Topic: Your opinions on Chinese ownership

[ENSKIED]

And if FSG do as they are doing, the club could be worth 1.5 billion in 5 years time.

FSG aren't fools and they know the market potential, that the increase in club worth will continue to rise.


Those advocating they'll make a big return on their initial purchase price and should sell now, don't understand FSG.

This is also a reason why they haven't sold the Red Sox as well. They would make a ton of money over their purchase price. But the value of the Red Sox is not going to go down any time soon.


I'll say it one more time, owning a club give money men a thrill that buying and selling a business doesn't. It's the ability to win big games, to challenge for "trophies", and win some if things go right.

That forecast will in all probablity only apply certainly at the main level, IF we become successful in winning trophies. The global fan base is built and increased on European and Domestic success, for example you won't see many Rotherham or Chester etc. football shirts or merchandise around the world. In order to increase our value, remembering you can only go so far wringing out increased sponsorship deals etc we need to be high profile in terms of success. FSG have to ask themslves can they really take take us to the next level and not only that BUT maintain our position there? If they can't they may see their asset plateau out before beginning to shrink. 

[CraigDS]

That forecast will in all probablity only apply certainly at the main level, IF we become successful in winning trophies. The global fan base is built and increased on European and Domestic success, for example you won't see many Rotherham or Chester etc. football shirts or merchandise around the world. In order to increase our value, remembering you can only go so far wringing out increased sponsorship deals etc we need to be high profile in terms of success. FSG have to ask themslves can they really take take us to the next level and not only that BUT maintain our position there? If they can't they may see their asset plateau out before beginning to shrink.

People have been saying this for a long time, yet we've continually increased commercial income above and beyond most PL competitors. It will limit us no doubt, but it won't stop that continued increase.

The value will continue to increase off the back of the TV income anyway, which will be driven by the international rights increases rather than the huge domestic ones we have seen. There is probably a good 10yrs+ of continued growth in those as the PL's popularity continues to grow in markets such as the US and China.

[KillieRed]

Interesting that the Chinese Government have taken a direct interest in pushing football in the country. I went there this summer (Shanghai and Beijing) and saw the grand total of two football tops (one Liverpool, one Red Manc) being worn by people in the cities. Meanwhile Basketball is everything to young people; Warriors, Cavs and Lakers tops, "sneakers" of all varieties and billboards for the big stars.

I can only assume that the Chinese Government are trying to force their way into football to increase national prestige. I guess if they can put a limit on childbirth they can engender youth interest in football. Buying Liverpool might be seen to be a good entry point into jumping starting that drive. As for them having a "spotted" history in terms of human rights abuse I think most nations (our own included) can look back at things that we wish had not been done. We might not feel comfortable with their modern take on totalitarianism either, but as President Xi pointed out (about the Brexit vote) perhaps democracy is not always the best choice over strong government.

All of which is to say, that compared to the ownership groups (past and present) of some football clubs, the Chinese would not be the worst or shadiest in my opinion.

[El Lobo]

Sure. We don't have that at the moment.
Although punching our weight is currently 5th so even that doesn't equate to a champions league place consistently
The current ownership seem want football to bridge the gap that money creates (although its hard to discern what their priorities and targets are) .... when actually money bridges the gap money creates!

What is any of that based on? Like literally, any of it?

The money they have spent on players, on wages, on agents, on signing on fees, on youngsters, on managers, on coaches etc etc etc should have had us competing much further up the table. The expansion of the stadium, the increase in revenue, the increase in sponsorship money has certainly helped that.

But the fact that we havent competed has got MUCH more to do with making the wrong decisions too often with managers and players than it has with not having enough money to compete. Its fucking startling that we've just released a £16 million £80,000 a week striker, and have a £20 million £80,000 a week winger out on loan, and people are moaning that we don't have enough money.

What couldn't be clearer is that we've made shit footballing decisions since they came in, generally. About a year ago we made pretty much the only universally agreed with decision, to bring in Jurgen Klopp. And people aren't even willing to give him the opportunity to do things the way he was attracted to coming in the first place and just want to launch money at the issue, like that solves issues. Nah, fuck that. Bad footballing decisions plus mega bucks. Always yields great results clearly. Yeesh.

[Cpt_Reina]

What is any of that based on? Like literally, any of it?

The money they have spent on players, on wages, on agents, on signing on fees, on youngsters, on managers, on coaches etc etc etc should have had us competing much further up the table. The expansion of the stadium, the increase in revenue, the increase in sponsorship money has certainly helped that.

