Why have FSG not yet appointed key staff?

[Guest San Don]

How many more threads do we need from impatient mongs wanting to know when this that and the other is going to be done by? Then, once they have the answer they start another thread saying it hasnt been done the right way!

[Tony Moanero]

They did save us from bankruptcy.

 

They bought us on the cheap, with the long-term aim of making plenty of money.

[ritchie]

still nothing on dof, chief executive and stadium - with the stadium i can understand the delays

 

the dof/chief executive thing is a strange one

 

i know rodgers said he didn't want to work under a dof, so ayre and fsg then said they'd just tweak the model slightly and have different heads of departments with different responsibilities

 

well so far all it seems we have done is gotten a few scouts from man city

 

to not have this sorted by mid july is a bit strange

 

when rodgers was appointed, all the talk was that the following week or two would be very interesting with a whole new management model in place so what the hell is going on then? have they just decided to kabosh the idea cos rodgers said he can do everything himself? can't they find anybody willing to work in an arrangement where rodgers has the final say or are they just hoping people forget all about their talk of restructuring the management of the club? because at the moment the only men making decisions seem to be the new kid on the block rodgers and ayre who many believe should be sacked already or at least demoted for his part in the shambles that was last season

 

I think the new strategy is just to put Ian Ayre in charge of everything, a bit like Moores did with Parry. So he's effectively Managing Director, Chief Exec and Director of Football/Sporting Director.

 

Not that he should be in any sort of senior position at all after his part in the Suarez shambles and general lack of any footballing nous.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

There are plenty of better ways to make money than a football club. You don't buy a football club just for the money. Partly, sure. Never solely for the money, because it doesn't really work. They certainly didn't need to clear the debt, just shift it.

[Medazza]

In terms of DoF they have gone for a committee with Rodgers, Segura and Dave Fallows from Man City.

 

I think Fallows and the other city scouts like Barry Hunter are all on gardening leave so cannot start officially yet

[Tony Moanero]

There are plenty of better ways to make money than a football club. You don't buy a football club just for the money. Partly, sure. Never solely for the money, because it doesn't really work. They certainly didn't need to clear the debt, just shift it.

 

 

For what other reason(s) did FSG buy Liverpool FC?

[Sandford]

Burn them, BURN THEM ALL!!!!!!!!

[ritchie]

I think we are only one key staff member away.

 

Rodgers has the manager/DOF role. i.e. no DOF

Man City scouts to help recruit players and discuss targets etc with Rodgers, who has final say.

Segura has the academy. He works in keeping with what Rodgers wants too so it's a good fit.

 

Here's where it gets problematic - Ian Ayre is doing the actual negotiations and deal making from a financial perspective? I'm not sure that he is the right man for this. Ian Ayre is at his best on the commercial side. He should help to grow that.

 

We need to hire a footballing man who can mix in the upper echelons of the FA and Premier League, someone who is well respected there and who also will represent our club very well. This is where we are lightweight in comparison to other big teams. Ideally this man will also have some business acumen and can easily handle negotiating player contracts.

 

Step forward Brian Barwick. He's the man we need. A gentleman and a red too.

 

Fully agree with this post, but Barwick's had a vague advisory role for a while, so if they were going to employ him properly - particularly in a job as big as CEO - then they would have done so already.

 

You get the sense that Ayre's running the show and a CEO would tread on his toes too much, reducing his power and influence.

 

The Suarez case would have played out a lot differently if we had Barwick on board. Ayre was beyond useless.

[Guest San Don]

They bought us on the cheap, with the long-term aim of making plenty of money.

 

WTF has anyone buying anything got to do with it? Do you go down the car showroom to buy a skoda at 10 grand and think 'you know what, that car is worth 15 grand so I'll pay 15 instead'?

 

Point is everyone else in the fucking world had a chance to buy LFC, who actually stepped forward with the money and did so? Only one company did so.

 

And if you remember, david moores had the saudi's or kuwaiti's with a deal on the table until the two cowboys trumped that by paying a premium for the club. So, in that scenario we were sold to the highest fucking bidder and look where that landed us.

 

You dont have a fucking clue about business so stop spouting shite about people 'getting the club on the cheap.'

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

For what other reason(s) did FSG buy Liverpool FC?

 

There are a few reasons why incredibly rich people do things. A challenge, the name, the trophy asset, amongst other things. However, if you think billionaires give a shit about a few million over the space of 5/10 years, you're insane.

