Topic: FSG (*)

[killer-heels]

Oh not this again.  We say it every single year.

This is the first time we have no one to sell. If we chose to sell Coutinho after signing a contract with no clause then they really are not interested in winning. If we dont sell Coutinho and still spend 20/30m then again the knives will be out.

[pyroparty]

Hard to expect too much from the summer given our past but we'll see what happens. I have a very worrying feeling about how it'd go though if we finished 4th (which may not be a problem if we keep playing shit anyway!  ) We really need 3rd at least.

[killer-heels]

Hard to expect too much from the summer given our past but we'll see what happens. I have a very worrying feeling about how it'd go though if we finished 4th (which may not be a problem if we keep playing shit anyway!  ) We really need 3rd at least.

Id take 4th right now.

[Funky_Gibbons]

This is the first time we have no one to sell. If we chose to sell Coutinho after signing a contract with no clause then they really are not interested in winning. If we dont sell Coutinho and still spend 20/30m then again the knives will be out.

We’ll sell Markovic, Sakho, probably Sturridge, maybe Origi, Stewart etc. Can see us getting ~£40m for that lot on top of our normal £20m outlay giving us an overall spend of £60m. Looks like we’re spending big but not really.

[killer-heels]

We’ll sell Markovic, Sakho, probably Sturridge, maybe Origi, Stewart etc. Can see us getting ~£40m for that lot on top of our normal £20m outlay giving us an overall spend of £60m. Looks like we’re spending big but not really.

No chance we sell Origi. I hope we sell Moreno, Can and Lovren though. So yeah we could still raise a fair bit.

[harrythedog]

I think this summer will be a defining one. If it's the exact same as our last few windows where we miss out on players we know the manager wants because of "value" not wanting to "overpay" or whatever shite the club can come up with then it's fairly obvious what the situation is.

Agreed mate, although it does seem like every summer is a defining one these days. But you're right we'll get the same rhetoric as always but having Klopp fronting up for FSG is an easier pill to swallow as he's nice guy, enigmatic etc, etc. All the while FSG are sat as distant owners increasing their investment with little or no outlay.

 Getting 4th is optimistic at best, the title was a pipe dream. Next year will be even harder because it's pretty obvious Utd are on a serious spending campaign to overturn city. Our threat next season, as Spurs have seemingly overtaken us, is going to be Everton catching us. We could end up with 7th/8th this season if we don't pull our finger out!

[Funky_Gibbons]

No chance we sell Origi. I hope we sell Moreno, Can and Lovren though. So yeah we could still raise a fair bit.

One of Origi or Sturridge will go I expect. Not sure why you'd sell the likes of Can and Lovren, one of our biggest issues has been a small squad with poor back up.

By all means sign better players but it should push the current first team players down the pecking order rather than replacing them. Get rid of the likes of Lucas, Klavan, Stewart etc who don't make enough of a contribution.

[Medellin]

Oh not this again.  We say it every single year.

There is a difference between scouting & bringing in Ledwanowski & the likes..and bringing in one you know will improve the team in Koncheski (excuse the deliberate spelling mistake).
Ever the optimist mate,still doubters out there..

[LallanaInPyjamas]

No chance we sell Origi. I hope we sell Moreno, Can and Lovren though. So yeah we could still raise a fair bit.

Why would you want to sell Can and Lovren? That means we'd have to buy two centre backs and two midfielders, rather than one of each, which you know isn't happening under Klopp and FSG. Otherwise you're just in the same position in terms of squad depth as we are now, with perhaps a 10-20% upgrade on the first eleven at best.

[Jfor83]

As opposed to the current millionaires owning the club lock, stock, and barrel?
Why are potential owners with presumably more cash than the current owners, seen as the great evil that is out in the wilds waiting to destroy our club.
I would argue that the worst owners ar those that rely on the club to make profits in order to justify expanding the stadium or making transfers. Owners like H&G are owners with less cash, rather than more. Presumably, owners that are far wealthier would be less concerned with making a fixed rate of profit per season before injecting their own cash. FSG are running us as a fabulous business asset that is starting to recoup their initial investments in a smooth rate without requiring to reinvest their own cash anymore.

I think this sums up FSG for me. They are doing fantastic business out of liverpool, we are becoming very profitable, so they are not willing to take any risks to the detriment of our ability to compete regularly at the top.