But the fact that we havent competed has got MUCH more to do with making the wrong decisions too often with managers and players than it has with not having enough money to compete. Its fucking startling that we've just released a £16 million £80,000 a week striker, and have a £20 million £80,000 a week winger out on loan, and people are moaning that we don't have enough money.

What couldn't be clearer is that we've made shit footballing decisions since they came in, generally. About a year ago we made pretty much the only universally agreed with decision, to bring in Jurgen Klopp. And people aren't even willing to give him the opportunity to do things the way he was attracted to coming in the first place and just want to launch money at the issue, like that solves issues. Nah, fuck that. Bad footballing decisions plus mega bucks. Always yields great results clearly. Yeesh.

The other clubs we're competing with have similar stories of making poor decisions in terms of recruitment, the *real* difference is that if Chelsea spunk £15m on a LB who never plays and then goes on loan (Baba) they then go straight back out and spend again and sign another LB to replace him for £20m+ in Alonso.

If United sign Valdes/Schwinsteiger on MASSIVE wages and they never play it doesnt stop them or put them off offering yet more massive wages to Di Maria/Pogba as well.

City have Yaya/Nasri/Hart collecting money for nothing these days and yet they wrote it off and still upped their wage bill regardless.

LFC will make mistakes same as those clubs do, the difference is that our mistakes actually inform and affect our future spending. We can't spend consistently and aggressively like they can. Markovic being a dud or Balotelli being a £20m write off affects us and our ability to compete and go again in ways that it simply doesnt for those around us.

Simply put, the clubs actually competing for the title can spend their way out of trouble. They can write off their mistakes and LFC under FSG simply can't follow.

[CraigDS]

The other clubs we're competing with have similar stories of making poor decisions in terms of recruitment, the *real* difference is that if Chelsea spunk £15m on a LB who never plays and then goes on loan (Baba) they then go straight back out and spend again and sign another LB to replace him for £20m+ in Alonso.

If United sign Valdes/Schwinsteiger on MASSIVE wages and they never play it doesnt stop them or put them off offering yet more massive wages to Di Maria/Pogba as well.

City have Yaya/Nasri/Hart collecting money for nothing these days and yet they wrote it off and still upped their wage bill regardless.

LFC will make mistakes same as those clubs do, the difference is that our mistakes actually inform and affect our future spending. We can't spend consistently and aggressively like they can. Markovic being a dud or Balotelli being a £20m write off affects us and our ability to compete and go again in ways that it simply doesnt for those around us.

Simply put, the clubs actually competing for the title can spend their way out of trouble. They can write off their mistakes and LFC under FSG simply can't follow.

I get the argument for those teams, and it's definitely a case for us that we need to make less mistakes than they do - however that would also need to be the case if we got big money, as those teams would all be able to match our spending if they wanted to.

However we've been out performed by teams who haven't massively out spent us - Arsenal didn't until recently, Spurs never have, Southamton have the last two since the title run, Everton the 2 or 3 before the title run.

We do spend a shed load of money, on wages and fee's, that we should be competing a lot higher in the table than we have been, which in turn would increase our ability to spend and compete higher again. If we do that we can do what United do and fund our own big spending without having to rely on any rich owner.

[LiverBirdKop]

This is also a reason why they haven't sold the Red Sox as well. They would make a ton of money over their purchase price. But the value of the Red Sox is not going to go down any time soon.

THey'll never sell the baseball team. Well, until John...maybe They LIVE in Boston and are socialites. Linda is a native of Mass and he's also heavily involved in charities and the tech scene. Big difference.

I'll say it one more time, owning a club give money men a thrill that buying and selling a business doesn't. It's the ability to win big games, to challenge for "trophies", and win some if things go right.

I'm sure you know from experience. 
I could see someone like Mike Cuban fitting into that category, definitely not Henry with LFC. If he were into winning "big games" so much, he'd come watch us play more than once or twice a year. 
 

[LiverBirdKop]

We do spend a shed load of money, on wages and fee's, that we should be competing a lot higher in the table than we have been, which in turn would increase our ability to spend and compete higher again. If we do that we can do what United do and fund our own big spending without having to rely on any rich owner.

We'll never match United commercially. But we can definitely close the gap a lot by winning lots and lots of trophies and leagues with a couple superstars that will be in the worldwide footie spotlight.

