Quantcast
Go fuck yourselves FSG - Page 334 - FF - Football Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content
Neil G

Go fuck yourselves FSG

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, VladimirIlyich said:

At least they've stayed in their home cities. Be prepared for Birmingham Reds if FSG get their way.

I can't see them moving Liverpool to the West Midlands personally. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/04/2021 at 19:40, Chip Butty said:

I’m not one for sticking the knife in, but they haven’t covered themselves in any glory here.

11A789E8-6F80-47D6-ABCE-BD1486E8A33A.jpeg

 

Not knowing the market for medals handed out to directors and their likes, that sounds like a pretty hefty sum! Nothing in the grand scheme of running a football club of course, but if they're that valuable, the sellers might be pleased with a greater sum of money? Do the club need all the medals of former employees? This really seems like a nothing story to me.

 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading the above, and most of the posts in this thread (not going back more than 20 pages...), it seems most are agreeing that the owners are cunts, and that they need to be replaced, as they;

  • only care about money
  • do not understand the sport or local culture
  • aren't interested in winning, just keeping us ticking over as an investment.

While I am sure that money and growing the value of Liverpool Football Club is pretty high on their agenda, I'd like to comment on the two latter points.

 

Firstly, I think one of the reasons they bought us (along with being a business opportunity, of course) is connected somewhere inbetween point two and three. Someone or several people within their organisation has some knowledge of the sport and its global appeal. I can easily see John Henry, Tom Werner and more thinking it could be a nice adventure dipping their toes into another sport, having overseen radical changes and success within baseball with the Red Sox. I'm sure some of that interest quickly intensified when they understood how big a name we are in international sports. While Red Sox are a historical MLB powerhouse in their native country, they're still only one of many sports teams across 4 major sports. To get the chance of rejuvenating an international superclub/fallen giant (for a relatively smallish outlay) must have been intriguing. Having grown up not really having an affinity with football, I'm tempted to give them some leeway with regards to not really "getting" the sport, its fans, rules and regulations. I'm still struggling to get a grip on American football, having watched it on telly since the 90's, and don't even get me started on cricket...

 

Secondly, the few Americans I know are absolutely obsessed with winning. It's what they are raised with from an early age. Winning or losing, there's normally not much inbetween. I'd be surprised if succesful businessmen like Henry defer much from that generalisation. I think there's plenty to criticise the current owners for, but I absolutely think it's important for them to win. I think they believe in their methods to do so as well. Get competent people in, preferably someone with a clear (and original) methodology to do so. I think they were duped by the financial fair play idea, and it was a (final) massive slap in the face when City (and PSG) didn't get punished for their obvious breeches of FFP. That more than anything (again, IMO) might have been what they were hoping to accomplish with the ESL. Some sort of regulation that led to a more level playing field. Should they have understood that a permanently closed shop was not what European football craved. Yep. Were they trying to act in the best interests of the football club in terms of giving us a better chance to win coveted trophies? I actually believe so.

 

Think about it. They have always pledged to keep a sound structure and to being selfsufficient. That's obviously not going to cut it in today's warped football climate. Debt is going to be skyrocketing for all clubs that try to follow the oil clubs. There's just no way to keep up. While we can always criticise Henry for getting a new yacht instead of buying player A, B and C for our club, I sincerely believe that him and his compatriots will try to win as much as possible with us. It won't be by digging into his or their pockets, but by trying to be smarter than the competitors.

 

In summary: Unless we want to be the plaything of another rotten regime, or someone has a similar connection with us as that Arsenal-loving Spotify founder, I think FSG is as good as it's going to get. No sound businessman or woman will dip into their own pockets and surrender hundreds of millions on players in a feeble attempt to keep up with Abu-Dhabi and Quatar FC. We'll at best be a sportswashing tool for similar regimes (the Saudis.... shudder). What we need to happen is a reform in football, and a regulatory cap on transfers and spending. Will it happen? Probably not for a while. I'll bask in the glory of our CL win and no 19 for quite a while, and while it's extremely annoying that the oil states keep corrupting our sport, there's sadly not much to do than try to give them a sporting fight on the field. Off it, we're powerless unless UEFA (ha-ha) and the PL (ha-ha-ha) and the broadcasters (ha-ha-ha-ha) intervene. Eh, or Boris....

