Topic: John Henry: May be no more Anfield expansion due to ticket price considerations

[Jonny-B]

Two completely different sports, two different clubs, two different businesses. You might as well say "John Henry owns a deli, the price of a sandwich is £5, so he shouldn't sell LFC tickets for more than £5." The cost of MLB tickets varies hugely from stand to stand in each stadium and is consistent across other teams etc.

This. There is nothing compared to a crappy bleacher seat at a Baseball game at Anfield. You might as well compare the obstructed views we sell for a tenner.

And as said already they play 80+ home games a season.

MLB tickets (even red sox ones) are easy to get on the day.

[Rush 82]

The amount of fewm here I thought for a moment I'd wandered onto GoT

[Qston]

I'm thinking that.

That Scottish journalist at the Times said Sept/Oct will be something happening in regard to Everbright.

It would make sense with some of what has been reported. The financial argument in the comments do make certain amount of sense but it depends on your perspective, timescales for return on investment and perhaps even a longer term strategy that they have regarding exiting the business all together. I think that there is news in the offing about possible investment from a third party they would have a strategy for how to present that news and the context within which it is presented. These aren`t stupid people (although some may disagree)

[JerseyKloppite]

Where do you think it's all going then? We'll see.

FSG's business model is to inflate the value of the asset, not to strip cash from it. Their aim, if they have an end-strategy, is for the club to grow and be self-sustaining so that if and when they sell it on they make a bundle. It's not altruistic but nothing from their operations so far suggestions they are pulling money out.

[Roady]

Think I'm going to bow out of this thread. Storm in a tea cup. And some truly embarrassing almost spoilt brat syndrome going on. Out owners to date have been excellent .

[ollick]

Think I'm going to bow out of this thread. Storm in a tea cup. And some truly embarrassing almost spoilt brat syndrome going on. Our owners to date have been excellent.

I would agree with this and add..................... but prone to the odd PR gaffe.

[audioedge]

We don't want those bottomless oil money type owners with their questionable backgrounds but we want our owners to behave like them when it comes to matters like this.

Who doesnt want bottomless money owners?

[NaivetyinBlack]

Of course there's no evidence, the accounts aren't out yet. But with the new tv deal we've brought in more than we spent, and at the same time are saying we can't financially justify anfield road, so the money must be going somewhere. Even if we assume all the new sponsorship deals have us running at no profit, the transfer budget and tv deal money should be going somewhere

I'm sorry, I might be wrong, but either:

1) You haven't seen the latest accounting statements and are plainly guessing.

or

2) You have seen the statements, the expenditures and revenue do not match up and are accusing them of siphoning money by cooking the books.

Which one is it ? I'm guessing the first one, which makes you nothing but a gossip.

[Fromola]

Absolute bullshit. Get these shysters out now and someone in who can take the club forward.  One re built stand is not good enough.

Spurs will fly ahead of us next year in their 61k stadium and City are expanding to that.

I know I'm cynical but I said this would happen with ticket prices as an excuse. They wanted their corporate stand and that's that.

[DangerScouse]

Think I'm going to bow out of this thread. Storm in a tea cup. And some truly embarrassing almost spoilt brat syndrome going on. Out owners to date have been excellent .

They certainly have, countless trophies and title challenges year after year.

[Blinis]

It really is amazing how much credit they get for essentially keeping things ticking over financially and simply not taking money out, then adding the odd commercial deal.

Not everybody does so.

[FrancisB]

@nativityinblack Ok, I'll bite. For me, it's 2.

Out owners to date have been excellent .

One league cup and one top 4 finish, in six seasons. Standards have dropped dramatically.

[El Lobo]

Think I'm going to bow out of this thread. Storm in a tea cup. And some truly embarrassing almost spoilt brat syndrome going on. Out owners to date have been excellent .

Pretty much.

People wanted the club to be self sufficient when we got rid of the cancers. We now have owners who make decisions based on how viable they are for making the club money, to move that forward. And people get pissy about it. For this specific thing, yeah I'll be honest its a bit of a stupid quote to even suggest its about protests by fans. Its dumb.

But yeah now people want a sugar daddy owner.