Reading the Spanish and South American sports websites I see a lot of coverage on Ibrahimovic for example. Since Suarez, we don't have any players who attract media interest whatsoever.

[Anfield Ed]

I get the argument for those teams, and it's definitely a case for us that we need to make less mistakes than they do - however that would also need to be the case if we got big money, as those teams would all be able to match our spending if they wanted to.

However we've been out performed by teams who haven't massively out spent us - Arsenal didn't until recently, Spurs never have, Southamton have the last two since the title run, Everton the 2 or 3 before the title run.

We do spend a shed load of money, on wages and fee's, that we should be competing a lot higher in the table than we have been, which in turn would increase our ability to spend and compete higher again. If we do that we can do what United do and fund our own big spending without having to rely on any rich owner.

Man Utd have owners who are willing to shell out £200k p/w to players over 30 and do not accept not being in the CL thus give whoever the manager is the dough to spend on top quality players.

FSG just aren't prepared to do that.

Plus commercially we'll never match Man Utd and we can't compete financially with Man City and Chelsea therefore we are running out of solutions if we wish to compete in the league with them and Arsenal plus Spurs.

I believe we definitely need to be cagey and do a lot of due diligence on anyone want to buy us outright or to buy a share of the club and we need to know their motives for doing so and where there money comes from etc.

So in that respect I am very sceptical about this Chinese group because I think they are a very dodgy group. However I too believe that FSG have taken us as far as they can or willing to do so and we need new owners/investment in the club to ensure we can compete - actually not compete but be genuine contenders - season in and season out and that means spending money on players, it means spending money on wages and it means having a broader outlook in terms of players fitting into team. For example Man Utd took Van Persie who was past his peak but he was still capable of providing them with one great season and won the title. I bet you the fans and owners alike ALL thought it was money worth spent because the ends justified the means and they are doing it again with Ibrahimovic. Are FSG willing to match that?

I like and respect FSG and admire what they have done for us both on and off the pitch but to get to that next level I do not see them willing to go there or if they can go there.

[CraigDS]

and it means having a broader outlook in terms of players fitting into team. For example Man Utd took Van Persie who was past his peak but he was still capable of providing them with one great season and won the title. I bet you the fans and owners alike ALL thought it was money worth spent because the ends justified the means and they are doing it again with Ibrahimovic. Are FSG willing to match that?

Like we did with Milner you mean?

[TheTeflonJohn]

Like we did with Milner you mean?

Not sure what the comparative wages are of the two players but I`d take a guess that there`s a massive difference in the lanky twat`s favour.

If so then it`s not a worthwhile comparison, mate.

[CraigDS]

Not sure what the comparative wages are of the two players but I`d take a guess that there`s a massive difference in the lanky twat`s favour.

If so then it`s not a worthwhile comparison, mate.

Relative though isn't it?

We apparently made Milner the highest earner at the club, earning a massive wedge. Whilst it's not United levels of wage, he'll certainly be one of the highest paid players in the league and we did so at an older age. It's exactly what he was saying we'd not do.

Also, I doubt the club would be the issue on this, but Klopp. If he see's another Milner, or Van Persie, then I'd imagine the club would back him.

[Anfield Ed]

Like we did with Milner you mean?

Milner was not in his 30's when we signed him.

[CraigDS]

Milner was not in his 30's when we signed him.

He was about 6 months off it.

Van Persie was even further away from his 30th too having just turned 29 (by days) when he signed for United.

[Doc Red]

I agree with your point, FSG are  a careful sporting investment firm, they own Liverpool for reasons other than interest. And yes, they have done things that are more moneyman than fan. But to date at least they have maintained a reasonably good relationship with the fans. I am just wary of unknown consortiums and their intentions and feel it we would be better to look before you leap rather than say "well, FSG are just the thin end of the wedge to a fan ass-fucking anyway, may as well take a chance on the entire wedge being shoved up there and take the new money on offer." I think we should let the thin edge of the wedge circle the rim for as long as possible, imo.

I think I can understand and see where you're coming from, and in that sense I agree wholeheartedly with your post.

There will always be a risk with new owners, even if their wealth exceeds everyone else in the game. We can't get away from that.
But I think just as FSG have been careful and strategic in their moves, business deals, and plans, for the club, that they'll undoubtedly be that much more careful with this sale. I think they'll still want a piece of the pie in the end, and they'll make sure that any partner coming in can benefit them, and consequently the club.