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, lebron said:

 

Not knowing the market for medals handed out to directors and their likes, that sounds like a pretty hefty sum! Nothing in the grand scheme of running a football club of course, but if they're that valuable, the sellers might be pleased with a greater sum of money? Do the club need all the medals of former employees? This really seems like a nothing story to me.

 

 

Probably has a bit more historical significance than the medals of pegguy arphexad like

 

https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10158005636829013&id=60844719012&scmts=scwspsdd

 

I suppose it depends on if we've already got a drawer full of medals from that era already, no point collecting multiples of the same medals for the sake of it. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Probably has a bit more historical significance than the medals of pegguy arphexad like

 

https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10158005636829013&id=60844719012&scmts=scwspsdd

 

I suppose it depends on if we've already got a drawer full of medals from that era already, no point collecting multiples of the same medals for the sake of it. 

Yeah, just thought the number seemed a bit steep. Also, just as much to do with the bolded part. 

Call me a cynic, but colour me completely unsurprised if the total sum gathered stays well below the 10 000 in the newspaper story though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see the accounts have just been released. 
 

Can’t wait to see all the expert accountants on the forum dissection of them. 

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Scott_M said:

Did any of your local supporters go and protest on Saturday?


I’m taking this as a no.

 

Dougie Do’ins and ATK youse are not. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Liverpool post £46m pre-tax loss as wages hit £325m and external debt rises sharply

 

GettyImages-1167053126-scaled-e161946287

 

They provide a snapshot of the financial impact of the global pandemic on Liverpool. The club’s accounts for the year to May 31 2020 show a pre-tax loss of £46 million. Total revenues were down by £43 million to £490 million — an eight per cent fall on the previous 12 months.

 

However, given that this figure covers only the opening three months of the crisis, the true cost of COVID-19 to Liverpool is much greater. Senior Anfield officials insist that figure currently stands at around £120 million in lost revenues and it’s expected to climb further in the coming months.

 

The club’s wage bill continued to rise, from £310 million in 2018-19 to £325 million last season — an increase of 4.8 per cent. Only Manchester City (£351 million) pay more in the Premier League. Liverpool’s wage bill stood at just £263 million for 2017-18, meaning it shot up 23.6 per cent in the space of two years.

 

The rise in the wage bill is understood to be heavily linked to bonuses as a result of Liverpool’s on-field success. The only significant senior signing made during this period was Takumi Minamino, who arrived from Salzburg for £7.25 million in January 2020, while Joel Matip, James Milner and Divock Origi agreed contract extensions.

 

The accounts show that Liverpool’s external debt rocketed from £50 million to £198 million as they reacted to the uncertainty of the pandemic by utilising their loan facilities. However, The Athletic understands that a significant chunk of this has since been repaid. The club has been able to largely support its cash flow through operating activities and commercial growth.

 

Media revenue dropped by £59 million to £202 million, although that 23 per cent slump is partly explained by the extension of the 2019-20 Premier League season beyond this accounting period.

 

With Liverpool playing their final nine league games in June and July, they had to wait longer than usual for the final instalment of money from the broadcasters. As Premier League champions they received a total of £161 million in TV income and prize money for 2019-20 but they have had to contribute around £17 million towards the broadcaster rebate.

 

The Athletic understands that about £28 million in media revenue for last season will be in the next set of accounts. So, in real terms, they suffered a £31 million reduction rather than £59 million.

 

Having banked £95 million from winning the Champions League in 2019, that payout from UEFA fell to £71 million for 2019-20 after Jurgen Klopp’s side lost to Atletico Madrid in the last 16 shortly before the first lockdown in March 2020.

