Quantcast
Go fuck yourselves FSG - Page 330 - FF - Football Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content
Neil G

Go fuck yourselves FSG

Recommended Posts

41 minutes ago, aRdja said:

This is rubbish. United signed Pogba without CL. I can name numerous other examples too. 

United could do that for financial and reputational reasons, we couldn't. Before our rebirth as a top club since 2019, we could never sign top players, at top prices without the Champions League. Someone like van Dijk,  coveted by City and Chelsea, and at a price at the top of the market, never would have signed for us.

 

Now we have cachet, so missing out for a year shouldn't matter too much in terms of attractiveness, but that was not the case 5 or so years ago. Anyway, this is a tired debate. We were talking about this in like 2016.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep seeing this shit, get out, sell up

 

Who do you think has the 2 billion to make them a offer they'll except another hedge fund, a dodgy russian,chinese gangster or a some more oil men with the human rights abuses they bring. There are no Jack Walkers that will pump money in anymore and even if there was a Jack Walker he wouldn't have even close to enough money to buy the club and fund the players people want. If people just want success and will deal with dodgy cunts at the top then fair play but just fucking say it. 

 

You are not going to get the best of all worlds anymore.

 

By all accounts we have 24 players earning over 50k a week

Over 140ml is spent on the base wages of the squad alone, then add Klopp and the coaches etc. 

 

They likely should be spending more and they are not putting their own money in but this was something that they said all along and people were just saying great we don't want to be City. Now im not the biggest fan of them but £70ml or so was spent last summer. But we spent it on a back up LB that hasn't started a league game, a midfielder that got injured and has struggled to cope and a forward that looks great but missed a few months by playing in a meaningless game. Without Covid hitting the world and fucking up the football calendar and without the injuries that screwed the balance of the side up we would likely be neck and neck with City for a second title and maybe in another European Semi final and very likely looking at a 3rd final in a row. 

 

Everything that could have gone wrong has and we have not reacted well on or off the pitch. The players look dead mentally and physically. The club fucked up massively by not having a CB signed and ready to join Jan 1st, the players have been unbelievable poor since the covid break and lack of fans in the stadium. The owners take some of the blame for the off field stuff and the recent stupidity of the ESL but if you think any new owners we had wouldn't have signed up for the ESL you are nuts, all these clubs whinging and wanting point deductions are just playing to the gallery like the wankers in Government, everyone of them would sign up in a instant. 

 

To be honest all the crap from Rotheram and the other guy about forcing fan ownership, i would rather he shut the fuck up and actually held the government to account for the shit they are doing rather than getting involved in the cheap point scoring with football fans. You and the whole Labour party have been a fucking disgrace for over a decade of infighting and being maybe the worst opposition this country has seen in living memory. But you hardly say a word, but the chance to run your mouth about football and appease the masses and there you are calling for fan ownership, when they know the chances of getting that past any court is pretty much non existent. Forcing people to sell 49% of a bussiness they owned would cause all sorts of shit to happen outside of football. Shut the fuck up and do your job as a MP/Major and take the cunts who are leaving kids in poverty while handing out to mates and family billions of pounds in dodgy contracts.

 

 

 

Anyway FSG are not great, but we had far far worse and any sale will just be too whoever fronts the most money and they'll be just and probably more fucking shady than these lot. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lee, Labour have had a bit on football ownership in their election manifestos for around a decade. The focus has been on good governance and supporters trusts to get stakes in football clubs. The sound argument put forward has long been that football is incapable of regulating itself. It needs people whose sole aim isn't growth to have an influence or veto. This is why we are where we are today. A sport with Oligarchs, Hedge Fund owners and Sheikhs dictating the terms of how football evolves. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But @Denny Crane the governing model of Liverpool hasn't changed since the club's founding has it?  The club has always been owned by a variety of rich people and governed by a board made up of these rich people.  In the past there have been different majority shareholders, right now it's FSG.