This probably didn't come out of nowhere, they must have known something was in the works going back some time. If they do actually decide to sell, it's probably because they feel they've circled the rim  long enough and now is the right moment. They are far better placed, and far more knowledgeable about these sorts of deals than the likes of Parry and Moore could ever be. If ever we were going to get bought by a major financial player, we probably couldn't find more shrewd and smart deal makers than FSG. And I mean that fully as a compliment.

[Norse Red]

How rich are Everbright compared to Abramovich and Sheikh Mansour?
At least, they sure must be wealthier than FSG, right??

The rumors about them (Everbright) being backed by Chinese government, is that true? Sure it isn’t just another Kenny Huang who want publicity?

[CraigDS]

How rich are Everbright compared to Abramovich and Sheikh Mansour?
At least, they sure must be wealthier than FSG, right??

They aren't 'rich' in the same sense as either the City or Chelsea owners are as they are basically an investment fund. So whilst they have a lot of assets which run into the many billions (many more billions than the personal wealth of those two), what they have available and willing to spend is anyone's guess.

[Nessy76]

How rich are Everbright compared to Abramovich and Sheikh Mansour?
At least, they sure must be wealthier than FSG, right??

The rumors about them (Everbright) being backed by Chinese government, is that true? Sure it isn’t just another Kenny Huang who want publicity?

They are owned by the Chinese Government. Exactly what that means in terms of how much they might have to invest is a matter of speculation.

[4pool]

All this talk of spending more on transfer fees to attract better known players.

Then the players on higher wages as well.

Better check with Her Gaffer Klopp because his way of working isn't the way some want us to go.

So should sugar daddy, or is it rice cakes daddy, comes in wanting to have LFC become the next Galactico's...would Jurgen want to work having to be told we're buying super star after super star? I don't think so from his interviews. So Jurgen gets a nice payout and a handshake and off he goes.

Then we go into the merry-go-round of managers with their next "project". Not what I want from my club but i'm sure others will be just fine with it. Fire 'em if they don't win and get someone else in. Managers and players alike.

[El Lobo]

Nah you're wrong 4Pool, we'd be different from every other mega billionaire owner club. Not sure why, but we would. It'd be exactly as it is now, but cheaper tickets and we'd buy Suarez and Reus.

[the_red_pill]

Mega purchases also depend on stability and the manager.

If the manager's been at it for years, have won some trophies, have built a steady squad and thus won the trust of the owners, then I can see the owners(especially ours) being willing to sanction 50million pound players.

That's the best way to keep up with the Jones' up the road.
For me it's about "better the devil you know..."

I'm not in a hurry anymore for new owners. We were in a hurry for owners a short while back and look where that got us. Also- I don't want us to change owners like underwear as I don't think that's healthy for the long term and it "cheapens" the asset. Yes, the monetary value will rise incermentally, but I think the asset itself becomes jaded. I'd prefer this lot to be at the helm for a lot longer and then hand it over responsibly. We need stability in order to thrive. There's gold in that.

[Passmaster Molby]

Quite happy with the owners we have now thanks very much.

[4pool]

#4: China’s President Xi Jinping has said he wants China to get a World Cup. He wants the Chinese national side to be able to compete at a high level. Multiple articles about this when the investment news into LFC from China was brought up.

LFC winning the League  or the Champions League or even making top 4 has not one iota to do with furthering the Chinese game, organizational structure, or ability to host a World Cup.

That takes investment within China not outside.

#5 & #6: As per #4, Chinese governments national pride means fuck all when it comes to LFC.

Further, large Chinese investment has not changed the scope of football with any of their investments so far. Unless you can name a qualified success where a Chinese investment arm has dumped millions into any of the various clubs they have already invested in, then don't assume that if Everbright or any other Chinese investment firm buys into LFC, that funds for playing staff surely follows. The facts are, so far, that has NOT happened where Chinese investment into various teams in the League they have bought into.

Name the top 10 players in the World and not one has been bought by a club that has Chinese investment. So why do you think any Chinese investment into LFC will mean the very top players will come here?

#7: In your mind, should Everbright buy into LFC , it follows that LFC gets a competitive advantage within China.

So can you explain how FSG gave LFC a competitive advantage in the USA?

No one will deny that Chinese investment should open up the market in China and allow for further investment from other Chinese firms via sponsorship.