 

Match-day revenue was down 15 per cent, by £13 million to £71 million, as a result of having four fewer Premier League home games during that period until the end of May.

 

This is where the pandemic has really cut deep. Match-day revenue will be virtually non-existent in the next set of accounts, with the 2020-21 season largely played behind closed doors.

 

Liverpool have had 26 home matches in all competitions since the pandemic first struck. With each full house usually worth around £3 million to the club, that’s up to £78 million they have missed out on.

 

Commercial revenue bucked the trend as that stream increased by 15 per cent, up by £29 million to £217 million.

Eight new partnerships were announced in this period including Cadbury and Iugis. Nivea and Carlsberg renewed their existing long-term sponsorship deals with the club.

 

Liverpool’s retail arm also grew significantly, helped by Klopp’s men blowing their rivals away and putting themselves on the brink of title glory before the pandemic hit. There were record-breaking sales of their home kit and the club’s global expansion saw them open new stores in Thailand, Singapore and Vietnam.

 

Commercial success softened the blow in other areas and ensured that total income only dropped by eight per cent.

For context, the average decline in turnover for the top 10 clubs in the Deloitte Money League list for 2019-20 was 12 per cent. Liverpool sit fifth in that list behind Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayern Munich and Manchester United.

They are also fifth in Forbes’ list of the most valuable clubs at around £3 billion — almost double what they were two years ago.

 

Over the course of 2019-20, Liverpool spent £39.4 million on fixed asset investments related to the club’s infrastructure. The Athletic understands that around £25 million of that figure relates to the new £50 million training complex at Kirkby, which belatedly opened its doors last November.

 

The balance of the £110 million intercompany loan owed to Fenway Sports Group to cover the cost of the new Main Stand, which opened its doors in 2016, now stands at £71.4 million. Liverpool paid off a further £7.9 million last season.

 

Digitally, the club saw a huge growth in its global social media following — up 32 per cent annually as they gained an additional 22 million new followers. Liverpool remain the most followed Premier League club on YouTube and are the fastest-growing on Instagram. The club’s combined Twitter accounts reached 17.4 million followers — a 29 per cent increase on the previous season.

 

“This financial reporting period was up to May 2020, so approaching a year ago now. It does, however, begin to demonstrate the initial financial impact of the pandemic and the significant reductions in key revenue streams,” said Liverpool’s managing director Andy Hughes.

 

“We were in a solid financial position prior to the pandemic and since this reporting period, we have continued to manage our costs effectively and navigate our way through such an unprecedented period.

 

“Importantly, what has remained constant throughout the pandemic is the club’s desire to support the local community and those who live in and around Anfield and across the city region. We have also worked closely with our city partners and provided unwavering support to the region’s public health departments in their drive to promote the important health messages across the region to help keep local people safe.

 

“We can now look ahead to the conclusion of this season and hopefully a more normal start to next season. It’s no secret that supporters have been greatly missed at Anfield over the past year and we look forward to having them back.”

 

Fourteen months ago, Liverpool reported a pre-tax profit of £42 million and turnover up by 17 per cent — a £78 million rise to £533 million.

 

The pandemic has since taken its toll. The unprecedented losses contributed to John W Henry joining forces with the Glazers to back “Project Big Picture” and then sign up for the European Super League. But his attempts to seize greater power and riches failed on both occasions.

 

Last month’s £538 million investment from RedBird into Fenway Sports Group will help to provide stability for Liverpool until revenue streams fully recover. It also means they can continue to pursue the redevelopment of the Anfield Road Stand, which will push the stadium’s capacity past 60,000.

 

But for a club that is trying to be self-sufficient, the latest accounts show the challenge of trying to balance the books when the wage bill keeps rising and your income streams are massively disrupted.

