Liverpool Rumours And General Discussion 2007/2008

PHB

Are DIC interested in getting half ownership of the club though? It'd be great for Hicks, because he'd be able to get a lot of the benefits without as much of the risk than dealing with Gilette.

whatawaster

PHB wrote: »

Are DIC interested in getting half ownership of the club though? It'd be great for Hicks, because he'd be able to get a lot of the benefits without as much of the risk than dealing with Gilette.

i'd imagine they'd try to use it as a platform to try and force hicks out eventually.

zing

PHB wrote: »

Are DIC interested in getting half ownership of the club though? It'd be great for Hicks, because he'd be able to get a lot of the benefits without as much of the risk than dealing with Gilette.

They've said they're not but they most likely would buy out Gillet now and try and squeeze Hicks out over the remaining term of the Gillet/Hicks finance deal. Once that deal is up DIC can invest as much as they want into the stadium/club but Hicks may seriously struggle to match their resources.

Mr Alan

I'd imagine them taking 50% of the club would just mean they'd force hicks out from the inside.

Zapp Brannigan

At least if they get 50% they'll start throwing some money into the club so we can buy some top quality players in the summer.

Dub13

Zapp Brannigan wrote: »

At least if they get 50% they'll start throwing some money into the club so we can buy some top quality players in the summer.

Don't think this will happen if they only get 50%.

~Rebel~

Dub13 wrote: »

Don't think this will happen if they only get 50%.

Aye, id say while both DIC and Hicks were in charge together, DIC would just match whatever Hicks was willing to put into transfers so we'll probably get around the 20mill net amount, which is fine really. It would be a step in the right direction still.

zing

The funding for the next 16/17 months is in place and that deal is unlikely to be wiped away unless DIC get 100% now. Where it would get interesting is if DIC were to start flexing their muscles a bit and look to increase say the xfer budget by another 20 or 30m with each party having to come up with half that amount. Exactly the type of pressure DIC should try and put on Hicks if they do get their feet under the boardroom table.

Zapp Brannigan

mike65 wrote: »

Liverpool v Newcastle is live on Setanta Ireland 3 pm Saturday! w00t!

Mike.

Why do you lie Mike? Wham v spurs is on.

lpool2k05

West H Spurs aint on cos their playing sunday so Pool Newcastle replaces it!!Mike would never lie

spockety

Setanta Ireland 2.50pm Live Barclays Premier League
Available in ROI only. Live action as Rafael Benitez' Liverpool entertain Kevin Keegan's Newcastle Utd at Anfield. K.0. 3:00pm.

Thanx 4 The Fish

I sure to fnck hope that Owen does not score against us this weekend, I will cheer him when he comes on but after that he'll get nothing.

GBX

its on according to setanta:

15:00
Live Barclays Premier League - Liverpool v Newcastle Utd
Available in ROI only. Live action from Anfield as Liverpool face Kevin Keegan's Newcastle in the top flight of English football. Rafa Benitez's men are desperate to move back into the top four and need victory here. K.O. 3:00pm.

Zapp Brannigan

Ah right, I was going by my EPG so apologies Mike!

mike65

Zapp Brannigan Unbeliever! :eek:

Mike.

~Rebel~

Our old boy Djibril back at it again tonight, got 2 in the uefa cup against zenit, was captain for the game as well. Pretty typical cisse goals, low and hard, but with a bit more conscious direction then during his time with us.

http://www.dailymotion.com/relevance/search/marseille%2Bzenit%2B/video/x4mega_marseille-zenit_sport

Mr Alan

good to hear that representives actually met with figures from Sons Of Shankley last night to discuss the fans feelings in regards to a takeover.

They were advised that fans would welcome the takeover but would be cautious, once bitten twice shy and all that, which DIC accepted as being fair enough.

At least even before they have ownership DIC seem to give a ****e wat the fans reckon.

good to see Everton put back in their place by Fiorentina tonight.

d22ontour

Mr Alan wrote: »

At least even before they have ownership DIC seem to give a ****e wat the fans reckon.

They care about making money just as yore yanks do/did/will.Liverpool is gonna be the Princes plaything in which he is gonna go all Romans rubles ? His/their advisors are moneymen to make money not facilitate what you might see as a dream takeover.

redspider

One thing that keeps getting bandied about on here and in the media, etc, is that Liverpool are not achieving in comparison to what they should. However, if we accept the premise that money is a large factor in what drives success on the field, as a club can buy in capability, although at the top level it cant buy you everything and it certainly cant guarantee success. Using that as a premise, lets take another look at the last Deloitte football money report (revenues):

euro m 2006/2007 (revenues)
315 Man Utd
283 Chelsea
264 Arsenal
199 Liverpool
153 Spurs
129 Newcastle

A spending table is similar to the above except that Man Utd spend less (on the footballing aspect, as they turn a profit/pay off debt) and Chelsea have been spending more than their revenues (ie: the club was running at a loss). Note that the above table even included Liverpool reaching the CL final.