But you seem to infer that we will be rolling in Billions, when the facts are Chinese investment has already happened with other football teams, and they sure aren't rolling in the billions and selling 50 million kit shirts in China. Just like American investment firm FSG didn't mean LFC would sell even 1 million more shirts in America.



Where you fail to understand things is Everbright, if it is them, is an investment vehicle set up to make money. Not spend like crazy on players because it will enhance Chinese National pride.

You're assuming, spend money to make us win = China getting their jollies. When the reality is, Chinese investment in other clubs or Leagues hasn't meant any sort of automatic spending spree and trophy haul.

The facts are there, should you look for them.

Never did get an answer from ThePoolMan on this..

[El Lobo]

Never did get an answer from ThePoolMan on this..

I'm sure you will, just to a completely different question that he'd rather answer.

[Eeyore]

Quite happy with the owners we have now thanks very much.

6th, 8th, 7th, 2nd, 6th, 8th.

How the fuck have expectations been lowered to such an extent that we accept League finishes like that. The telling thing is that the fans now have to put their entire faith in the manager because you would have to be certifiable to believe in FSG.

New owners might require a leap of faith but that has to be preferable to profitable risk averse mediocrity. Under FSG we just plod along hoping everyone else trips themselves over and we plod into first place. Football should be about hope, passion and ambition, it should be about a love affair with the Club. FSG are accountants to the core and who wants to settle for sensible day in day out drudgery and settling for 5th, 6th, 7th or 8th best.

We were a pretty shite second division side when Shanks fronted up. If he had the ambition and drive of FSG we would still be plodding along accepting our lot whilst dreaming up a million reasons why we couldn't compete with the games elite. IF FSG were a Football manager they would be David Moyes, solid and reliable but as dull as dishwater. That simply isn't good enough and the sooner we realise that the better.

[4pool]

We were a pretty shite second division side when Shanks fronted up. If he had the ambition and drive of FSG we would still be plodding along accepting our lot whilst dreaming up a million reasons why we couldn't compete with the games elite. IF FSG were a Football manager they would be David Moyes, solid and reliable but as dull as dishwater. That simply isn't good enough and the sooner we realise that the better.

Al...apples and oranges there mate.

When Shanks came...

Our owners didn't have much ambition because we were in the Second Division. They had seen us slide from the top flight to the second and we'd been there a few seasons. They were happy with the profits they were making. So you can't compare the old ownership to FSG unless FSG get us relegated.


Further, Shanks was at PNE. He had taken PNE to their lowest league standing in years. They were 11th in the Second Division when he left them ( if memory serves). PNE supporters weren't that sorry to see him go.

The difference was Shanks found one ally on the board who sanctioned what he wanted to do. Without that, history could have been much different. I'm not sure we can lay not sanctioning players at FSG's feet either. They don't decide who we have bought. Klopp isn't complaining like Rafa did when shafted over buying players.


So apples and oranges mate...imho.

[TSC]

As has probably been repeated several times in this thread, net spend is not the best indicator of financial expenditure on transfers.  It's wages that seem to have a closer link to success. There have been numerous occasions when we might have matched an offer, but lost out on the gap in wages. Additionally,  the capability to offer high wages can make it easier for us to keep our core players, instead of seeing them seek transfers elsewhere. You can't expect our top players to have salaries vastly dwarfed by other contenders and expect them to not consider moving on to other clubs competing for titles and with higher salaries to boot, simply because we're Liverpool and we budget costs the FSG way.

Yes I agree with this.  We do spend at times big amounts (not huge obviously aka UTD) but always seem to fall short for the real quality and it always seems to come down to the wages.  I don't know what our top paid player is on, but there must be some sort of internal cap on salary where we won't even bid for a player if the wages aren't within the cap.  Or we quickly exit stage left when it becomes apparent wages are beyond what we're gonna pay.

[CraigDS]

Yes I agree with this.  We do spend at times big amounts (not huge obviously aka UTD) but always seem to fall short for the real quality and it always seems to come down to the wages.  I don't know what our top paid player is on, but there must be some sort of internal cap on salary where we won't even bid for a player if the wages aren't within the cap.  Or we quickly exit stage left when it becomes apparent wages are beyond what we're gonna pay.

Most decent sources seemed to suggest we were willing to offer big wages to Gotze this summer (£180-200k a week level).

[4pool]

We also offer Alexis Sanchez more wages than Arsenal did.

he turned us down because he did not want to be seen as the replacement for Suarez.