[NaivetyinBlack]

@nativityinblack Ok, I'll bite. For me, it's 2.

Excellent ! Share with us what you found, so that we can forward the information to the necessary authorities.

[SerbianScouser]

They certainly have, countless trophies and title challenges year after year.

All the while richer and better owners are proper killing each other to buy us.

[murgaz]

I would agree with this and add..................... but prone to the odd PR gaffe.

They've been nothing of the sort. They've just lowered your expectations so you're happy with anything. It's beyond disingenuous to suggest 'ticket price issues' are a reason not to expand the stadium when the increase in the TV deal alone was greater than our entire ticket revenue last season.
They have a complete lack of imagination and have fobbed us off with a main stand extension that puts us on a par with Newcastle and prevents a proper whole ground redevelopment. They don't want to have a properly increased capacity because that would erode the ticket scarcity that they use to justify high prices.
A 70 000+ capacity ground could easily be viable with low interest rates, increased sponsorship, corporate, ticket and media revenues. They could even have issued supporters' bonds for equity. However, that would require a long term outlook rather than the dress the pig up to sell it approach they clearly have.

[Jake]

Fsg missed all the penalties in the league cup final

Fsg opened morenos legs and shut his brain in the uefa final

Fsg bottled it against villa in the fa cup semi

Fsg put Steven Gerrard on his arse vs Chelsea in the league

Some people on rawk are fucking arseholes. With netter luck/management/left back we'd have won every trophy going bar the champions league.

And against the oil money club,  the slave trade club, the commercial behemoth club and the sitting on a warchest club that's not half bad.

[elliotsmith101]

They've been nothing of the sort. They've just lowered your expectations so you're happy with anything. It's beyond disingenuous to suggest 'ticket price issues' are a reason not to expand the stadium when the increase in the TV deal alone was greater than our entire ticket revenue last season.
They have a complete lack of imagination and have fobbed us off with a main stand extension that puts us on a par with Newcastle and prevents a proper whole ground redevelopment. They don't want to have a properly increased capacity because that would erode the ticket scarcity that they use to justify high prices.
A 70 000+ capacity ground could easily be viable with low interest rates, increased sponsorship, corporate, ticket and media revenues. They could even have issued supporters' bonds for equity. However, that would require a long term outlook rather than the dress the pig up to sell it approach they clearly have.

Easy, let's do this! Have they got a job going at anfield for you mate? Please tell us more!

[Chakan]

Fsg missed all the penalties in the league cup final

Fsg opened morenos legs and shut his brain in the uefa final

Fsg bottled it against villa in the fa cup semi

Fsg put Steven Gerrard on his arse vs Chelsea in the league

Some people on rawk are fucking arseholes. With netter luck/management/left back we'd have won every trophy going bar the champions league.

And against the oil money club,  the slave trade club, the commercial behemoth club and the sitting on a warchest club that's not half bad.

Mate if they had just spent more money, we would have won the world cup as well!!

[murgaz]

Easy, let's do this! Have they got a job going at anfield for you mate? Please tell us more!

Why? Which bits don't you understand? Have no sporting clubs ever built a new stadium and paid for it that way? Perhaps we could ask Spurs how they're using voodoo magic to do exactly the same thing I suggested? Get up of your knees. Remember how protesting would never get owners to lower ticket prices too.

[NaivetyinBlack]

Funny that the two biggest clubs in Germany can be so successful and have massive stadia, yet charge less than half the price we do for a season ticket for a team that has won one trophy in 6 years of FSG stewardship

I assume the government is not subsidizing the cost of the stadium development at Anfield, like it did for most of the German clubs.

[Suareznumber7]

Pretty much.

People wanted the club to be self sufficient when we got rid of the cancers. We now have owners who make decisions based on how viable they are for making the club money, to move that forward. And people get pissy about it. For this specific thing, yeah I'll be honest its a bit of a stupid quote to even suggest its about protests by fans. Its dumb.

But yeah now people want a sugar daddy owner.

Just a little hypocrisy in this thread.  Happens every so often when FSG make a business decision that makes sense for running a business. 

