Go fuck yourselves FSG

[Red74]

16 minutes ago, No2 said:

My understanding is we operate in a completely different way to Utd. Utd pay big money and then deduct when success isn't achieved, circa 20% if I recall correctly. We do it the other way so when you compare the 2019 season and 2021 seasons you should see mirror image of salaries between the clubs.

It’s based on them not qualifying for the CL 2 years running so kicks in in year 3. A lot of their sponsorship income drops by 50% at this event. 

[TD_LFC]

So FSG are not stealing money from the club, they could take more risks than they do but won't because it makes the club less sustainable, they're probably still cunts for that.

 

Good work everyone, same time next week.

[BeefStroganoff]

11 minutes ago, TD_LFC said:

So FSG are not stealing money from the club, they could take more risks than they do but won't because it makes the club less sustainable, they're probably still cunts for that.

 

Good work everyone, same time next week.

As I've said, the term 'sustainable' is ambiguous. Its more than likely sustainable to the benefit of the value of the club but little else.

[Barrington Womble]

12 minutes ago, BeefStroganoff said:

As I've said, the term 'sustainable' is ambiguous. Its more than likely sustainable to the benefit of the value of the club but little else.

Even the value of the club is questionable while there's no ESL or equivalent. 

[BeefStroganoff]

12 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

Even the value of the club is questionable while there's no ESL or equivalent. 

very true mate.

 

I can only speak from my own experience but as I've mentioned before I work for a US company, owned by hedgefunders. They are looking to break the 2-3 billion barrier in the next 24 months.

 

We are 'sustainable'. However its come at a cost. Employee benefits have been slashed including health benefits, international travel and client expenses to name but a few. But the worst cost cutting has come in departments. For every 3-4 employees we lose we only hire one back and resources are stretched. They are seeing how far we can get by with minimal resources, especially in this climate. They would probably shut our UK office but can't because of the lease.

 

We are running at a profit and doing well to reach our target but at the cost of employees welfare. It has started to erode at performance, but they maybe out of it by the time the shit hits the fan.

[TD_LFC]

32 minutes ago, BeefStroganoff said:

Employee benefits have been slashed including health benefits, international travel and client expenses to name but a few. But the worst cost cutting has come in departments. For every 3-4 employees we lose we only hire one back and resources are stretched. They are seeing how far we can get by with minimal resources, especially in this climate.

That isn't exclusive to private companies or hedge funds mind.

[Moo]

1 hour ago, TD_LFC said:

Doubt the tea lady, catering staff, and kit men are on 150k a week.

 

 

Well quite, but Other could mean lots of different, and some special roles. It might not but it could.

[VladimirIlyich]

3 hours ago, BeefStroganoff said:

You can always rely on a tweet from the Swiss Ramble when the fan base is up in arms over our transfer business. 

 

We are totally sell to buy at this point as he confirms in one of his tweets.

 

We are also the definition of unsustainable from a footballing standpoint. Long term we can't continue to challenge on this model, eventually we will have no assets to sell. Its only sustainable from the point of view it keeps Fenways profit margin in tact. Thats the only thing thats sustainable.

 

It will be grim when Jurgens gone.

We are far from unsustainable as a viable business but there are valid longer term concerns at our ability to actually win trophies without Klopp.

[Moo]

5 minutes ago, VladimirIlyich said:

We are far from unsustainable as a viable business but there are valid longer term concerns at our ability to actually win trophies without Klopp.

Aren't there valid concerns that we would struggle to regularly qualify for the CL without Klopp?  I think so.  Which would potentially bring sustainability into question over time.

[VladimirIlyich]

2 minutes ago, Moo said:

Aren't there valid concerns that we would struggle to regularly qualify for the CL without Klopp?  I think so.  Which would potentially bring sustainability into question over time.

I dont think we'd ever be less than a top six side but if FSG value the CL that highly then you raise a good point. Although I dont believe that European Super League is going to go away in a hurry.

[Barrington Womble]

1 hour ago, VladimirIlyich said:

I dont think we'd ever be less than a top six side but if FSG value the CL that highly then you raise a good point. Although I dont believe that European Super League is going to go away in a hurry.

Once you drop out of the CL though, it's harder to attract players or pay them or both. Maybe a one year duck is ok, after that it's a struggle. As arsenal know only too well. And that is true both on and off the pitch. There was a time the value of our business was probably half of arsenal. It was probably about equal around when Wenger left. And now according to Forbes they're worth about 70% of our value. 

 

https://soccer-nbcsports-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/soccer.nbcsports.com/2021/04/13/forbes-most-valuable-clubs-list/amp/?amp_js_v=a6&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#aoh=16309346274693&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From %1%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fsoccer.nbcsports.com%2F2021%2F04%2F13%2Fforbes-most-valuable-clubs-list%2F

 

We need top 4 (or an ESL type solution) to maintain our position and be sustainable. 

 

[aws]

1 hour ago, Barrington Womble said:

Once you drop out of the CL though, it's harder to attract players or pay them or both. Maybe a one year duck is ok, after that it's a struggle. As arsenal know only too well. And that is true both on and off the pitch. There was a time the value of our business was probably half of arsenal. It was probably about equal around when Wenger left. And now according to Forbes they're worth about 70% of our value. 

