Jump to content
Neil G

Go fuck yourselves FSG

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, dockers_strike said:

Sorry to disappoint but, no. They're growing their sports team group not selling.

Why would anyone be disappointed by staying under FSG? They've literally turned us around from bankruptcy to one of the top 5 teams in Europe!

 

The way people talk about FSG does my head in, honestly. They're not perfect but you can't name a single better owner in the entire league.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Net spend over the last 5 years...

 

1. Manchester United | Net spend: £-457.60m
2. Manchester City | Net spend: £-357.31m
3. Aston Villa | Net spend: £-247.86m
4. Arsenal | Net spend: £-238.68m
5. Everton | Net spend: £-233.92m
6. Brighton | Net spend: £-212.35m
7. Chelsea | Net spend: £-209.15m
8. Wolves | Net spend: £-196.87m
9. Tottenham | Net spend: £-173.30m
10. Liverpool | Net spend: £-164.71m
11. West Ham | Net spend: £-132.28m
12. Leicester | Net spend: £-114.36m
13. Leeds | Net spend: £-106.39m
14. Newcastle | Net spend: £-98.97m
15. Crystal Palace | Net spend: £-55.99m
16. Southampton | Net spend: £-37.80m
17. Burnley | Net spend: £-22.09m
18. Watford | Net spend: £-14.10m
19. Brentford | Net spend: £+59.42m
20. Norwich | Net spend: £+66.17m

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Buying a new franchise. It explains why money is so tight. 

Does it?

In that case they would have bought a new franchise every year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Ne Moe Imya said:

Why would anyone be disappointed by staying under FSG? They've literally turned us around from bankruptcy to one of the top 5 teams in Europe!

 

The way people talk about FSG does my head in, honestly. They're not perfect but you can't name a single better owner in the entire league.

Yeah I think they get a bit of a rougher ride than they should. Bellingham and Mbappe or Haaland in the summer or they can fuck off. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

chelsea fans are being asked to pay more than three times the current price for their season tickets with costs reaching almost £4,000 next year, after the club upgraded the facilities in one of the stands at Stamford Bridge.

The West Stand upper tier has been rebranded, Westview, with new bars, food outlets and TV screens, but it comes at a cost for supporters wanting to keep their padded seats next season.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-10212819/Chelsea-tell-fans-season-ticket-prices-TRIPLING-year-Stamford-Bridges-West-Stand-upper.html

In other news, manchester united have increased their wage bill by nearly a quarter, their latest financial reports have revealed. 

The playing staff budget has increased to a whopping £354million a year, thanks to the addition of some big hitters at Old Trafford - as evidenced by the first quarter sum of £88.5m.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-10212473/Manchester-Uniteds-wage-bill-rockets-354MILLION-year.html

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spurs post £80m loss as a result of the pandemic resulting in no crowds at games. Liverpool's accounts arent due to be published until sometime in the New Year.

 

Spurs have posted a whopping £80million pre-tax loss over the past 12 months, new financial results published by the Premier League club on Tuesday show.

The north London side's net debt has also increased by £101m to £706m in the financial year ending June 2021 as the financial effects of the Covid-19 pandemic continue to take hold.

Spurs posted revenues of £402.4m in June 2020, just months after the pandemic took hold. But this year Tottenham announced their revenue fell even further to £361.9m as the absence of fans inside the club's £1billion stadium proved costly.

It means Tottenham have posted a pre-tax loss of £80.2m for the year which, when added to the £67.7m loss in June 2020 - which covered the first three months of the pandemic - means Spurs have recorded nearly a £150m loss in the last two years. 

 

 

The scale of the losses caused by matches having to be played behind closed doors is highlighted in the club's match receipts. 

For the year ending June 2021, receipts totalled a mere £1.9m which is a massive drop from the £94.5m brought in for the year ending June 2020.  

There has also been a drop off in results on the pitch and the absence of Champions League football in both the current campaign and the last one has also caused financial damage. 

UEFA prize money was £23.6m this year, compared to £51.2m in 2020 which shows the huge financial implications of missing out on the Champions League. 

TV and media revenues were better than the previous year (£184.4m compared to 95.2m in 2020), but only because the 2019-20 season was completed in the current financial year because of the Covid lockdown.

Chairman Daniel Levy said: 'The financial results published for our year ended 30 June, 2021, reflect the challenging period of the pandemic and the incredibly damaging timing of COVID-19 coinciding, as it did, with the opening of our stadium in April, 2019. 