[Eeyore]

Why would you want to sell Can and Lovren? That means we'd have to buy two centre backs and two midfielders, rather than one of each, which you know isn't happening under Klopp and FSG. Otherwise you're just in the same position in terms of squad depth as we are now, with perhaps a 10-20% upgrade on the first eleven at best.

Probably because it is what we do. FSG simply don't like having first team players on big wages who are not playing week in week out. They would much rather have a Gomez or a Stewart on low wages filling out the squad.

Even if it means loaning players out and leaving ourselves short we would still rather do that then have what FSG see as wasted wages. The other thing is that a revolving door recruitment policy gives you more tickets for the raffle and a better chance of hitting the jackpot. Can and Lovren have stalled and are unlikely to be the next Torres, Suarez or Sterling so let's get in another load of moneyball signings because we might unearth a gem.

From a football perspective it's madness but from a business perspective it makes sense. FSG have this inflated opinion of themselves in which they see themselves as super smart operators whose use of numbers gives them an advantage and if you have an advantage then surely you would silly not to use it.

As they see it they have a top coach an ace Sporting Director and they want Edwards to use the numbers to recruit them and Klopp to coach them into superstars. The reality is that all the top teams use stats and believe it or not they don't just front up on match days and play off the cuff they actually coach their players as well.

When it doesn't work they just look for scapegoats.

[CraigDS]

Probably because it is what we do. FSG simply don't like having first team players on big wages who are not playing week in week out. They would much rather have a Gomez or a Stewart on low wages filling out the squad.

Even if it means loaning players out and leaving ourselves short we would still rather do that then have what FSG see as wasted wages. The other thing is that a revolving door recruitment policy gives you more tickets for the raffle and a better chance of hitting the jackpot. Can and Lovren have stalled and are unlikely to be the next Torres, Suarez or Sterling so let's get in another load of moneyball signings because we might unearth a gem.

From a football perspective it's madness but from a business perspective it makes sense. FSG have this inflated opinion of themselves in which they see themselves as super smart operators whose use of numbers gives them an advantage and if you have an advantage then surely you would silly not to use it.

As they see it they have a top coach an ace Sporting Director and they want Edwards to use the numbers to recruit them and Klopp to coach them into superstars. The reality is that all the top teams use stats and believe it or not they don't just front up on match days and play off the cuff they actually coach their players as well.

When it doesn't work they just look for scapegoats.

Think it was Pearce who reported the other day we're offering Lovren a new deal, and we already know we're trying to get Can to sign a new one.

Other than that you've posted another factually correct post.

[Eeyore]

Think it was Pearce who reported the other day we're offering Lovren a new deal, and we already know we're trying to get Can to sign a new one.

Other than that you've posted another factually correct post.

This James Pearce mate.

However, the Liverpool Echo‘s James Pearce has provided an update on Can’s contract talks, suggesting that he could leave if he doesn’t sign a new deal.

“I wouldn’t say Emre Can is definitely off but his future is certainly up in the air,” Pearce responded as part of a Q&A on Tuesday.

“He has been stalling over a new contract and clearly believes he’s worth more than Liverpool are offering.

“Hopefully it will be sorted before the end of the season. If he doesn’t sign then it’s likely he will be sold because I can’t see Liverpool letting him enter the final year of his current contract.”


Sounds really hopeful that but as we know with you what people actually say is mere conjecture if it doesn't agree with the clubs PR. Whereas the PR must be taken as gospel.

If he does leave I am sure you will tell us it was Klopps decision.

[penga]

Craig,FSG are purely in it to make money, and i can't argue with that they are first and foremost buisnessmen, we can all go back and forth with regard are FSG making the money available or is klopp just holding back spending it, no one on here knows for sure and as supporters we are all going to have different opinions. The biggest statement FSG made for me and I have stated this on numerous occasions was saying that extending the anfield road stand might not be viable due to not making the money back quick enough, that is not heresay that's fact straight from the horses mouth, that said everything to me about them being here to purely make money and not to keep moving us forward, whoopee do we have one shiny new stand but let's be honest that's the bare minimum they could do.

Ding Ding Ding

I don't think anyone would disagree they are here to make money because it's blatantly obvious. But why is it so hard to understand that them making money from the club is not mutually exclusive to bringing us forward? If we end up finding a way to regularly be in top 4 or even progressing to more consistent title challenges, does that not logically mean the value of LFC shoots up at a much higher rate than it is currently and also the revenue as well? And from that you can start paying more and more for player recruitment IF NEEDED. It's not "they are only in it to make money therefore they have 0 interest in bringing us forward" that is absolutely nonsensical. You could also argue they get a bit of a kick or thrill out of seeing their sporting side do well, that's why they're in this type of business and also owning the Red Sox who have had success, though that's fairly insignificant in the end for us.