[ollick]

They've been nothing of the sort. They've just lowered your expectations so you're happy with anything. It's beyond disingenuous to suggest 'ticket price issues' are a reason not to expand the stadium when the increase in the TV deal alone was greater than our entire ticket revenue last season.
They have a complete lack of imagination and have fobbed us off with a main stand extension that puts us on a par with Newcastle and prevents a proper whole ground redevelopment. They don't want to have a properly increased capacity because that would erode the ticket scarcity that they use to justify high prices.
A 70 000+ capacity ground could easily be viable with low interest rates, increased sponsorship, corporate, ticket and media revenues. They could even have issued supporters' bonds for equity. However, that would require a long term outlook rather than the dress the pig up to sell it approach they clearly have.

What a pile of shit.

My expectations, for what it's worth, is to have a club ownership that isn't saddled with debt and that isn't the play thing of a billionaire.

As for the TV deal, where else do you think that money might have to be spent? Inflated transfer fees? Clearing current debt? Increased player wages? Renewing current player contracts? Extending the manager's contract? Agreeing to not increasing ticket prices (due to the protest last season, which I agreed with btw)

There are currently (if you'd read the whole thread, which I doubt) availability of corporate tickets at all matches, maybe the MS redevelopment isn't paying off as they expected?

Why has the MS development prevented a 'whole ground development' can you expand on how much it would cost to redevelop The Kop and Centenary? how is the club going to afford re-routing the roads around Anfield? purchasing the properties around the Centerary etc?

Is that going to cost more or less that the TV revenue that isn't going to be used on players, contracts, debt etc, etc.

[ScubaSteve]

Compared to where they make money in other areas, ticket receipts mustn't be that high surely!! They badly need to expand the Annie road!

Wait and see what happens

[murgaz]

What a pile of shit.

My expectations, for what it's worth, is to have a club that isn't saddled with debt and that isn't the play thing of a billionaire.

As for the TV deal, where else do you think that money might have to be spent? Inflated transfer fees? Clearing current debt? Increased player wages? Renewing current player contracts? Extending the manager's contract? Agreeing to not increasing ticket prices (due to the protest last season, which I agreed with btw)

There are currently (if you'd read the whole thread, which I doubt) availability of corporate tickets at all matches, maybe the MS redevelopment isn't paying off as they expected?

Why has the MS development prevented a 'whole ground development' can you expand on how much it would cost to redevelop The Kop and Centenary? how is the club going to afford re-routing the roads around Anfield? purchasing the properties around the Centerary etc?

Is that going to cost more or less that the TV revenue that isn't going to be used on players, contracts, debt etc, etc.

You're not making any sense. We are the play thing of a billionaire: the asset has appreciated nicely and looks good on their balance sheet.
The increase in media rights (the reason American owners are attracted to PL teams in the first place) has clearly not been spent on transfer fees and nor then does it go on wages for players we haven't bought.
Building a stadium, you know like Spurs are doing, doesn't saddle a club with debt. It's an investment that adds to the asset value and pays for itself overtime. Do you not think FSG use the increased value of the club in their accounts to leverage borrowing elsewhere?
You're heroes have feet of clay who are here for the short term. Yet another wasted corner for LFC.

[CHOPPER]

They've been nothing of the sort. They've just lowered your expectations so you're happy with anything. It's beyond disingenuous to suggest 'ticket price issues' are a reason not to expand the stadium when the increase in the TV deal alone was greater than our entire ticket revenue last season.
They have a complete lack of imagination and have fobbed us off with a main stand extension that puts us on a par with Newcastle and prevents a proper whole ground redevelopment. They don't want to have a properly increased capacity because that would erode the ticket scarcity that they use to justify high prices.
A 70 000+ capacity ground could easily be viable with low interest rates, increased sponsorship, corporate, ticket and media revenues. They could even have issued supporters' bonds for equity. However, that would require a long term outlook rather than the dress the pig up to sell it approach they clearly have.

70,000, ha, thats some boss cheese your smokin there lad.