 

I think there would have been an outside chance of majority fan ownership at the price that Moores sold at - plus he might have been persuaded into it rather than looking to maximise his cash out - but it would have needed to be managed by the club itself and not competing supporters groups.  Unfortunately at the time the club board and Parry had no vision whatsoever, and couldn't even keep the season ticket waiting list on a computer.  Never mind being able to organise a membership scheme. 

 

The only way we're getting a different ownership model now is if the club goes bust or you have a time machine.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, an tha said:

Grammar errors aside not a bad shot across their bows...

 

 

EzmqBDgWQAUI6lw?format=jpg&name=large

 

 

If you're going to be asking for a seat on the board, it would be helpful to have that read over by a primary school teacher 1st. It just makes them look daft and illustrates why they shouldn't have a seat. I fuck up with that type of thing all the time , but I wouldn't be releasing a public statement asking for the seat on the board of a company while typing on my phone on the bog, which pretty much is how that reads. 

3 hours ago, Denny Crane said:

I thought a new corporate structure was required but here he walks through the steps. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Personally I think that is way too simplistic. Every company has its own articles of association and memorandum of association which can define the objectives and purpose of the company. It doesn't seem impossible to me within this for there to be board members who's objective it is is to ensure any financial decisions made by the club are not to the detriment of the sport as a whole or the customer base - or even the club can't act outside the broader interests of the game. This may not exist today (in fact I would feel certain it doesn't), but these articles can be changed. 

 

What needs to be remembered though is having a seat at the boardroom table is not always enough. By all accounts Billy Hogan found out about this on Sunday with everyone else. He is our CEO. I'm not sure how that is possible (that he doesn't know) - but again, we don't know how decision making is defined within the club. Not every contract signed needs board aporoval. 

 

The club has mechanisms today to get the thoughts of the supporters. They litterally don't give a fuck. It didn't take a genius to know what the reaction in the wider game was going to be. They did it anyway. Because they can. 1 seat on the board won't fix this. Different memorandum of association might - but why would they change them? They don't give a fuck. 

 

The bottom line here is the owners will do what the fuck they want unless the law says otherwise. There's ways around absolutely everything until there isn't and that is fixed in law. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

But @Denny Crane the governing model of Liverpool hasn't changed since the club's founding has it?  The club has always been owned by a variety of rich people and governed by a board made up of these rich people.

Not exactly true. Liverpool were in existence for over 90 years until the FA changed rule 34. There was actual legislation that restricted director pay, dividends, selling grounds and benefiting financially from selling a club.

I have David Conns book somewhere. I will dig it up and copy a few pages and upload later today or tommorow. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

 

The bottom line here is the owners will do what the fuck they want unless the law says otherwise. There's ways around absolutely everything until there isn't and that is fixed in law. 

I absolutely agree. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How exactly does fan ownership work? I don't want fans directly involved in the day to day decision making process - elect a president and judge them on their performance, but that is it. A cursory glance at this forum alone highlights that every time we elect a president there will be about 10 thousand candidates! I am of the view that it is better to curtail the current owners powers through government legislation than get new owners at the moment. 

 

There is an unrealistic expectation on the owners - spend millions on transfers but don't increase ticket prices, and stop with the commercial side. The increase in value of the club and therefore the increase in value of their asset should come from improving the club as a whole - as they have done to be fair - not increasing ticket prices, or signing up for super leagues. I still think the TV rights, especially international is up for discussion and, we absolutely should be selfish over that. 

 

I am not going to say 'grass Isn't always greener' and just accept them, I think they need their wings clipped - but, United moved from PLC to the Glazers. Without Government regulation and a serious commitment to a genuine fit and proper rule - I think better the devil you know is a fair approach. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before the next tv deal the Big 6 need to get another few clubs on board regarding negotiating their own deals. The lesser clubs are hypocrites just as much, the relegated clubs received £100m from broadcasting etc the £40m in parachute payments in the first year, £30 the second. How is that fair on the other Championship clubs? I understand money talks in the PL but you should live within your means as a lower club who are not big TV draws. It’s dog eat dog unfortunately, not good but true.