[Tony Moanero]

WTF has anyone buying anything got to do with it? Do you go down the car showroom to buy a skoda at 10 grand and think 'you know what, that car is worth 15 grand so I'll pay 15 instead'?

 

Point is everyone else in the fucking world had a chance to buy LFC, who actually stepped forward with the money and did so? Only one company did so.

 

And if you remember, david moores had the saudi's or kuwaiti's with a deal on the table until the two cowboys trumped that by paying a premium for the club. So, in that scenario we were sold to the highest fucking bidder and look where that landed us.

 

You dont have a fucking clue about business so stop spouting shite about people 'getting the club on the cheap.'

 

I've been on here for all of five minutes, how the fuck do you know what I have a clue about?

 

I'll go on about what I fucking like, ye patronising get.

[xerxes]

There are plenty of better ways to make money than a football club. You don't buy a football club just for the money. Partly, sure. Never solely for the money, because it doesn't really work. They certainly didn't need to clear the debt, just shift it.

 

There are a few reasons why incredibly rich people do things. A challenge, the name, the trophy asset, amongst other things. However, if you think billionaires give a shit about a few million over the space of 5/10 years, you're insane.

 

Although I agree that sports investment is risky, FSG's strategy has not been risky. The £30m extra on the TV deal alone gives them a return in excess of 14% on their cash investment (the new Barclays deal is on top of that) handsome indeed.

 

FSG is not incredibly rich, some of the people investing in it are. There is a big difference. If those individuals had wanted to throw their money around Mansour/ Abrahamovic style, they could have done. But they havent.This is no more than a minor investment club punt at around £10m each.

[G Richards]

Fully agree with this post, but Barwick's had a vague advisory role for a while, so if they were going to employ him properly - particularly in a job as big as CEO - then they would have done so already.

 

You get the sense that Ayre's running the show and a CEO would tread on his toes too much, reducing his power and influence.

 

The Suarez case would have played out a lot differently if we had Barwick on board. Ayre was beyond useless.

 

Didn't realize that, thanks.

 

Perhaps Ayre can still be the top dog - whether we call that CEO or MD, and his specialty will be overseeing the growth of the club commercially, though obviously as top dog he has a watching brief on the whole thing, on behalf of the owners.

 

Barwick (or similar if the club is not going to press ahead with hiring him) could be a director employed to handle player contracts and hob-nob on our behalf around the FA and Premier League.

 

I don't know exactly what 'hob-nob around the FA and Premier League' might mean (!) but I do know that we appear to carry little gravitas in those places, and, much as I don't like it, you have to play the game and learn how to grease the wheels with those in authority over you, and that's the sort of role I see the likes of Barwick excelling in. Perhaps Ayre would not be in favor because he would feel threatened? Just guessing now, but we do need another top man in there, off the pitch.

[Tony Moanero]

FSG own this club because it is an opportunity to make money. Fair enough, those involed are businessmen, I don't expect anything else. However, fucked if I'll blow smoke up their arses like some seem happy to do.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

Although I agree that sports investment is risky, FSG's strategy has not been risky. The £30m extra on the TV deal alone gives them a return in excess of 14% on their cash investment (the new Barclays deal is on top of that) handsome indeed.

 

14% over how long?

 

FSG is not incredibly rich, some of the people investing in it are. There is a big difference. If those individuals had wanted to throw their money around Mansour/ Abrahamovic style, they could have done. But they havent.This is no more than a minor investment club punt at around £10m each.

 

Take your above answer and divide it by how many people are in FSG. How handsome is that.

 

Football is a poor investment if money is what you're after.

[xerxes]

Perhaps Ayre can still be the top dog - whether we call that CEO or MD, and his specialty will be overseeing the growth of the club commercially, though obviously as top dog he has a watching brief on the whole thing, on behalf of the owners.

 

Barwick (or similar if the club is not going to press ahead with hiring him) could be a director employed to handle player contracts and hob-nob on our behalf around the FA and Premier League.

 

Barwick's credentials dwarf those of Ayre in virtually every respect. There is no way that Barwick would accept a junior position- nor should he.

 

Ayre simplys is not good enough to be MD, or CEO. His mishandling of the Suarez affair, and of the DOF position are proof positive of that.

[LFC64]

Fully agree with this post, but Barwick's had a vague advisory role for a while, so if they were going to employ him properly - particularly in a job as big as CEO - then they would have done so already.

 

You get the sense that Ayre's running the show and a CEO would tread on his toes too much, reducing his power and influence.

 

The Suarez case would have played out a lot differently if we had Barwick on board. Ayre was beyond useless.

