Topic: So the commercial office of LIVERPOOL FC will be London huh

[The 5th Benitle]

Timbo does has a point to make here (embedded in our oligarchic system) that Liverpool FC does not have to pay fealty to London. 

They're not paying fealty to London, they're moving some people from Boston to London. It's a total non-issue and it could certainly be argued that it's better to have the commercial team closer to Liverpool, which is exactly what's happening.

[Trendisnotdestiny]

Think about this for a second. Nobody had a problem when he was staying 5000 more kilometers away in Boston

But wasn't there a recent article about him having 580 million (do not quote me on the figure) reasons to be happy about LFC?

Three questions really.   Why London?  Why not Liverpool?  Why now?

Good work involves following the money.

[gazzam1963]

If this had been opened in july , we could have had a chauffeured car ready at heathrow , picked up alexis Sanchez and wife , whisked them around London showing them a few sites , took him to our new plush offices , all replicas of our 5 European cups and uefa cups in glass cabinets , Brendan in chatting to him ...sign him on a five year deal ... see there is advantages to being in London

[JerseyKloppite]

Can't believe anyone thinks that this is an issue, and certainly that it's more of an issue than our commercial offices being overseas (i.e. in Boston) before this.

It dosen't matter. It really doesn't matter. No, honestly, it dosen't matter.

Go back 5 years to H&G. They were actual problems.

We have owners who have installed a successful and popular manager, are delivering on stadium expansion and who are guaranteeing the financial stability of the club for years to come with their commercial strategies.

Moaning about moving the club's commercial offices to London is trying to close the stable door after the horse has bolted, been caught and ended up in a Lasagne in Aldi. We'd all rather have local, passionate owners running the club locally, or at least domestically based owners. But the game is international and as soulless and faceless corporate tycoons, ours seem better than most.

They're far from faultless but if people are so desperate to beat them with any stick they can get hold of then they really can't win. Anfield is still in Liverpool, the club's name is still Liverpool, we still play in red, the staff are still based at Melwood and the club has offices on Merseyside. We're investing in the city with the Anfield redevelopment.

Most corporate entities, banks, law firms etc. have their offices in London, it's a perfectly pragmatic base of operations for a huge commercial enterprise like Liverpool FC. In an ideal world we could base our commercial offices in Liverpool, but this isn't an ideal world and this seems like the kind of non-issue where fans really should stand back and be pragmatic.

I'm just grateful it's not in Texas.

[CraigDS]

But wasn't there a recent article about him having 580 million (do not quote me on the figure) reasons to be happy about LFC?

Three questions really.   Why London?  Why not Liverpool?  Why now?

Good work involves following the money.

Because the sponsors we want to attract have a presence in London, and/or are in London more often, and/or can get to London quicker and easier than Liverpool, and/or there is a greater pool of qualified people to pick from.

It's a non-story. We are moving a tiny fraction of our employees to a London based office to improve their ability to do their job. That's it.

[Trendisnotdestiny]

They're not paying fealty to London, they're moving some people from Boston to London. It's a total non-issue and it could certainly be argued that it's better to have the commercial team closer to Liverpool, which is exactly what's happening.

I hear you. 

This may not be relevant, but what I do know is relevant is that London has become the leading place in the world, at present, for control fraud ---- precisely due to a race to the bottom laxity of regulation designed to attract capital from all areas around the world.

It may be a non-issue.  However, there is little need to spurn conversation and debate, especially when we consider what has happened in the world economy over the last decade (fraud, insolvencies, bailouts etc.).    And from my time in the private sector, there is always a reason for a location change (one that is public and a few that are not).

Again, I am not trying to stir the pot as this may be a non-issue, but for the person most recently talking about LFC's financial prospects moving to London from Boston does beg the question, why not Liverpool. 

[RainbowFlick]

The outrage on this is partially justified (local jobs/want to showcase Liverpool) but pretty over exaggerated. It's the current state of business in England - it's all HQ'd in London, just due to ease of logistics.

Business is centred around London, which itself is unjust but it's the world we live in.

Manchester United - Mayfair
Manchester City - Regents Park

We're playing catch-up.

[SP]

I hear you. 

This may not be relevant, but what I do know is relevant is that London has become the leading place in the world, at present, for control fraud ---- precisely due to a race to the bottom laxity of regulation designed to attract capital from all areas around the world.

It may be a non-issue.  However, there is little need to spurn conversation and debate, especially when we consider what has happened in the world economy over the last decade (fraud, insolvencies, bailouts etc.).    And from my time in the private sector, there is always a reason for a location change (one that is public and a few that are not).