The part where you may disagree is how they get there. They don't want to risk their money and pump it in like the other top clubs which is sort of fair enough in my view as they aren't as rich, it's not their "plaything" so it would be more risky and make less sense for them. They aren't taking money out of the club at least and have stabilised the club and grown it commercially since H+G days so it's not all bad. They make the club live within it's means, don't want to overpay for recruitment but want to be smarter. They made plenty of mistakes so far which is again sort of understandable being new to the game. How they want to do it is by the models of Arsenal in the recent past, the Spurs of now (who have less money than us but consistently finish above us), Atletico, Dortmund and Juventus. Being a club of our stature if and when we can get to that level after doing things "smarter" than the rest which has been proven to be able to work then we can start paying the really big fees and wages some of you so desperately crave, we can generate more revenue than any of these clubs if we can get ourselves back towards those levels (without spending above our means).

There is not only one way to win. At the end of the day if you recruit very well and are coached well you can win, that doesn't mean you have to necessarily spend big. You have more chance if you have more money, yes, but it doesn't guarantee more quality. How do the likes of Bayern, Juventus, Atletico and Dortmund get teams that are equally strong if not stronger than the pure quality of EPL teams? If you faced them up in the CL the EPL teams will lose more often than not and it has nothing to do with them being in a league of less competition regarding teams that can challenge for titles. I'm talking about the actual quality of their squads and how they play being better than what the EPL can muster on less money. It can be done but FSG haven't found the way YET.

[El Lobo]

This James Pearce mate.

However, the Liverpool Echo‘s James Pearce has provided an update on Can’s contract talks, suggesting that he could leave if he doesn’t sign a new deal.

“I wouldn’t say Emre Can is definitely off but his future is certainly up in the air,” Pearce responded as part of a Q&A on Tuesday.

“He has been stalling over a new contract and clearly believes he’s worth more than Liverpool are offering.

“Hopefully it will be sorted before the end of the season. If he doesn’t sign then it’s likely he will be sold because I can’t see Liverpool letting him enter the final year of his current contract.”


Sounds really hopeful that but as we know with you what people actually say is mere conjecture if it doesn't agree with the clubs PR. Whereas the PR must be taken as gospel.

If he does leave I am sure you will tell us it was Klopps decision.

Nah, we should offer him what he wants. He deserves it.

[LallanaInPyjamas]

Probably because it is what we do. FSG simply don't like having first team players on big wages who are not playing week in week out. They would much rather have a Gomez or a Stewart on low wages filling out the squad.

Even if it means loaning players out and leaving ourselves short we would still rather do that then have what FSG see as wasted wages. The other thing is that a revolving door recruitment policy gives you more tickets for the raffle and a better chance of hitting the jackpot. Can and Lovren have stalled and are unlikely to be the next Torres, Suarez or Sterling so let's get in another load of moneyball signings because we might unearth a gem.

From a football perspective it's madness but from a business perspective it makes sense. FSG have this inflated opinion of themselves in which they see themselves as super smart operators whose use of numbers gives them an advantage and if you have an advantage then surely you would silly not to use it.

As they see it they have a top coach an ace Sporting Director and they want Edwards to use the numbers to recruit them and Klopp to coach them into superstars. The reality is that all the top teams use stats and believe it or not they don't just front up on match days and play off the cuff they actually coach their players as well.

When it doesn't work they just look for scapegoats.

I think you're stretching here mate and that's coming from someone who would gladly see us sold tomorrow to more ambitious and wealthy owners should they exist. The issue for us isn't keeping players like Can and Lovren, it's been keeping players like Coutinho who start to demand the dreaded £150k+ p/w mark which makes them queasy. And of course attracting and signing them in the first place, which is a totally different debate altogether which isn't going to change under this ownership.

In the case of someone like Sturridge or Sakho who genuinely aren't regular starters, I agree, but for me these players should always be upgraded any way because we simply can't afford them to drain our wage bill in the way they have been. Do I think/wish FSG would change approach and start offering top-class players £150-200k p/w from the get go, yes; do I think we should keep them here even when they're regularly not starting or contributing to games? No.