 

Liverpool Women have announced a turnover of £1.7 million for 2020, an increase of 55 per cent compared to 2019. The rise was down to a 21 per cent increase in investment from parent company Liverpool FC as well as new commercial partnerships and revenue generated from playing a game at Anfield. After making a loss of £313,000 in 2019, that figure dropped to £5,000 in 2020.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do we have a bigger wage bill than Man United. They pay players 350k a week. 

 

If you add back the lost revenue, we would have only just about made a profit - in a year when we didn't buy anyone. Yet people believe FSG aren't sucking money out 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Daisy said:

How do we have a bigger wage bill than Man United. They pay players 350k a week. 

 

If you add back the lost revenue, we would have only just about made a profit - in a year when we didn't buy anyone. Yet people believe FSG aren't sucking money out 

Guess we have more on the 200k mark, In fact all of the first 11 are prob on 100k+. 
 

add to us paying big bonuses and having actually won stuff recently. Those numbers prob go up quite a bit.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Sugar Ape said:

Liverpool post £46m pre-tax loss as wages hit £325m and external debt rises sharply

 

GettyImages-1167053126-scaled-e161946287

 

They provide a snapshot of the financial impact of the global pandemic on Liverpool. The club’s accounts for the year to May 31 2020 show a pre-tax loss of £46 million. Total revenues were down by £43 million to £490 million — an eight per cent fall on the previous 12 months.

 

However, given that this figure covers only the opening three months of the crisis, the true cost of COVID-19 to Liverpool is much greater. Senior Anfield officials insist that figure currently stands at around £120 million in lost revenues and it’s expected to climb further in the coming months.

 

The club’s wage bill continued to rise, from £310 million in 2018-19 to £325 million last season — an increase of 4.8 per cent. Only Manchester City (£351 million) pay more in the Premier League. Liverpool’s wage bill stood at just £263 million for 2017-18, meaning it shot up 23.6 per cent in the space of two years.

 

The rise in the wage bill is understood to be heavily linked to bonuses as a result of Liverpool’s on-field success. The only significant senior signing made during this period was Takumi Minamino, who arrived from Salzburg for £7.25 million in January 2020, while Joel Matip, James Milner and Divock Origi agreed contract extensions.

 

The accounts show that Liverpool’s external debt rocketed from £50 million to £198 million as they reacted to the uncertainty of the pandemic by utilising their loan facilities. However, The Athletic understands that a significant chunk of this has since been repaid. The club has been able to largely support its cash flow through operating activities and commercial growth.

 

Media revenue dropped by £59 million to £202 million, although that 23 per cent slump is partly explained by the extension of the 2019-20 Premier League season beyond this accounting period.

 

With Liverpool playing their final nine league games in June and July, they had to wait longer than usual for the final instalment of money from the broadcasters. As Premier League champions they received a total of £161 million in TV income and prize money for 2019-20 but they have had to contribute around £17 million towards the broadcaster rebate.

 

The Athletic understands that about £28 million in media revenue for last season will be in the next set of accounts. So, in real terms, they suffered a £31 million reduction rather than £59 million.

 

Having banked £95 million from winning the Champions League in 2019, that payout from UEFA fell to £71 million for 2019-20 after Jurgen Klopp’s side lost to Atletico Madrid in the last 16 shortly before the first lockdown in March 2020.

 

Match-day revenue was down 15 per cent, by £13 million to £71 million, as a result of having four fewer Premier League home games during that period until the end of May.

 

This is where the pandemic has really cut deep. Match-day revenue will be virtually non-existent in the next set of accounts, with the 2020-21 season largely played behind closed doors.

 

Liverpool have had 26 home matches in all competitions since the pandemic first struck. With each full house usually worth around £3 million to the club, that’s up to £78 million they have missed out on.

 

Commercial revenue bucked the trend as that stream increased by 15 per cent, up by £29 million to £217 million.

Eight new partnerships were announced in this period including Cadbury and Iugis. Nivea and Carlsberg renewed their existing long-term sponsorship deals with the club.