Again, I am not trying to stir the pot as this may be a non-issue, but for the person most recently talking about LFC's financial prospects moving to London from Boston does beg the question, why not Liverpool. 

All of which is completely irrelevant to this topic. London and Liverpool are under the same regulatory financial framework. If you want to discuss the conduct of the City of London in general, there are a myriad of topics outside the LFC boards. 

[CraigDS]

The outrage on this is partially justified (local jobs/want to showcase Liverpool) but pretty over exaggerated. It's the current state of business in England - it's all HQ'd in London, just due to ease of logistics.

Business is centred around London, which itself is unjust but it's the world we live in.

Manchester United - Mayfair
Manchester City - Regents Park

We're playing catch-up.

I believe we've had offices, or at least the use of offices, in London for a while now. This is just a permanent base. Plus I'm fairly sure we've got some sort of commercial offices, or people working commercially, in the Far East, and presumably the US (given this is what he was based prior to moving).

So not catch up per se.

[Upinsmoke]

 I can't think of any positives or a good enough reason to choose London over Liverpool.  The club is based in Liverpool, Anfield. There for any deals negotiated in London or Boston or Liverpool will be noticed in Anfield, adverts, players, sponsors, whatever.

I therefor expect FSG baseball hq to be in New York, would make sense over Boston.

[indlfc]

What is the issue with this again?

[[new username under construction]]

What is the issue with this again?

Exactly. 3 Pages lol

[Anfield Ed]

Don't see a problem with this really.

[Alan_X]

Has Uniteds commercial centre been moved to London?

Sponsorship Sales Manager
Manchester United, London

Manchester United is the World’s largest and most famous sports club. Over 659 million people support the club today worldwide, with its rich history covering 135 years of footballing success.

Manchester United seeks a robust, high achiever to realise the full commercial potential of one of the most globally recognised sports brands.

http://www.odgersberndtson.co.uk/gb/executive-opportunities/opportunity-details/45665/

[Ginamos]

Timbo's Goals takes exception with this and we get three thread pages over a non-issue.

We're all bored with the Internationals, bring on next weekend.

[Lone Star Red]

I can't think of any positives or a good enough reason to choose London over Liverpool.  The club is based in Liverpool, Anfield. There for any deals negotiated in London or Boston or Liverpool will be noticed in Anfield, adverts, players, sponsors, whatever.

I therefor expect FSG baseball hq to be in New York, would make sense over Boston.

Except the Red Sox have nowhere even close to the global brand, image and fanbase that Liverpool has.

[John C]

What is the issue with this again?

We don't quite know what the issue is mate, but I suspect the club has appraised the advantageous of the move and there's a strategic objective to it.

[reddebs]

The way I see it, if you want to seperate a rich person from their money, you go to them to get it not the other way round. 

[CraigDS]

I can't think of any positives or a good enough reason to choose London over Liverpool. 

You're not thinking very hard if you can't think of any positives at all.

I therefor expect FSG baseball hq to be in New York, would make sense over Boston.

You're comparing a baseball team which has predominately locally based sponsors in a sport which is viewed by predominately local supporters to a football team which is supported the world over and attracts sponsors who are based well away from the local area.

[Alan_X]

Has Uniteds commercial centre been moved to London?

Manchester United moved their commercial and sponsorship office to 5 Stratton Street in Mayfair a few years back.

Manchester United is set to expand its commercial operations by moving to new offices in Mayfair, London.

The football club has agreed a deal to occupy 11,500 sq ft of luxurious new office space in the heart of London's West End.

The deal will do little to help United's reputation for attracting more supporters from London than Manchester, and exacerbate frustration from the club's fans who feel the Glazer family have lost touch with its roots.

However, the deal also highlights the commercial success the Glazer's, who bought United in 2005, have enjoyed since launching operations in London three years ago.

The club set up a team in a Pall Mall office building designed to secure new sponsorship deals from around the world. It said London was a more practical base for overseas companies travelling to the UK for sponsorship talks.

However, the 45-man operation is understood to have grown too large for the St James's office, leading to the move to Mayfair.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/constructionandproperty/8309651/Manchester-United-moves-to-Mayfair.html

[Alan_X]

I can't think of any positives or a good enough reason to choose London over Liverpool.  The club is based in Liverpool, Anfield. There for any deals negotiated in London or Boston or Liverpool will be noticed in Anfield, adverts, players, sponsors, whatever.

I therefor expect FSG baseball hq to be in New York, would make sense over Boston.

Liverpool's HQ isn't moving to London, it's opening a commercial office, like United did a few years back.

