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

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, M_B said:

Plenty of other bonuses - goals, appearances, league position, clean sheets. You get a bonus for being on the bench but not used these days. Lots of clubs use a plethora of bonus clauses, which is why you always hear people wondering how the likes of Spurs pay such low wages.

 

Its reasonable to ask questions about how wages are calculated for sure, although there wont be any answers. Its not reasonable for amateur armchair accountants to accuse the club of illegal activity by leaping to the conclusion that funds are being siphoned off for other purposes.

As I say, it doesn't need to be illegal, it can just be creative with the truth. I'm not really sure why anyone would think the accounts are not creative to some extent. What's for sure is there's no reason to assume because something is written in a set of accounts under a particular heading like wages it actually has to mean salaries going out of the door to employees. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

As I say, it doesn't need to be illegal, it can just be creative with the truth. I'm not really sure why anyone would think the accounts are not creative to some extent. What's for sure is there's no reason to assume because something is written in a set of accounts under a particular heading like wages it actually has to mean salaries going out of the door to employees. 


It’s like KPMG or other massive financial institutions have never picked up on companies lying through their teeth when auditing accounts. 
 

Let alone putting genuine costs under a more ‘general heading’. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, M_B said:

The trouble with fag packet calculations is that they are invariably wrong. Your wage bill is based on The Mirror as a source of info and you have no idea what bonuses are paid out during a season when LFC became champions of the world.

 

Which is more likely - your rough calculations are out or our accountants are committing fraud?

Sounds like that bluenose years ago over having money left to sign Hamez.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, lifetime fan said:

I bet with your fucking shit sense of humour you work in finance you boring cunt. 


I do.

 

If only we were so riotously funny, have so many slide splittingly hysterical (and not at all made up) stories & as many priceless pictures of burnt Yorkshire Puddings & soggy vegetables, as you. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, lifetime fan said:


Hahahaha

 

Fucking hell you do! 

 

I don't try to be anybody else on the forum apart from myself. Like it or don't, I don't care.

 

Of the multiple people I've met off the forum, this Lifetime Fan / "Col" caricature you portray is not you at all and in real life your a lot more meek, weird and quite pathetic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, lifetime fan said:


It’s like KPMG or other massive financial institutions have never picked up on companies lying through their teeth when auditing accounts. 
 

Let alone putting genuine costs under a more ‘general heading’. 

Yep. And it doesn't have to be illegal. They can do lots of things that are both legal and will get past auditors. I'm not suggesting even for a second they're doing anything illegal, because I don't think they are. However, as I keep saying, a set of accounts isn't a bank statement. It's a picture of a company and if you put 3 accountants together it would be pretty certain with the same set of info and no direction, they would create 3 different sets of accounts. Just like 3 artists would painting a picture of a bowl of bananas. Lots and lots of stuff is open to interpretation. 

32 minutes ago, Scott_M said:

Amazing how many accountants, auditors, risk assessors, financial managers & forecasters, for multi, multi million pound companies the forum has. 

Well I run a company, so I have a pretty reasonable idea of what can and can't be done. I'm not quite of a size that requires my accounts to be audited, but I've run the p&l for companies that have had that requirement. Accounts are barely worth the paper they're written on and it's why when a company buys another there.is usually a period of due diligence to allow the purchaser to go through the books themselves to see if the accounts (which will have been audited) represent the reality of the health of the company. If accounts were a 100% picture of reality, that process would never be required on audited accounts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Scott_M said:

 

I don't try to be anybody else on the forum apart from myself. Like it or don't, I don't care.

 

Of the multiple people I've met off the forum, this Lifetime Fan / "Col" caricature you portray is not you at all and in real life your a lot more meek, weird and quite pathetic.

OH SNAP, here we go! 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Scott_M said:

 

I don't try to be anybody else on the forum apart from myself. Like it or don't, I don't care.

 

Of the multiple people I've met off the forum, this Lifetime Fan / "Col" caricature you portray is not you at all and in real life your a lot more meek, weird and quite pathetic.


You’ve met me in real life? 
 

News to me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, M_B said:

The trouble with fag packet calculations is that they are invariably wrong. Your wage bill is based on The Mirror as a source of info and you have no idea what bonuses are paid out during a season when LFC became champions of the world.

 

Which is more likely - your rough calculations are out or our accountants are committing fraud?