 

Liverpool’s retail arm also grew significantly, helped by Klopp’s men blowing their rivals away and putting themselves on the brink of title glory before the pandemic hit. There were record-breaking sales of their home kit and the club’s global expansion saw them open new stores in Thailand, Singapore and Vietnam.

 

Commercial success softened the blow in other areas and ensured that total income only dropped by eight per cent.

For context, the average decline in turnover for the top 10 clubs in the Deloitte Money League list for 2019-20 was 12 per cent. Liverpool sit fifth in that list behind Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayern Munich and Manchester United.

They are also fifth in Forbes’ list of the most valuable clubs at around £3 billion — almost double what they were two years ago.

 

Over the course of 2019-20, Liverpool spent £39.4 million on fixed asset investments related to the club’s infrastructure. The Athletic understands that around £25 million of that figure relates to the new £50 million training complex at Kirkby, which belatedly opened its doors last November.

 

The balance of the £110 million intercompany loan owed to Fenway Sports Group to cover the cost of the new Main Stand, which opened its doors in 2016, now stands at £71.4 million. Liverpool paid off a further £7.9 million last season.

 

Digitally, the club saw a huge growth in its global social media following — up 32 per cent annually as they gained an additional 22 million new followers. Liverpool remain the most followed Premier League club on YouTube and are the fastest-growing on Instagram. The club’s combined Twitter accounts reached 17.4 million followers — a 29 per cent increase on the previous season.

 

“This financial reporting period was up to May 2020, so approaching a year ago now. It does, however, begin to demonstrate the initial financial impact of the pandemic and the significant reductions in key revenue streams,” said Liverpool’s managing director Andy Hughes.

 

“We were in a solid financial position prior to the pandemic and since this reporting period, we have continued to manage our costs effectively and navigate our way through such an unprecedented period.

 

“Importantly, what has remained constant throughout the pandemic is the club’s desire to support the local community and those who live in and around Anfield and across the city region. We have also worked closely with our city partners and provided unwavering support to the region’s public health departments in their drive to promote the important health messages across the region to help keep local people safe.

 

“We can now look ahead to the conclusion of this season and hopefully a more normal start to next season. It’s no secret that supporters have been greatly missed at Anfield over the past year and we look forward to having them back.”

 

Fourteen months ago, Liverpool reported a pre-tax profit of £42 million and turnover up by 17 per cent — a £78 million rise to £533 million.

 

The pandemic has since taken its toll. The unprecedented losses contributed to John W Henry joining forces with the Glazers to back “Project Big Picture” and then sign up for the European Super League. But his attempts to seize greater power and riches failed on both occasions.

 

Last month’s £538 million investment from RedBird into Fenway Sports Group will help to provide stability for Liverpool until revenue streams fully recover. It also means they can continue to pursue the redevelopment of the Anfield Road Stand, which will push the stadium’s capacity past 60,000.

 

But for a club that is trying to be self-sufficient, the latest accounts show the challenge of trying to balance the books when the wage bill keeps rising and your income streams are massively disrupted.

 

Liverpool Women have announced a turnover of £1.7 million for 2020, an increase of 55 per cent compared to 2019. The rise was down to a 21 per cent increase in investment from parent company Liverpool FC as well as new commercial partnerships and revenue generated from playing a game at Anfield. After making a loss of £313,000 in 2019, that figure dropped to £5,000 in 2020.

Interesting point in the article for me was 

 

“They are also fift h in Forbes’ list of the most valuable clubs at around £3 billion — almost double what they were two years ago.”

 

They paid something like £250m for the club from Hicks and Gillette that’s some ROI. no one will be buying the club anytime soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, JagSquared said:

Guess we have more on the 200k mark, In fact all of the first 11 are prob on 100k+. 
 

add to us paying big bonuses and having actually won stuff recently. Those numbers prob go up quite a bit.