[stewy17]

This is a common sense decision, like many people have said there are a lot more commercial opportunities in London than in Liverpool.

I work in London, the industry I work in is non-existent in Liverpool and in order to do what I want to do I had to move here (it so happens I kinda like london but still the opportunities are greater here). You can argue that we're paying fealty to london, but what are the other options? Miss out on numerous opportunities whilst the club fights against the commercial realities of this country?

A massive global commercial company visits the UK, they can speak to Arsenal, Chelsea, Tottenham, Man City, Man Utd in London, but our directors sit up here (i'm guessing you'd have them in Anfield and not the city centre office because after all that's where we're based) telling said company to hike their arses up to Liverpool if they want to discuss anything. Sounds like a solid plan that.

Expecting people to travel to us, and that we should ONLY have offices in Liverpool is so short sighted, naive and dare I say it small minded that it beggars belief.  We're a global company, we should be ran as one and to simply have an office in Liverpool would almost be negligent.

[Hij]

This thread is pathetic.

There are more important things to be angry about than this total non issue.

There always has to be something to have a tantrum about though.

[john_mac]

Personally don't see why it makes sense for part of the commercial arm of the club to be based in London, why bother there arses moving from Boston to London?

Not having that it will make better commercial sense than having a base elsewhere, most big deals will involve big companies, I imagine most of these will understand the club has historical geographical links with the city of Liverpool and understand that it's commercial arm will be based in the city if they want to work with them.

Could not and have never really given a shite about what and why United do things, I could not think of something more that I don't want LFC to emulate. The club often shows a lack of respect for the locally community and local economy, too often for my liking. It may not be the end of the world but it is quite typical of the way the club sees the environment they operate in.

[Pistolero]

a) He's right to move to the South of England..it makes sense as that's where the commercial centre is.

b) We're right to push for game 39. Ok it may be unfair on 'the people who happen to be in a place where it's possible to go to lots of games' ...but as these are yet to be exploited huge potential revenues it makes commercial sense

c) We're right to move the club to the South/South East of England - it has great Motorway and airport links - players increasingly want to be near to the capital - it doesn't matter to the TV companies where you play as long as the stadium is full and we'll be able to charge premium prices for tickets. It makes commercial sense

[Hij]

a) He's right to move to the South of England..it makes sense as that's where the commercial centre is.

b) We're right to push for game 39. Ok it may be unfair on 'the people who happen to be in a place where it's possible to go to lots of games' ...but as these are yet to be exploited huge potential revenues it makes commercial sense

c) We're right to move the club to the South/South East of England - it has great Motorway and airport links - players increasingly want to be near to the capital - it doesn't matter to the TV companies where you play as long as the stadium is full and we'll be able to charge premium prices for tickets. It makes commercial sense

Utter bollocks that you link all three of those as one and the same.

[The 5th Benitle]

a) He's right to move to the South of England..it makes sense as that's where the commercial centre is.

b) We're right to push for game 39. Ok it may be unfair on 'the people who happen to be in a place where it's possible to go to lots of games' ...but as these are yet to be exploited huge potential revenues it makes commercial sense

c) We're right to move the club to the South/South East of England - it has great Motorway and airport links - players increasingly want to be near to the capital - it doesn't matter to the TV companies where you play as long as the stadium is full and we'll be able to charge premium prices for tickets. It makes commercial sense

I know you're being flippant, but there is no logical progression whatsoever from a) to b) or c).

[Redman0151]

a) He's right to move to the South of England..it makes sense as that's where the commercial centre is.

b) We're right to push for game 39. Ok it may be unfair on 'the people who happen to be in a place where it's possible to go to lots of games' ...but as these are yet to be exploited huge potential revenues it makes commercial sense

c) We're right to move the club to the South/South East of England - it has great Motorway and airport links - players increasingly want to be near to the capital - it doesn't matter to the TV companies where you play as long as the stadium is full and we'll be able to charge premium prices for tickets. It makes commercial sense

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope

[Pistolero]

I know you're being flippant, but there is no logical progression whatsoever from a) to b) or c).

get back to me in 15 years.......your flat will be full of Scousers travelling down for home games 

[john_mac]

I know you're being flippant, but there is no logical progression whatsoever from a) to b) or c).

Sorry but there is, all people appear to want to talk about is what makes commercial sense for the club regardless of what that mean to the local area, there are some on here that support Liverpool despite its geographical location, so take it to its logical conclusion.

Maybe move it to the boozer forum there is no mention of Raheem Sterling in the thread.

[ThePeetmix]

It makes 100% commercial sense if we're looking to expand. If you can't see that then you've just got rose-tinted glasses on I'm afraid.