Can and Lovren have started plenty of matches this season and despite the negative attention they seem to be receiving at the moment, have played well in good wins too. They aren't perfect footballers and never will be but have proven they can be part of a successful team. Both seem physically and mentally strong, both of which we are lacking.

To promote selling them when they are in their prime and we are already lacking squad depth in both of their areas is madness and as far as I'm concerned will not happen without either asking for obscene wages.

[AaronSingh25]

We’ll sell Markovic, Sakho, probably Sturridge, maybe Origi, Stewart etc. Can see us getting ~£40m for that lot on top of our normal £20m outlay giving us an overall spend of £60m. Looks like we’re spending big but not really.

This.

We'll also cover that 20 million outlay by getting rid some of high earners, to contribute towards the 20 million.

It's all PR, spin and perceptions.

[Suareznumber7]

After skimming through the past 15-20 pages it seems that the majority here want a super rich sugar daddy to buy the club.  Which is fine, but people should be honest about it instead of beating around the bush about it.   

[Redric1970]

I don't think anyone would disagree they are here to make money because it's blatantly obvious. But why is it so hard to understand that them making money from the club is not mutually exclusive to bringing us forward? If we end up finding a way to regularly be in top 4 or even progressing to more consistent title challenges, does that not logically mean the value of LFC shoots up at a much higher rate than it is currently and also the revenue as well? And from that you can start paying more and more for player recruitment IF NEEDED. It's not "they are only in it to make money therefore they have 0 interest in bringing us forward" that is absolutely nonsensical. You could also argue they get a bit of a kick or thrill out of seeing their sporting side do well, that's why they're in this type of business and also owning the Red Sox who have had success, though that's fairly insignificant in the end for us.

The part where you may disagree is how they get there. They don't want to risk their money and pump it in like the other top clubs which is sort of fair enough in my view as they aren't as rich, it's not their "plaything" so it would be more risky and make less sense for them. They aren't taking money out of the club at least and have stabilised the club and grown it commercially since H+G days so it's not all bad. They make the club live within it's means, don't want to overpay for recruitment but want to be smarter. They made plenty of mistakes so far which is again sort of understandable being new to the game. How they want to do it is by the models of Arsenal in the recent past, the Spurs of now (who have less money than us but consistently finish above us), Atletico, Dortmund and Juventus. Being a club of our stature if and when we can get to that level after doing things "smarter" than the rest which has been proven to be able to work then we can start paying the really big fees and wages some of you so desperately crave, we can generate more revenue than any of these clubs if we can get ourselves back towards those levels (without spending above our means).

There is not only one way to win. At the end of the day if you recruit very well and are coached well you can win, that doesn't mean you have to necessarily spend big. You have more chance if you have more money, yes, but it doesn't guarantee more quality. How do the likes of Bayern, Juventus, Atletico and Dortmund get teams that are equally strong if not stronger than the pure quality of EPL teams? If you faced them up in the CL the EPL teams will lose more often than not and it has nothing to do with them being in a league of less competition regarding teams that can challenge for titles. I'm talking about the actual quality of their squads and how they play being better than what the EPL can muster on less money. It can be done but FSG haven't found the way YET.

You are right in a lot of things you say, but You can't compare us with Bayern, Dortmund, juventus and Atletico they are pretty much guaranteed champions league football every year, the premier league is a different animal, in Germany who really challenges Bayern and Dortmund out of the top 4, juventus have won the league for the last 5 seasons, and in la Liga bar Barca and real who else challenges Atletico for the top four. Juventus sold pogba for a ridiculous fee and went straight out and spent £70mil on higuain, bayern are a massive draw to players we aren't any more that's the sad fact. So before we can follow the juventus model let's win the league for the next 5 years like them or Bayern champions for the last 4 years.

[clinical]

Surely we must be in a position to spend  >£50m net in the summer. 

We've made about £10m profit over last two windows.

[Jfor83]

After skimming through the past 15-20 pages it seems that the majority here want a super rich sugar daddy to buy the club.  Which is fine, but people should be honest about it instead of beating around the bush about it.

Of course we do. It's probably the only way to get to the top and stay there

[El Lobo]

After skimming through the past 15-20 pages it seems that the majority here want a super rich sugar daddy to buy the club.  Which is fine, but people should be honest about it instead of beating around the bush about it.

Exactly this, nothing wrong with it but lets not be hiding behind stuff which doesn't exist.

Just open a new thread titled 'what I want from an owner'

[west_london_red]

This.

We'll also cover that 20 million outlay by getting rid some of high earners, to contribute towards the 20 million.

