statement that we have no money because of the loans they're recalling immediately. 

I think we will find out in our next set of company accounts. The often peddled line of 'we have bills to pay' used to justify our lack of spend (verbatim what came out of Jurgen's mouth) and the fact that we started repaying the loan almost immediately (and FSG doubled interest on the loan within a year) would make it highly likely that we've continued to pay back those loans.

 

Edit: On your first sentence - I am not. I respect your position and you're entitled to it just as I am mine. I think the owners should be footing the bill for any investment that turns us into a more valuable asset on their books, especially as they promised to do so when they got us for fuck all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, scudger99 said:

Then why continue with it ?

I'm sure there are posters in here who are equally fucked off seeing you constantly bleating about the owners.

You hate them - we get the message.

Do you really have to ram the message home on here several times a day ?

I get where you're coming from but you're labouring the same point over and over, and it's fucking tedious.

 

The same can be said for those on every thread defending FSG as if they are comprised of biblically holy characters. Why don't they stop laboring their points? 

 

The club has spent fuck all over five years and seem likely to continue to do so after winning everything. It's totally understandable why fans are asking questions at the lack of investment right now. 

 

This thread is called 'go fuck yourself FSG'. What do you expect to read on here? If it's tedious find another thread.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, FrenchEyeGlass said:

I think we will find out in our next set of company accounts. The often peddled line of 'we have bills to pay' used to justify our lack of spend (verbatim what came out of Jurgen's mouth) and the fact that we started repaying the loan almost immediately (and FSG doubled interest on the loan within a year) would make it highly likely that we've continued to pay back those loans.

 

Edit: On your first sentence - I am not. I respect your position and you're entitled to it just as I am mine. I think the owners should be footing the bill for any investment that turns us into a more valuable asset on their books, especially as they promised to do so when they got us for fuck all.

Similarly, I’ve no issue with the view that they should dip into their own pockets. I’d like them to do that, but this was never the game with these. 
 

On the early stuff, I’d say your claim about having no money because we have to pay back the loan immediately is dubious. I don’t think there’s anything to suggest that. I do see the ‘bills to pay’ stuff but that’s not the same. I personally don’t buy that we don’t have any money. Whether we spend it or not is another thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

Finances just blows my mind.  You buy a company, you then own the company but you lend it money and charge it interest to pay yourself back what you lent yourself.

 

Like with borrowing money to buy a business that easily pays off the borrowed money. Its like everything is free shit when your loaded.

 

Like I said I've no fucking clue what I'm on about.

Basically, when you are loaded you somehow get away with paying tax and get everyone else to pay for things for you. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a time when the Jordan Henderson thread had the subtext of him being Captain was the equivalent of being fucked by a person with Herpes.

 

Hopefully somebody sees sense and rather than leave this thread title as it is, it gets changed something more conducive to reasoned, balance views rather than the bias of how FSG should go and fuck themselves.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Fluter in Dakota said:

There was a time when the Jordan Henderson thread had the subtext of him being Captain was the equivalent of being fucked by a person with Herpes.

 

Hopefully somebody sees sense and rather than leave this thread title as it is, it gets changed something more conducive to reasoned, balance views rather than the bias of how FSG should go and fuck themselves.

 

I mean, in the grand scheme of things...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FrenchEyeGlass said:

 

The same can be said for those on every thread defending FSG as if they are comprised of biblically holy characters. Why don't they stop laboring their points? 

 

The club has spent fuck all over five years and seem likely to continue to do so after winning everything. It's totally understandable why fans are asking questions at the lack of investment right now. 

 

This thread is called 'go fuck yourself FSG'. What do you expect to read on here? If it's tedious find another thread.

Pretty much what I have read from the same faces, repeatedly.

There are some valid points being made but at times, but it's difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. 

So if it's quite alright with you I'll read what the fuck I like and comment as I see fit.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, scudger99 said:

Pretty much what I have read from the same faces, repeatedly.

There are some valid points being made but at times, but it's difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. 

So if it's quite alright with you I'll read what the fuck I like and comment as I see fit.

 

It's fine with me mate! You're the one complaining about something you have full control in not being irked about =D

 

Look, as an aside. I do also appreciate the covering of all ground is tiresome. But I think some of that is born out of frustration. Sometimes people just come on here to vent, so that's probably the 'chaff' you're talking about. 

 

I do find odd the hostility aimed towards those who want more investment. They're only desperate for it because they want us to be dominant, have a dynasty and give Klopp every chance of winning every fucking thing possible because we know how brilliant he is.

 

We all want the same thing in the end...

  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×