Is it shitty that London is the biggest commercial hub in the country? Sure it is but it is what it is.

[CraigDS]

a) He's right to move to the South of England..it makes sense as that's where the commercial centre is.

b) We're right to push for game 39. Ok it may be unfair on 'the people who happen to be in a place where it's possible to go to lots of games' ...but as these are yet to be exploited huge potential revenues it makes commercial sense

c) We're right to move the club to the South/South East of England - it has great Motorway and airport links - players increasingly want to be near to the capital - it doesn't matter to the TV companies where you play as long as the stadium is full and we'll be able to charge premium prices for tickets. It makes commercial sense

d) FSG builds a big dome over the old Anfield, attaches rockets to the outside of the Kop and Anny Rd and blasts it into orbit to become the first space stadium. Shuttling fans from Liverpool to Space Anfield for a reduced price due to it's new sponsorship deal with Richard Branson.

Given you linking B and C to A, I expect D is just as likely.

[The 5th Benitle]

Sorry but there is, all people appear to want to talk about is what makes commercial sense for the club regardless of what that mean to the local area, there are some on here that support Liverpool despite its geographical location, so take it to its logical conclusion.

Maybe move it to the boozer forum there is no mention of Raheem Sterling in the thread.

There simply isn't John, it's completely disingenuous. As others have pointed out, were you angry when Hogan was based even further away from Liverpool, in Boston?

People who are not against the move are pointing out the commercial sense it makes for the club.

[Solomon Grundy]

This thread is pathetic.

There are more important things to be angry about than this total non issue.

There always has to be something to have a tantrum about though.

This.

[Upinsmoke]

Except the Red Sox have nowhere even close to the global brand, image and fanbase that Liverpool has.

The gaps to them and the Yankees and us and United are probably relative. Commercially we want to aspire to be where United are, I'm sure the red sox want to be where the Yankees are too.

[Samie]

This thread is pathetic.

There are more important things to be angry about than this total non issue.

There always has to be something to have a tantrum about though.

These three lines sum it up.

Some on RAWK find a way to moan about something every day.

[john_mac]

There simply isn't John, it's completely disingenuous. As others have pointed out, were you angry when Hogan was based even further away from Liverpool, in Boston?

People who are not against the move are pointing out the commercial sense it makes for the club.

As for your Sterling comment, come on, you're better than that.

James, I have always thought that the club could do much, much more for the local economy and frankly, I'm not buying that any big commercial deals are falling over because we are not commercially based in London, it does not go hand in hand for me. Companies who want to work with Liverpool know where we are based, they know where the bedrock of the fan base is from and they know our global appeal. I don't think that having a commercial vase in London changes that, it is not going to put us on the telly more, surely the basis that drives many commercial deals, certainly more than anything else.

I'm not angry by the way, it's what I expect from the club and the reaction I expect in here.

I'm not daft, I know exactly what the commercial reality is, but I do think if we struggle to attract our commercial team to the area how can we expect to attract players when competing for their signatures?

[CraigDS]

The gaps to them and the Yankees and us and United are probably relative. Commercially we want to aspire to be where United are, I'm sure the red sox want to be where the Yankees are too.

The gap between Red Sox and Yankee's is irrelevant. The differences between the baseball and football commercial markets are what you should be looking at as to the reason they don't need to open an office in New York.

[Mutton Geoff]

Whilst it maybe pragmatic!
 To the locals it could look like a representative of Liverpool F.C. doesn't think Liverpool is good enough or big enough for him to be based in.  This might sound OTT to people with no allegiance to the city itself, but it comes down to pride and maybe as i was brought up near this city i can understand Timbo's point of view a bit more than people the other side of the country or even the world, you need to be from Liverpool or really understand Liverpudlians to understand Timbo's point and if you don't well you are chatting uneducated shit anyway.

Actually his excuse of the need to be based in London is pure bollox, in a corporate world of net based conferences and skyped conversations and deals all done on the net are we saying he could not do business just the same here rather than some overpriced shack in Mayfair.

So he does deals and wines and dines in London, how nice for him, but why do this  is he scared that the sponsors will run a mile if they see the wonderful city of culture  Liverpool?

Seems like this is a cosmetic plan to keep Billy Boy in the UK, or maybe he just want to use his Oyster card.

( Craig where you on your lunch hour?) 

[Mutton Geoff]

These three lines sum it up.

Some on RAWK find a way to moan about something every day.

Location, Location, Location,  what's yours ? 

I think frankly it's amazing and deplorable how many people in Rawk have no allegiance to the city their team plays in or any understanding of the people who live in it