That financial table is a HUGE factor in determining our league position, so Liverpool finishing 4th is NOT a failure given the pure financial limitations of our situation, in my opinion.

The bad news for us is that the new stadium, with whatever owner, wont fall into place until 2011, so revenues are likely to stay in 4th place no matter what, so we should expect more of the same, mainly: ie: 4ths until 2011-2012 onwards. Anything above that is punching above our weight.

Having said that, I think it would be possible with some wise management and optimisation for the league to put in a good challenge and go for 2nd place at least. But given our limited constraints, perhaps going for the CL is the 'easier' competition to optimise for and Rafa and the boys should just go for that. In terms of silverware, maybe optimize for the cups (League Cup and FA Cup).

By the way, two examples of clubs which are member-owned, a route that has been mooted, ie: Barcelona and Real Madrid, had the following revenues:

351m Real Madrid
290 Barcelona

They are clearly under-performing in terms of where they should be on the field ias can be seen n the CL. Barca may make some amends on that this season, but they are beatable.

Its a funny (money) old game ....

Redspider

PHB

There are two things money wise that determine success on the pitch.
Transfer fees
Wage budgets

Total Revenue is relevent only in the sense that if often determines the other two, but there isn't a direct linkage.

Dub13

PHB wrote: »

Total Revenue is relevent only in the sense that if often determines the other two, but there isn't a direct linkage.

This is very true,if Liverpool put there ticket prices up to what Chelski charge they would be a lot higher up the list.

Stky10

Dub13 wrote: »

This is very true,if Liverpool put there ticket prices up to what Chelski charge they would be a lot higher up the list.

Not in reality though. Chelsea and Arsenal can charge much higher prices than Man U or Liverpool because of the earning power of fans living in London compared to Liverpool or Manchester. If Liverpool doubled the price of a season ticket for next season, they'd sell very few of them and revenue would drop.

Dub13

Stky10 wrote: »

Not in reality though. Chelsea and Arsenal can charge much higher prices than Man U or Liverpool because of the earning power of fans living in London compared to Liverpool or Manchester. If Liverpool doubled the price of a season ticket for next season, they'd sell very few of them and revenue would drop.

I am very aware of the social economical effects of were a club is based,sure I have got flights,match tickets and a few pints for Anfield for the same price mates have paid just for the ticket into Stanford bridge.

The point I am making is some people go mad about these turnover figures when they come out every so often.And the reality is they mean very little.

PHB

That said, it'd be so much easier to fly to London on a regular basis, as Ryan Air can't **** you over by upping the prices the second the match times come out.

Dub13

PHB wrote: »

That said, it'd be so much easier to fly to London on a regular basis, as Ryan Air can't **** you over by upping the prices the second the match times come out.

This is true....but they don't have the ferry option.:D

Stky10

Dub13 wrote: »

The point I am making is some people go mad about these turnover figures when they come out every so often.And the reality is they mean very little.

Sure, but from a financial/accountancy point of view its quite a significant income advantage, when coupled with the fact that clubs main financial cost (player wages) are the same whether the player lives in London or Liverpool. I'd even say Liverpool's average player wage is probably even higher than that of Arsenal/Spurs, because lots of (foreign) players prefer to live in London than up north, and so wages need to be higher to attract them (ie a much lesser form of the Newcastle/M-boro effect).

zing

Lots of reports overnight suggesting Hicks is willing to play ball (i.e. allow Gillet to sell) if he gets 1% and DIC get the remaining 49% and those reports suggest DIC will go along with this. I'd be very surprised if that were the case. Makes those 49% worthless in comparison and DIC won't pay over the odds to not have a say in the running of the club.

Dubit10

Does anyone know anything about a protest at tomorrow's game.Am going over hope there is some sort of organised hicks/gillete out protest to join in:)

redspider

Dub13 wrote: »

The point I am making is some people go mad about these turnover figures when they come out every so often.And the reality is they mean very little.

I think most analysts of football wouldnt agree with you. If you take an extreme example, the revenue/spending of Man Utd and the revenue/spending of Waterford Utd, its obvious to the blind man that Man Utd can buy more capability than Waterford and hence success on the field. Money drives success, and success brings in money. The reality is that the money/figures drive everything in the professional game, so they mean a lot.

PHB wrote:

here are two things money wise that determine success on the pitch. Transfer fees, Wage budgets.
Total Revenue is relevent only in the sense that if often determines the other two, but there isn't a direct linkage.

I think we are in agreement that there is a direct linkage between spending amounts and the likelihood of success on the pitch. Its is not an absolute of course, as in whoever gets the most money will finish 1st, etc. It is a capability. But when using extreme examples the differences are clear. Also, less extreme, Everton, Man City, West Ham, Everton, Newcastle each season have less success than Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool. So there is a direct linkage between spending and success, not 1-for-1, not guaranteed, but a direct linkage in any determimation.