It's not fraud if that money is actually paid to people 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyhoo, apologies for continuing the derailment of the thread. 
 

I’m not going to go over my previous thoughts on FSG but, after minimal spending over the past 18 months, if other lesser clubs significantly outspend is this summer, I do think there is a question to be answered as to why. 

 

I’m still confident Klopp & the squad can deliver again, but I’m less confident than I was going into 19/20.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Brian Reade’s piece in the Mirror today was a good representation of my current views.

 

Liverpool owners must trust Jurgen Klopp in transfer market to make club 'sustainable'

FSG have stuck to prudent approach amid the Covid-19 fallout - but they must take risks now that Klopp has got them back on their perch, and that may include signing Thiago and Sarr

 

Paul Konchesky has been looking back on his move to Liverpool 10 years ago and feels that “being a London boy” might explain why he bombed.

 

A label which didn’t really affect Paul Walsh, Michael Thomas, Paul Ince, Glen Johnson, Joe Gomez or others.
 

Maybe a more telling reason was that, performance-wise, Konchesky made Liverpool’s second-worst left-back signing, Julian Dicks, look like Carlos Alberto.

 

He wasn’t the lone failure in Roy Hodgson’s only summer as Liverpool manager. Joe Cole, Christian Poulsen, Brad Jones, Milan Jovanovic, Danny Wilson, Raul Meireles and Jonjo Shelvey also arrived and made as little impact as the man who signed them.

 

It’s why FSG, the owners who came in and sacked Hodgson, have been determined to operate a prudent strategy ever since - which is taken personally by many thousands on social media who annually fixate on a player and demand he’s signed.

 

Two years ago it was Nabil Fekir, last year Pepe. Looking back, it’s fair to say neither were missed.

 

This year it’s Bayern Munich’s Thiago Alcantara, and with only Kostas Tsimikas brought in as Andy Robertson’s back-up, with the money received from Dejan Lovren’s sale, the Twitter fumes are toxic.

 

Especially as all their rivals, including Everton, are waving around the cheque book.

 

But maybe this time they have a point. Liverpool haven’t made any major signings for two years and of the outfield team that lost the 2018 Champions League final, only Joe Gomez has come in for Lovren and Fabinho for James Milner.

 

The rest, with the possible exception of Gini Wijnaldum, have been automatic choices when fit. That’s a lot of games between them. And little variation in style - leading to a feeling that tactically the squad needs more flexibility and some high-quality fresh legs.

 

Klopp appears to agree with that. Whenever he’s been asked about transfer plans he has hinted that he’d like to bring in players but is operating on a different financial level to his nearest rivals. Which rankles with some fans, who point out Liverpool have reached two Champions League finals and won the Premier League in the last three seasons.

 

New CEO Billy Hogan’s opening message was that the club “is about trying to create a business that is sustainable".

 

But is it sustainable to ask the same small squad which racked up 196 points over two seasons in the world’s toughest league, to hit the same phenomenal levels again, without an injection of quality?

 

FSG are right to point out they’re taking a big hit with Covid and can’t gamble with the future. But which club isn’t? And when you have a man like Jurgen Klopp at the helm for the next four years, is backing his judgement in the market that much of a gamble?

 

I think Liverpool will spend. There’s a long way to go in this transfer window and as the deadline approaches there will be demand for the likes of Harry Wilson, Marco Grujic and Xherdan Shakiri, which could bring in a minimum £50million. Wijnaldum could also engineer an exit to Barcelona.

 

If that doesn’t raise enough cash to plug the gaps in the squad, FSG would be wise to stump up the cash. Because Klopp needs cover in central defence, a new point of attack from midfield, which would be Alcantara, and an alternative striker, possibly Ismaila Sarr or Adama Traore.

 

This isn’t 2010, and the manager isn’t Roy Hodgson. Looking at Klopp’s track record, they can feel confident the players he covets will deliver.

 

It’s admirable that Hogan’s priority is a sustainable business model. But having got back on their perch after 30 years, surely the main thing they need to sustain is keeping the team at number one. The rest will follow.

 

With Manchester City strengthening an already formidable squad, and possibly bringing in Lionel Messi, it would only take the slightest drop in standards to fall off that perch again.

  • Upvote 3
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.


×
×
  • Create New...