 

https://soccer-nbcsports-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/soccer.nbcsports.com/2021/04/13/forbes-most-valuable-clubs-list/amp/?amp_js_v=a6&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#aoh=16309346274693&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From %1%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fsoccer.nbcsports.com%2F2021%2F04%2F13%2Fforbes-most-valuable-clubs-list%2F

 

We need top 4 (or an ESL type solution) to maintain our position and be sustainable. 

 

Going back to our posts over the last couple of days, FSG will (leaving aside remuneration of its directors) have its own internal operating,staffing, accommodation etc costs to meet and these need paying now rather than out of future capital growth. I doubt that the individual investors will be stumping up new equity for these costs every year so there's every chance that each of its " franchises" will be paying a share of these costs via a series of advisory agreements. This wouldn't necessarily show up as a separate item in our accounts  but might just be part of our general expenses. 

If there is a black hole in our accounts where money goes up to FSG then this seems the most likely explanation. And FSG would seek to justify it on the grounds that it's not taking profits but just covering its costs. 

[Captain Howdy]

2 hours ago, VladimirIlyich said:

I dont think we'd ever be less than a top six side 

I don’t think it would take that much to drop out of the top 6 in all honesty. There are only 3 places up for grabs, City, Chelsea and Utd have unlimited resources and so they will always be there. The PL is incredibly competitive and there are clubs with far more ambition than us. As has been said when Klopp goes it will come crashing down imo. You just cannot continue to compete at this level the way we make do and mend. It’s a good job the Newcastle take over got blocked.

[3 Stacks]

Their pushing for the Super League more than most clubs is an admission that you can't win the right way in the long term in football. I don't think anyone is fooling themselves that we can keep spending about 30m per window net and stay near the top of the Premier League for ever, but there's not much that can be done more than we've already done. 

[Bruce Spanner]

2 minutes ago, 3 Stacks said:

Their pushing for the Super League more than most clubs is an admission that you can't win the right way in the long term. I don't think anyone is fooling themselves that we can keep spending about 30m per window net and stay at the top of the Premier League for ever, but there's not much that can be done.

 

Individual broadcast rights will be where energies next are would be my guess.

 

Bin off collective bargaining and go it alone.

[Harry Squatter]

If we dropped out of the CL then they would never sanction a spending spree like the one Arsenal have just had. They will still be using the Covid 19 excuse for another couple of years. 

 

The CL may end up having the top 6 in it anyway to try to stop the ESL which may prolong their "model". 

 

All they are arsed about is protecting their profit margins. If we win anything it is a bonus. 

[Barrington Womble]

22 minutes ago, aws said:

Going back to our posts over the last couple of days, FSG will (leaving aside remuneration of its directors) have its own internal operating,staffing, accommodation etc costs to meet and these need paying now rather than out of future capital growth. I doubt that the individual investors will be stumping up new equity for these costs every year so there's every chance that each of its " franchises" will be paying a share of these costs via a series of advisory agreements. This wouldn't necessarily show up as a separate item in our accounts  but might just be part of our general expenses. 

If there is a black hole in our accounts where money goes up to FSG then this seems the most likely explanation. And FSG would seek to justify it on the grounds that it's not taking profits but just covering its costs. 

I could well imagine that happening and could easily fall in those "other" costs. City group do it to keep costs off Man city, but playing with a straight bat to share costs or even move some revenue away into another segment of the group rather than pay a dividend or indeed some individuals wouldn't be surprising. There's never been much suggestion fsg do this (why would they highlight it), but it wouldn't be a massive shock if they did. For all these fsg flag wavers, it's the type of thing auditors wouldn't give 2 fucks about. 

[Daisy]

Swiss Ramble defo part of FSG propaganda machine. He's blocking everyone who questions them 

[TD_LFC]

So, we taking bets on whether Daisy sent abuse accused him of lying or acted like a dickhead and is now annoyed they're blocked?

 

If it's all three we'll call it a draw.

 

 

[m0e]

7 hours ago, Daisy said:

Just confirms FSG model doesn't work. 

 

[Daisy]

47 minutes ago, m0e said:

 

If you are happy with that then good for you. You won't see any more trophies for a long time. 

 

All it would have taken is maybe 50-100m of investment with Klopp at the helm and that haul would likely be doubled by now. 

[Daisy]

1 hour ago, TD_LFC said:

So, we taking bets on whether Daisy sent abuse accused him of lying or acted like a dickhead and is now annoyed they're blocked?

 

If it's all three we'll call it a draw.

 

 

He got loads of stick as he's clearly pro FSG. 

[TD_LFC]

29 minutes ago, Daisy said:

He got loads of stick as he's clearly pro FSG. 

As an Arsenal fan I doubt he cares one way or the other.

[m0e]

1 hour ago, Daisy said:

If you are happy with that then good for you. You won't see any more trophies for a long time. 

 

All it would have taken is maybe 50-100m of investment with Klopp at the helm and that haul would likely be doubled by now. 

Which ownership model has brought more success in the past 10 years, to any club?

 

And which one are you advocating we use.

[VladimirIlyich]

2 hours ago, TD_LFC said:

So, we taking bets on whether Daisy sent abuse accused him of lying or acted like a dickhead and is now annoyed they're blocked?

 

If it's all three we'll call it a draw.

 

 

I think its always a bit infantile not to at least answer your constructive critics with a paragraph or two rather than having a hissy fit. Why do what you do otherwise?