Revenue does not determine spending exactly though, and I qualified the table with that. I would have put up a spending table if I had it to hand but I dont at the moment and the revenue table gives an idea if we consider how Abramovich runs Chelsea, over the previous seasons they have been spending more than Man Utd with less revenue and hence making a loss and Man Utd have been making profits or paying off debt. In previous seasons, Arsenal and Liverpool were spending around the same. Mind you, Arsenal were more successful in the league and on the field in general.

So, there is a direct linkage in terms of spending, and revenue long-term drives the amount of money that the clubs can spend. A club may be able to live beyond its means for a while with a 'sugar-daddy' or by someone who wants to get rid of it, but long-term, its the revenues that drive everything.

For fans that go to Anfield and want to win the league, you should not complain if they put up prices. I would expect G&H, or DIC or Hick&DIC to do so, and Liverpool fans cant complain really, as its a case of "do we really want to win the league or not?" If so, there is only one solution, and that at the end of the day is money, like it or not. True, it is possible to win the league without it, football is like that, possible yes, but probable, no.

Redspider

Mr Alan

d22ontour wrote: »

They care about making money just as yore yanks do/did/will.Liverpool is gonna be the Princes plaything in which he is gonna go all Romans rubles ? His/their advisors are moneymen to make money not facilitate what you might see as a dream takeover.

sorry, but i must have missed the post where i denied they were there to make money?!

my point is simply they seem willing to have the thoughts of the fans on board, and open to a communication with them. Which is a good thing.

no need for your smug response to a point i didnt actually make tbh.

Tusky

Some Torres stats. Really is amazing.

16 goals in 13 league games at Anfield. (1.2 goals each game)

24 goals in 33 games overall. (0.7 goals a game)

prendy

they are unreal stats....
begs the question..is he our best ever signing(after less than one season)?
i mean over the years we've made some serious signings but has anyone made the same kind of impact in the short time he's been here?

Tusky

prendy wrote: »

they are unreal stats....
begs the question..is he our best ever signing(after less than one season)?
i mean over the years we've made some serious signings but has anyone made the same kind of impact in the short time he's been here?

Bit early to say that. If he continues this kind of form for the next couple of seasons, then maybe.

~Rebel~

Tusky wrote: »

Bit early to say that. If he continues this kind of form for the next couple of seasons, then maybe.

indeed. a few consistent years at this level and he could be up in the Dalglish level of signings.

mike65

Dalglish cost £400000 :eek: Okay it ws 1977 but still, what a bargain!

Mike.

~Rebel~

mike65 wrote: »

Dalglish cost £400000 :eek: Okay it ws 1977 but still, what a bargain!

Mike.

yeah, definately Pool's best signing of all time. Was amazing the way he just slotted in for Keegan's exit, and then some!

Mr Alan

wasn't Dalglish a transfer record at the time? I think he may have been

~Rebel~

Mr Alan wrote: »

wasn't Dalglish a transfer record at the time? I think he may have been

just checked wikipedia there;

On 10 August 1977, after 269 appearances and 167 goals, an average of a goal every 1.6 games, for the Hoops, Dalglish moved to Bob Paisley's Liverpool for a record £440,000 transfer fee. He was bought as a replacement for Kevin Keegan who had left the club to play for Hamburg in Germany.

Mr Alan

:cool: i'm always right :cool:

whatawaster

Mr Alan wrote: »

:cool: i'm always right :cool:

about everything. Like Roy Keane.

Mr Alan

:)exactly:)

mike65

Masch looks likely to miss tomorrows game.

---

Reina
Arbeloa--Carra-Skrtle--Aurelio

---

Alonso
Pennant

---

Babel

---

Gerrard

---

Kuyt--Torres

Could just as easily be Finnan-Carra-Hyypia-Riise at the back.

Mike.

~Rebel~

I think we could see Agger come in for this one. Played 45mins for reserves last week, and 60mins this week so could see him start against Newcastle.

If Masch is out then probable midfield of Gerrard Alonso and Lucas i'd say. Has kept that 3 man midfield since before the Sunderland game and will be using it again against inter so i'd say it'll be as you were. Maybe rest Torres and one of Kuyt and Babel though.

prendy

i dont want to see them rested...cant afford to rest torres and there is no need..hes 23 ffs.give him an extra day off training if needs be!

redzerdrog

id like to see

---

reina

---

finnan

---

carra

---

skyrtle

---

aurelio

---

lucas

---

alonso

---

pennent

---

gerrard

---

babel/yossi

---

torres

---

with kuyt getting a rest and maybe babel rested and bring crouch on for torres when we go 2-0 up

StickyMcGinty

SSN just confirmed he's out of the newcastle game... says he might miss the Inter game aswell.

i'd prefer torres to be out of the inter game instead of masc...

kaimera

Who's out?

Tusky

kaimera wrote: »

Who's out?

Mascherano - http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/drilldown/N159090080307-1331.htm

Ive no problem with him missing the Newcastle game but I really really hope hes back for Inter.

Mr Alan

masch

Mr Alan

that noble ****er leaving the leg in on him the other night did it