It doesn't add up that much. The bonuses would have to be more than their basics 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, JagSquared said:

Interesting point in the article for me was 

 

“They are also fift h in Forbes’ list of the most valuable clubs at around £3 billion — almost double what they were two years ago.”

 

They paid something like £250m for the club from Hicks and Gillette that’s some ROI. no one will be buying the club anytime soon.

Yet they would have us believe they recently turned down £3b

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Daisy said:

How do we have a bigger wage bill than Man United. They pay players 350k a week. 

 

Bonus driven heavily incentivised contracts. Shouldn't be a problem for the current year.....

Share this post


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

Yet they would have us believe they recently turned down £3b

Of course they're not going to sell for that.  If the ESL actually happened the Club would have been worth even more there and then and we'd have had a load of money as a club.  The value will still rise just at a slower pace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I look at our squad and can't wrap my head around how it's higher than other clubs around us. We wouldn't even give Gini a payrise. Shenanigans going on in this league with wages, obviously city are bent to fuck.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

How do we have a bigger wage bill than Man United. They pay players 350k a week. 

 

If you add back the lost revenue, we would have only just about made a profit - in a year when we didn't buy anyone. Yet people believe FSG aren't sucking money out 

Because united have won virtually fuck all in the 3 years we've been to 2 Champions League Finals winning one and won the PL. You dont reward failure but we're back to this bollocks why is our wage bill more than insert name of desired club?

 

As for united paying players 350k a week, who and how many? Probably only pogba and de gea.

Share this post


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

I look at our squad and can't wrap my head around how it's higher than other clubs around us. We wouldn't even give Gini a payrise. Shenanigans going on in this league with wages, obviously city are bent to fuck.

or we inflate ours and include stuff outside of typical wages. go and look at one of those websites that lists the wages of our players - while no doubt they're not completely accurate, they fit in with the general expected salaries we pay. Then add all those salaries up and they don't cross 200m. i reckon we must include agents fees in with that salary number. We do also include employers NI for sure (in the previous accounts that counted for around 25m iirc). 

 

as for a 45m loss ... well considering it is a pre-tax loss, so they will be able to recover tax they have paid in previous years, that isn't too bad at all - i am pretty sure they can go back 3 years, so they can probably recover all of that 45m. makes it all the more disturbing we have ben davies and not a footballer in january. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

Because united have won virtually fuck all in the 3 years we've been to 2 Champions League Finals winning one and won the PL. You dont reward failure but we're back to this bollocks why is our wage bill more than insert name of desired club?

 

As for united paying players 350k a week, who and how many? Probably only pogba and de gea.

De Gea

Pogba

Cavani

Rashford

Fernandes

Martial 

Maguire

Mata

Shaw

 

All have ridiculous wages 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JagSquared said:

Interesting point in the article for me was 

 

“They are also fift h in Forbes’ list of the most valuable clubs at around £3 billion — almost double what they were two years ago.”

 

They paid something like £250m for the club from Hicks and Gillette that’s some ROI. no one will be buying the club anytime soon.

Epic Swindle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Daisy said:

De Gea

Pogba

Cavani

Rashford

Fernandes

Martial 

Maguire

Mata

Shaw

 

All have ridiculous wages 

Of that list, Im only aware of 2 that are reported to be on over 300k a week. That's pogba and de gea. Where's your proof all the others are on 300k+ a week?

 

People banged on for years we had the 5th and 6th highest wage bill and that was why we always finished 4th, 5th and 6th in the league and never won it.

 

Now we have the 2nd highest wage bill behind city and won the title not to mention playing in 2 CL finals, winning 1, you want to change the record and say our reported wage bill is actually lower than united and city.

 

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


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

for a 45m loss ... well considering it is a pre-tax loss, so they will be able to recover tax they have paid in previous years, that isn't too bad at all - i am pretty sure they can go back 3 years, so they can probably recover all of that 45m

Relief is capped at £2m for carry back >1 year, so not sure on what basis they’d be able claim all of the £45m.

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

×