[The 1989 Brit Awards]

Fsg missed all the penalties in the league cup final

Fsg opened morenos legs and shut his brain in the uefa final

Fsg bottled it against villa in the fa cup semi

Fsg put Steven Gerrard on his arse vs Chelsea in the league

Some people on rawk are fucking arseholes. With netter luck/management/left back we'd have won every trophy going bar the champions league.

And against the oil money club,  the slave trade club, the commercial behemoth club and the sitting on a warchest club that's not half bad.

Best post, agree with all of it.

Many just have to direct the "blame" at someone, easy to do it at John "the yank" Henry.

[ollick]

You're not making any sense. We are the play thing of a billionaire: the asset has appreciated nicely and looks good on their balance sheet.
The increase in media rights (the reason American owners are attracted to PL teams in the first place) has clearly not been spent on transfer fees and nor then does it go on wages for players we haven't bought.
Building a stadium, you know like Spurs are doing, doesn't saddle a club with debt. It's an investment that adds to the asset value and pays for itself overtime. Do you not think FSG use the increased value of the club in their accounts to leverage borrowing elsewhere?
You're heroes have feet of clay who are here for the short term. Yet another wasted corner for LFC.

I dont think you understand how FSG work, at all, We are not a play thing were £££ is thrown willy nilly to increase ego or standing a la Chelsea or City.

Do you really think that the lack of transfers (and therefore wages) is down to FSG stopping purchases? Do you think Klopp would stand for that? Have you any idea of the amount of money this club has spent on transfers supporting Kenny and Brendan since they have come into the club (and the shite that was bought with it). FSG have shown that they support buying players, when the manager thinks it is necesary so perhaps you need to look at Klopp this summer? he seems happy with what he has bought though and the standard of the squad as it stands (aren't we all??)

Comparing building a ground in the capital (or even in a one club city like Newcastle) is a total red herring, FSG have always said that ground development would go hand in hand with the ability for that development to pay for itself, why is this such a shock??

Where have they leveraged borrowing elsewhere, on what, can you show me? surely this would be in the accounts somewhere?

Or is it just a big fat lie?

Look forward to your finacial forcast of developing The Kop and Centenary too, bet it's gonna be a cracker.

[murgaz]

70,000, ha, thats some boss cheese your smokin there lad.

Must be. Can't think of any clubs nearby with a huge local, national and international fan base who've managed to pull that off. Keep our heads down eh boss

[Carlito Roberto]

The guy is an absolute walking PR disaster. Everybody knows FSG's intentions towards fleecing the fans on the issue of ticket prices. With the dust having only just settled from their latest attempt to bleed the fanbase dry, I find it staggering he is moronic enough to bring up the issue of ticket prices unprompted in an interview.

[Hij]

Fsg missed all the penalties in the league cup final

Fsg opened morenos legs and shut his brain in the uefa final

Fsg bottled it against villa in the fa cup semi

Fsg put Steven Gerrard on his arse vs Chelsea in the league

Some people on rawk are fucking arseholes. With netter luck/management/left back we'd have won every trophy going bar the champions league.

And against the oil money club,  the slave trade club, the commercial behemoth club and the sitting on a warchest club that's not half bad.

Huh?

Why does everything have to be one extreme or the other?

Why can't you be extremely disappointed that it looks like they are pouring cold water on the Anfield Road project, without having to want to kill the entire lot, or have them fuck off?

I think it's crucial for the dynamics of the stadium, for getting new people into the ground and expanding the general admission tickets the stadium is further increased in capacity. For me, it appears to come across that the long term investment won't recoup the money quick or fast enough for them, and makes me believe some of the implications that they are looking short to medium term and are looking more towards fattening the value of the club than perhaps being the custodians we want.

Of course they should be looking after their own interests, they are businessmen, but just being fairly decent owners so far, doesn't mean that I shouldn't be disappointed that perhaps they aren't taking a long term view. They've done the stand that impacts them fairly directly, and recoups in less than a decade but look less likely to want to do the one that will have the biggest impact for perhaps a new generation of supporter.

Could fund it by doing a share release to supporters for less than 10% of the club if the £60m figure is accurate, but obviously that will dilute their share holding and the profit they make when they sell.

I'm more inclined to believe after this news that they are readying for a sale at the highest amount possible, and a long term decision like the Anfield Road isn't in their immediate interests.