'With no less than three lockdowns our operations were severely disrupted, albeit this was secondary to the impact everyone felt in their personal and family lives. 

'We report our results at a time when we are delighted our fans can return to the stadium to cheer on the players. I want to give special thanks for their continued support throughout this extremely difficult period.

'Resilience is, however, a hallmark of everyone at the Club. Going forward, therefore, our strategy is clear - to drive and generate revenues to invest in all of our football activities.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-10233491/Tottenhams-revenue-drops-40m-past-12-months.html

Share this post


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

Spurs post £80m loss as a result of the pandemic resulting in no crowds at games. Liverpool's accounts arent due to be published until sometime in the New Year.

 

I bet we’re similar. We posted c.£40m last year and rumours were it was going to cost c.£120m in total.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Scott_M said:

 

I bet we’re similar. We posted c.£40m last year and rumours were it was going to cost c.£120m in total.

Yes, there or thereabouts. Think we posted £46m pre tax loss in the last accounts?

Share this post


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

Didn't they say the redbird investment meant we are financially covered for the losses during the pandemic?

Yeah I kept reading that in the Echo. They said the investment wouldn't give us any extra transfer funds but would allow us to carry on as normal. But then they would go on to say how hard up we were and thats why we didn't have much money for signings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

Didn't they say the redbird investment meant we are financially covered for the losses during the pandemic?

No. The Red Bird investment was in FSG not Liverpool FC. Not even the Echo claimed that. Why do people think if Red Bird handed over £500m, it was to tide Liverpool over and not the Red Sox, the Roush Racing team, the rest of their other interests and actually buying a share of FSG?

Share this post


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

No. The Red Bird investment was in FSG not Liverpool FC. Not even the Echo claimed that. Why do people think if Red Bird handed over £500m, it was to tide Liverpool over and not the Red Sox, the Roush Racing team, the rest of their other interests and actually buying a share of FSG?

I'm assuming there's no reason that the investment in FSG couldn't have been split across all (three?) of their sporting interests.  If not, where else would it go?

Share this post


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

I'm assuming there's no reason that the investment in FSG couldn't have been split across all (three?) of their sporting interests.  If not, where else would it go?

You do know there's more parts to FSG rather than just the 3 I mentioned?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, dockers_strike said:

No. The Red Bird investment was in FSG not Liverpool FC. Not even the Echo claimed that. Why do people think if Red Bird handed over £500m, it was to tide Liverpool over and not the Red Sox, the Roush Racing team, the rest of their other interests and actually buying a share of FSG?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/redbird-liverpool-fsg-investment-breaking-20298651.amp

 

The echo claiming the Red Bird investment will contribute to reducing debts incurred by covid. No one claimed it was for LFC alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will be interesting to see how FSG manage to show a loss of 120m for us.

 

Increased TV revenue should offset the gate loss and 1st team wages should be down.

 

Would imagine administration wages increasing hugely 

 

 

Share this post


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

Will be interesting to see how FSG manage to show a loss of 120m for us.

 

Increased TV revenue should offset the gate loss and 1st team wages should be down.

 

Would imagine administration wages increasing hugely 

 

 

I'm going to guess that however they manage it, someone won't be happy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, dockers_strike said:

You do know there's more parts to FSG rather than just the 3 I mentioned?

That's why I used brackets and a question mark on three, but you still ignored the question.

I'm assuming there's no reason that the investment in FSG couldn't have been split across all of their sporting interests.  If not, where else would it go?

Share this post


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

That's why I used brackets and a question mark on three, but you still ignored the question.

I'm assuming there's no reason that the investment in FSG couldn't have been split across all of their sporting interests.  If not, where else would it go?

Into the existing FSG investors pockets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not like the world hasnt been hit with a virtually unprecedented scenario, is it? Little to no income, loan agreements still need to be met, company running expenses still to be paid, staff still to be paid etc across virtually every company in the world not producing vaccines and PPE etc.

 

Bottom line is, the Echo never to my knowledge said the Red Bird investment was intended to fund Liverpool FC as has been claimed in this thread. If there was, Id like to see it.

 

And even if the Echo did print that, on what basis have they got to say it seeing as they arent part of FSG's organisation?

 

Yep, an uncomfortable truth for some, not just rumour.

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

×