[Easy]

We also offer Alexis Sanchez more wages than Arsenal did.

he turned us down because he did not want to be seen as the replacement for Suarez.

Nothing to do with London or his girlfriend or both?

[JackWard33]

Most decent sources seemed to suggest we were willing to offer big wages to Gotze this summer (£180-200k a week level).

Where did you see that? I'd be shocked if we offered a player 200k a week. Our highest earner is Sturridge on a heavily incentivised 140/150 a week ( seen both numbers reported)

[CraigDS]

Where did you see that? I'd be shocked if we offered a player 200k a week. Our highest earner is Sturridge on a heavily incentivised 140/150 a week ( seen both numbers reported)

Was reported at the time of the bid. I'd need to trudge through the thread to find it but it's missing until the PRATS come back!

[SerbianScouser]

Spurs must be laughing their asses off at all the wage talk, they have a ridiculously low wage bill (Eriksen`s new contract on 70k??) and it looks like they`ll be in another title challenge or very close to it. Extremely good coaching of hungry young players (which is exactly what we`re doing as well) can compensate for what is perceived as a financial gap. This gives me a lot of hope for the future as what we are doing is extremely similar to their model.

[TSC]

Most decent sources seemed to suggest we were willing to offer big wages to Gotze this summer (£180-200k a week level).

We also offer Alexis Sanchez more wages than Arsenal did.

he turned us down because he did not want to be seen as the replacement for Suarez.

Not to discredit your views but to be honest you take such reports with a proverbial pinch, simply because we didn't land them.  There's always an excuse.  What is it about the glorious metropolis 30 miles away that attract the likes of Ibrahimovic, Pogba, Aguero, etc? Never read much about them pushing for the bright lights of London.  And if Sanchez really turned us down because of having to replace Suarez then a bullet dodged.

[TSC]

People have been saying this for a long time, yet we've continually increased commercial income above and beyond most PL competitors. It will limit us no doubt, but it won't stop that continued increase.

The value will continue to increase off the back of the TV income anyway, which will be driven by the international rights increases rather than the huge domestic ones we have seen. There is probably a good 10yrs+ of continued growth in those as the PL's popularity continues to grow in markets such as the US and China.

Sadly I fear you're correct on this point.  I think in the UK it's at its peak, but more value maybe to be realised globally.  But do you not find it depressing that we've a load more years ahead of us trudging through mid-table like treacle while FSG increase the value of their investment?

Where's the rope?

[TSC]

http://davewill.bigcartel.com/the-end-for-lfc-postcards

It's not just the big TV money where there is potential, the club are maximising every opportunity no matter how small.

[4pool]

Nothing to do with London or his girlfriend or both?

Nope.

My information came from Chile and what he told his mates there.

Edit...people may forget Alexis was at Barcelona and we sold Luis to them. At first it was going to be an exchange plus cash. Alexis balked at that. What he told his mates is he didn't want to be seen as a replacement for Suarez and have to live up to the expectations that go with that. He didn't want to replace a 75 mil ( or whatever we got for Luis) player.

So Barca told LFC no swap deal. Needs to be straight up.

They bought Luis, and according to the press in Spain, which was then reported in England, we offered more money and more wages to get Alexis. But he chose Arsenal. And that all stemmed from the attempt at a swap deal.

[Easy]

http://davewill.bigcartel.com/the-end-for-lfc-postcards

It's not just the big TV money where there is potential, the club are maximising every opportunity no matter how small.

Well the opportunity you've quoted wasn't maximised but killed off because FSG wanted too much money. There's a balance between getting some money and being sensible and just asking silly money and getting nothing.

[CraigDS]

Sadly I fear you're correct on this point.  I think in the UK it's at its peak, but more value maybe to be realised globally.  But do you not find it depressing that we've a load more years ahead of us trudging through mid-table like treacle while FSG increase the value of their investment?

Depends really, as the club spends what it makes and they don't take anything out, so more money coming in should mean more for Klopp to spend.

The club just needs to make sure that money is spent on players Klopp wants, and the ones he wants are signed. It won't always happen of course, but it needs to be more than it has in the past.

If we do that I think we'll push on on the pitch, which then leads to more financial gain, more spending, more success, etc. Etc.

Is the hope anyway.

[TepidT2O]

From the echo


“I have said repeatedly this club is not for sale,” Werner said.

“I don’t know how many more times I can say it. I am saying it today and I am emphatic about it and that is all I can say.”