 

I would be far happier with Brian Barwick taking on more responsibility and reducing those of Ian Ayre. He's obviously good in the commercial department but hasn't filled me with confidence after last season.

[Guest San Don]

FSG own this club because it is an opportunity to make money. Fair enough, those involed are businessmen, I don't expect anything else. However, fucked if I'll blow smoke up their arses like some seem happy to do.

 

It isnt a question of blowing smoke up anyone's arse but people like you just seem to want to blow shit in people's faces all the fucking time.

 

This shit about them 'getting the club on the cheap,' what's it all for? When moores was first selling the club, people were wanting an auction so the club went for an amount of money similar to what united are \ were worth.

 

All that money would just go to moores so what is the point in selling the club for 500, 600, 700 or 800m quid? Does the club benefit? Do the fans benefit? No, the owner and a few lucky shareholders would have benefited, that is all.

 

In any event, we got that magical 'auction' between two bidders. Yhe owner seriously ended up pissing off one set of bidders and landing us with a couple of cowboys who took us to the brink of administration (and anyone who dismisses that notion needs a serious wake up call and fast).

 

But never mind, the club wasnt 'sold on the cheap' and went for a premium!

[WhiskeyJar]

Behave yourself. I know exactly what G&H were, putting it in simple terms they were stupid businessmen. FSG are not, they're rather intelligent.

 

I didn't make them 'fucking Hitler', their intentions are the same as H&G's only this time they may just be successful, that doesn't necessarily translate to success on the pitch, it doesn't have to. Honestly get to fuck with that shite.

 

Jesus wept.

 

Its a business from their point of view and if we start winning things more money will come.

 

This agenda that you have going about these owners is bang out of order.

Sadly there are fans like you so hurt from the previous regime that will view any owners with a paranoid mind and a suspect-full glare.

 

These owners are in a different league because they are actually setting us up to stand on our own two feet; not to dive in a concrete wall of debt and rename us Newco Liverpool and start in the third tier of English football.

[Tony Moanero]

It isnt a question of blowing smoke up anyone's arse but people like you just seem to want to blow shit in people's faces all the fucking time.

 

This shit about them 'getting the club on the cheap,' what's it all for? When moores was first selling the club, people were wanting an auction so the club went for an amount of money similar to what united are \ were worth.

 

All that money would just go to moores so what is the point in selling the club for 500, 600, 700 or 800m quid? Does the club benefit? Do the fans benefit? No, the owner and a few lucky shareholders would have benefited, that is all.

 

In any event, we got that magical 'auction' between two bidders. Yhe owner seriously ended up pissing off one set of bidders and landing us with a couple of cowboys who took us to the brink of administration (and anyone who dismisses that notion needs a serious wake up call and fast).

 

But never mind, the club wasnt 'sold on the cheap' and went for a premium!

 

I'm not blowing shite in anyone's faces, just posting my view.

[Guest San Don]

I'm not blowing shite in anyone's faces, just posting my view.

 

Dont be so duplicitous. You were talking about people willing to blow smoke up their arses.

 

Now fucking shut up!

[WhiskeyJar]

[RANT]We are fans of one of the biggest clubs in the world.

Our owners want to make money from us when we win.

 

They might be coldhearted, calculating, profit-making, business structuring, demanding cunts; but thats what owners are there for.

 

They will give as much as they think in order to have a healthy return i.e: The action or process of investing money for profit or material result.

A thing that is worth buying because it may be profitable or useful in the future.

 

Thats what owners are.

Why is everybody panicking about their intentions?

They will give money and expect a return.

 

We are just about to buy a player thats worth 11 million.[/RANT]

[xerxes]

14% over how long?

 

Take your above answer and divide it by how many people are in FSG. How handsome is that.

 

Football is a poor investment if money is what you're after.

 

£30m/£220m down is 14% per annum.

 

14% is 14% - handsome.

 

We agree that football can be a poor investment, but need not be.Ask Mandaric, the Golds/Sullivan and Jack Petchey. The trick is capital and windfall growth,with minimal capital net investment, which FSG are seeing (they have not had to spend a penny on the club shirt and PL TV deals). Nice.

[Tony Moanero]

Dont be so duplicitous. You were talking about people willing to blow smoke up their arses.

 

Now fucking shut up!

 

Duplicitous?

 

Ha Ha.

 

Behave.

 

Go and argue with someone who can be arsed.

[WhiskeyJar]

Duplicitous?

 

Ha Ha.

 

Behave.

 

Go and argue with someone who can be arsed.

 

Why post back if you are not arsed?