[lfc79]

FSG run Liverpool as a business which on the whole is a good thing, but businesses want to make money from their customers. In this case FSG will be looking at the new MS development, the ticket prices they are charging and the sales or general and corporate tickets to gauge the effect of further expansion.
How many reds members logged onto the online sales but did not purchase any tickets in that sale or in the subsequent late availability, what number of games did members purchase compared to last year.
If increase the capacity of the AR how will that affect the ticket prices they can charge.
Would I still in advance by ticket for every home game in the bulk sale to stay in the first round sale if I could buy a ticket a month before each game with no problems.
Did they get the corporate estimates wrong and not enough people think a match ticket and meal is worth £500

[Chakan]

Huh?

Why does everything have to be one extreme or the other?

Why can't you be extremely disappointed that it looks like they are pouring cold water on the Anfield Road project, without having to want to kill the entire lot, of have them fuck off?

I think it's crucial for the dynamics of the stadium, for getting new people into the ground and expanding the general admission tickets the stadium is further increased in capacity. For me, it appears to come across that the long term investment won't recoup the money quick or fast enough for them, and makes me believe some of the implications that they are looking short to medium term and are looking more towards fattening the value of the club than perhaps being the custodians we want.

Of course they should be looking after their own interests, they are businessmen, but just being fairly decent owners so far, doesn't mean that I shouldn't be disappointed that perhaps they aren't taking a long term view. They've done the stand that impacts them fairly directly, and recoups in less than a decade but look less likely to want to do the one that will have the biggest impact for perhaps a new generation of supporter.

And that would be a balanced view and that's all fine and good. But half the replies aren't balanced , calling them every name under the sun and saying they should just fuck off out of the club already.

[Hij]

Many just have to direct the "blame" at someone, easy to do it at John "the yank" Henry.

Looking at the stadium in isolation, the 'blame' for not expanding it would presumably lie with the person who takes the decision

[CHOPPER]

Must be. Can't think of any clubs nearby with a huge local, national and international fan base who've managed to pull that off. Keep our heads down eh boss

Not really arsed abar anyone else but us. 70,000 is a no-goer, simple as, we'd never fill it regularly enough to justify it.


Does anyone really think that season ticket and match day prices are to go down and go down consistently or not even follow some level of inflation?



I await the next knee jerk clamour debate for not enough season tickets and we can align it to this thread. 



Some people want their stand and to s-eat in it.


 

[Chakan]

Looking at the stadium in isolation, the 'blame' for not expanding it would presumably lie with the person who takes the decision

Who have looked at the numbers and decided it might not be worth doing because the ROI isn't enough.

[Hij]

The guy is an absolute walking PR disaster. Everybody knows FSG's intentions towards fleecing the fans on the issue of ticket prices. With the dust having only just settled from their latest attempt to bleed the fanbase dry, I find it staggering he is moronic enough to bring up the issue of ticket prices unprompted in an interview.

This is where I'm at as well. I think perhaps a more carefully worded statement on the club website would have been a better way of going about it.

[CHOPPER]

Who have looked at the numbers and decided it might not be worth doing because the ROI isn't enough.

Fuckin Irish again eh

[Hij]

Who have looked at the numbers and decided it might not be worth doing because the ROI isn't enough.

He hasn't decided either way, as he has said "We will see".

But that's where the blame would lie wouldn't it? Regardless of the reasons and the right/wrong of them, if you wanted to point blame at someone for not expanding the stadium when we have basic planning permission, it would be John Henry, it's churlish to suggest the blame would be directed anywhere else.

Biggus Dickus isn't contributing much here other than perpetuating an anti Yank myth, because he's presumably American himself with a chip on his shoulder.

[Chakan]

He hasn't decided either way, as he has said "We will see".

But that's where the blame would lie wouldn't it? Biggus Dickus isn't contributing much here other than perpetuating an anti Yank myth, because he's presumably American himself with a chip on his shoulder.

That's the "might" in my sentence. It "might" not be worth doing...

It's also childish to suggest as other have, that they're stealing money from the club and haven't contributed to the club in anyway except negative.