Share this post


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

Before the next tv deal the Big 6 need to get another few clubs on board regarding negotiating their own deals. The lesser clubs are hypocrites just as much, the relegated clubs received £100m from broadcasting etc the £40m in parachute payments in the first year, £30 the second. How is that fair on the other Championship clubs? I understand money talks in the PL but you should live within your means as a lower club who are not big TV draws. It’s dog eat dog unfortunately, not good but true.

I have never understood parachute payments. It's a reward for being totally shit as far as I can tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Pete said:

I have never understood parachute payments. It's a reward for being totally shit as far as I can tell.

Don’t see them moaning about them though the way they moaned about  Null and Void and no relegation. West Ham, Villa, Everton and their ilk would have jumped at a Super League invite. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As the Prem teams love the parachute idea so much, maybe there should be parachute payments if a team in the CL fails to make it the following year. Keep everybody happy. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So this Paul Cope character is essentially suggesting forcibly seizing private, commercial assets to be put into "charitable trusts". Great work. LFC has been owned by a private individual dating back to its inception in 1892. "Business people" have always been at the heart of club ownership. They've just upped the stakes.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Alex_K said:

So this Paul Cope character is essentially suggesting forcibly seizing private, commercial assets to be put into "charitable trusts". Great work. LFC has been owned by a private individual dating back to its inception in 1892. "Business people" have always been at the heart of club ownership. They've just upped the stakes.

I feel I should be the new Chairperson, I can bring clarity and Hobnobs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When we won everything in the 80s the owners put the square root of fuck all back into the club - so little so, that when the PL explosion came we still had no changing rooms at Melwood, no executive boxes and were woefully unprepared for the next decade. 

 

I realise it was a different time - and not an fair comparison, but I still feel looking back they were negligent - winning meant we as fans didn't look beyond the next trophy. 

Share this post


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

I feel I should be the new Chairperson, I can bring clarity and Hobnobs.

A cynical attempt at using biscuits to sway the vote of the Tony Moanero's of the world. Shameless. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, VERBAL DIARRHEA said:

I feel I should be the new Chairperson, I can bring clarity and Hobnobs.

You'll probably be able to wrangle a nice £400 or £500k "golden goodbye" for you & your mates when you leave the room too. Honest pay for honest work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, VERBAL DIARRHEA said:

I feel I should be the new Chairperson, I can bring clarity and Hobnobs.

You can fuck off with clarity!

 

The Hobnobs are worth a vote though. 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

You'll probably be able to wrangle a nice £400 or £500k "golden goodbye" for you & your mates when you leave the room too. Honest pay for honest work.

Haha, do you think we could find the £1.15bn to buy out percentage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Jockey said:

When we won everything in the 80s the owners put the square root of fuck all back into the club - so little so, that when the PL explosion came we still had no changing rooms at Melwood, no executive boxes and were woefully unprepared for the next decade. 

 

I realise it was a different time - and not an fair comparison, but I still feel looking back they were negligent - winning meant we as fans didn't look beyond the next trophy. 

Yeah its just bollocks really. From your John Houldings to your Sam Longsons to your Jack Walkers, private individuals have always ruled the roost in UK football. Some private owners did great things for their clubs, and some did terrible things. As in any walk of life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Football has been not for profit far longer than it has been up for sale to the highest bidder.

 

Nobody is saying business people shouldn't be involved in running the club but checks and accountability needs to be in place. As I mentioned earlier there were strict FA rules in force for the majority of Liverpool's existence see below. 

 

The FA once took a robust view that clubs were not there for owners or directors to exploit. In 1899, just as professional, commercialised football was taking off, the FA imposed rules to protect the clubs' sporting heart. These allowed clubs to form limited companies, but prohibited directors from being paid, restricted the dividends to shareholders, and protected grounds from asset-stripping.

