Search the Community

If what we're hearing is true, that Benitez has managed to recoup some money for Dossena and got something for Voronin then he has pulled off a miracle in the transfer market in addition to recouping 80% of Robbie Keane's fee (which he has not been allowed to spend) I have always maintained that Benitez should be allowed to put this mess right. Some of you forget that Benitez has a lot of contacts and players who want to play for him (usually good foreign ones), it's a disgrace that the board cannot back our manager more because if they did we would see more players like Fernando Torres arriving rather than having tens of millions taken out of the club for the privilage of being owned by Hicks and Gillett. So, Benitez has to work another way. Some of the fans and their kneejerk reactions calling for his head really are pathetic, if Benitez is allowed to operate effectively he will sort it out, he will change the personnel and I'm sure he will make sure the players know what is expected of them or they can also find themselves out the door. Those people who lose faith because of a bad run of results need to wake up. The results are short term and while our league campaign has been bitterly disappointing, the development of the club does not stop, we need to think long term, beyond this season and beyond next because we want to be consistent challengers despite the financial handicap. It's just going to take longer for Benitez to get the squad the way he needs to and the players he needs along with the right blend of youngsters, which some fans call for him to develop then simultaneously crucify them when he plays them. Chelsea have just wasted £40m on compensation to three coaches in 2 years, this has never been the Liverpool way and i'd prefer to see us spend whatever money we have on players and backing Benitez.

In virtually every recent article, I've read Liverpool FC is in debt. Nothing could be further from the truth. Being "in debt" means that your debts exceed your assets. We are carrying debt that is being comfortably serviced by our cash flow. We have a squad that is worth at current transfer values at least three times the net cost of what it took to put it together, and as a business, we are profitable and cash flow positive. Add to that the unrealized potential of a 70,000 capacity stadium that we can sell out with no problems, and the prospect (supported by the recent shirt deal and the impending naming rights deal) of becoming the biggest brand in the game. It makes sense to manage debt prudently - how many of us could live without a mortgage? - and that is what the club is doing. But we are a long way from having debt problems as many in the Press would have us believe.

Daily Express | Sport | Football The problems on the pitch come as strong rumours circulate within the city that the Royal Bank of Scotland and Wachovia are putting the squeeze on American owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett to pay back another chunk of the £240millionstill outstanding from their original borrowing to buy Liverpool, or reduce their asking price and sell the club. It comes with the Anfield hierarchy trying to drum up interest in a shares issue that would dilute their stake and bring in a minority investor. Liverpool are seeking £100m for a 25 per cent stake in the club which would go towards paying down the debt and trigger a long-term refinancing arrangement with the banks that could last between three and four years. A reduced level of debt would allow the much-delayed stadium project to return to the agenda.

Could anybody explain this to me? Because i fail to see how we can be told that their debt is ten times worse than ours but yet, they can spend so much money? I understand they have a bigger revenue, but if their debt is so large, then that should balance out, no? Its not like they spend 5m more than us, we are poles apart, and they are in a totally different world of transfers. So how does that work out?... Anybody?...