Later codified as the FA's Rule 34, these restrictions established the culture that being a club director was a form of public service, that directors should be 'custodians', to support and look after clubs. There never was a golden age of selfless club owners, but the system of clubs as not-for-profit companies did provide the basis for their phenomenal growth. Fans were never overcharged, which helped to encourage loyalty and return visits. But it was not all good news: lack of investment led to decrepit facilities, a failure to deal with hooliganism and crumbling and unsafe grounds.

 

The FA and their rules were in need of updating as football itself changed and modernised, but instead they surrendered completely. When, in 1983, Irving Scholar's Tottenham Hotspur became the first club to announce the intention of floating on the stock market, the club's advisers asked the FA if Spurs would be free to form a holding company to evade the FA's restrictions on dividends and directors' salaries. The FA, who have never explained why, permitted Spurs to do what they wanted. Every other club that floated after that formed holding companies similarly, to bypass the FA's rules.

Football clubs became companies for sale like any others, against the 'heritage' and rules once insisted upon by their governing body. 

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just running an idea up the flagpole here - but I would suggest that in 1899 they knew the square root of fuck all about business and how football could be run as a business. If your term of reference is over a 100 years old, then it has long passed into irrelevance. This may be a bit of an urban myth, but wasn't football and the development of football so that the feckless and the poor didn't spend all day Saturday getting pissed? 

 

The simple fact is that since we have all been watching football - teams have been run by individuals. The only difference is that in the 70s you could win the league with a chairman who owned a used car showroom and a few social clubs, now you can't. 

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

  • Available Subscriptions

  • Last Match Report

  • Latest Posts

    • Cant see past a chelsea win tonight to be honest. Arteta is out of his depth. If arsenal get a result tonight it will purely be down to professional pride his players have in themselves.
    • Remind me again. When was the last time they won the league be it Premiership or first division? 
    • Had a new look at it. A draw in London tonight could actually be enough if we win our last four.   If we win our last four we'll end up with 69 points and goal diff. +22 or better.   If Chelsea beats Leicester and Leicester then beats Spurs, Leicester will end on 69 points too (the currently have GD +21)   Then if Arsenal gets a point today and Chelsea draws against Leicester Chelsea will end on max 69 points (GD +24 or better)   Then of course there's the small detail about winning our last four.          
    • The way I see football, you can have a very good team and a shite \ no so good manager and you maybe win the domestic cups if you concentrate on them. You might even win the Europa or Champions League. But the latter of those two will be harder as UEFA's 'more games' means tactical nounse plays a greater part in winning the prize.   Similarly, very good teams with so so managers dont win the Premier League. Roll it all up and this is why, in my opinion, we won cups between 1990 and 2019 but not league titles.   Despite him being called a fraud on here by some, Tutchel is anything but. He's followed in Jurgen's steps to an extent. He has a very good team that lampard was out of his managerial depth with.   While the football authorities loosen the FFP regulation due to covid, teams like city and chelsea backed by oil nations and oligarchs will gain an advantage. This is the antithesis of what should be happening.   chelsea will likely be challengers next season. Sooner or later, united's plethoral of penalties which has handed them routes back into games they were either losing or drawing, will stop. The gimp is tactically inept like lampard. Yes, he will no doubt be able to frustrate teams like ourselves, city and chelsea with draws from time to time but that doesnt make him a tactical genius or mean he can alter his tactics when the penalty appeals arent answered.   Jurgen's task is going to be in either re invigorating the team to 'go again' or rebuilding it in selected areas, bringing in not only players hungry for success but also single minded winners.   I dont think it makes much difference if you have a two or three way fight for the title. it makes it more nervey to be part of but at the end of the day, you've still got to be top of the pile to win it.
    • A draw tonight will do that too although we would be reliant on goal difference. 
  • Latest Round Up

  • Popular Contributors

  • top casino sites
  • new UK casino
×