It's all PR, spin and perceptions.

Well, there was the original poster, yourself and at least myself who are now on to their dastardly plan. I wonder who else can subtract one set of figures from another and figure out what is actually being spent?

[ToneLa]

I'd love a poll thread about ownership, choose only one of:

- Fan ownership?
- A new British owner who understand the club totally but can't afford to be a sugar daddy?
- FSG to stay on, better the devil you know?
- a Chinese company with billions who see red as lucky?
- a Sheikh who wants to play championship manager with his oil money?

[Eeyore]

I think you're stretching here mate and that's coming from someone who would gladly see us sold tomorrow to more ambitious and wealthy owners should they exist. The issue for us isn't keeping players like Can and Lovren, it's been keeping players like Coutinho who start to demand the dreaded £150k+ p/w mark which makes them queasy. And of course attracting and signing them in the first place, which is a totally different debate altogether which isn't going to change under this ownership.

In the case of someone like Sturridge or Sakho who genuinely aren't regular starters, I agree, but for me these players should always be upgraded any way because we simply can't afford them to drain our wage bill in the way they have been. Do I think/wish FSG would change approach and start offering top-class players £150-200k p/w from the get go, yes; do I think we should keep them here even when they're regularly not starting or contributing to games? No.

Can and Lovren have started plenty of matches this season and despite the negative attention they seem to be receiving at the moment, have played well in good wins too. They aren't perfect footballers and never will be but have proven they can be part of a successful team. Both seem physically and mentally strong, both of which we are lacking.

To promote selling them when they are in their prime and we are already lacking squad depth in both of their areas is madness and as far as I'm concerned will not happen without either asking for obscene wages.

The thing is though if we didn't have a problem keeping squad players under FSG then we wouldn't have such a paper thin squad. If we are to go forwards then players like Lovren and Can need to be squad players but FSG don't see it like that. Look at the last time we qualified for the CL we did it with an incredibly small squad including 2 loan players. During that summer it was 8 in 8 out.

We see some of the benches we have had this season as a joke whereas FSG are probably delighted that the likes of TAA, Ejaria and Woodburn are getting exposure and game time but above all massively reducing the wage bill.

[penga]

You are right in a lot of things you say, but You can't compare us with Bayern, Dortmund, juventus and Atletico they are pretty much guaranteed champions league football every year, the premier league is a different animal, in Germany who really challenges Bayern and Dortmund out of the top 4, juventus have won the league for the last 5 seasons, and in la Liga bar Barca and real who else challenges Atletico for the top four. Juventus sold pogba for a ridiculous fee and went straight out and spent £70mil on higuain, bayern are a massive draw to players we aren't any more that's the sad fact. So before we can follow the juventus model let's win the league for the next 5 years like them or Bayern champions for the last 4 years.

I'm not saying following their model is likely to net us several titles in the next few years, I'm saying it's very possible in my opinion to consistently get top 4 which Arsenal have done in the last 10 years with basically negative net spend (until recently) and what Spurs are doing now with less money - if FSG and Klopp can get recruitment right. So with more money than Spurs why isn't it possible for us to be consistently above them is something we should look at. FSG haven't got it right yet that's the problem but in signing Klopp they are hopefully getting towards that point. Ye our league is hell competitive but what I was saying was look where these teams were before Klopp (Dortmund), before Conte (Juventus), before Simeone (Atletico). They were nowhere close to challenging for leagues but recruited smartly e.g. Juventus was around our position in the league coming 6-7th for quite a while I think, without lots of money, then the same year we bought the likes of Poulsen, Konchesky, Meireles they were signing Vidal for 7mil and Pirlo for free, then later added Pogba for free, suddenly they have a world class midfield that can compete with anyone in the world without spending shit nor paying exorbitant wages until they proved themselves. In Klopp's case you can see the same parallels in Dortmund and now at Liverpool with signings like Matip. Not only, that a lot of these teams have managed it doing it the hard way losing their top players year after year e.g. Torres, Aguero, Falcao, Diego Costa but managed to buy the correct replacement each time culminating in Griezmann. Same as Dortmund especially and in our league currently - Southampton dare I say it!  I think with Klopp on we won't have this problem as long as we don't continue this slump into 5-8th for the next 2 seasons, the signs are already positive with our top player Coutinho signing on a big contract.

It's not absolutely necessary to only look at the top of our league because that's only 1 example, you can draw parallels from other places e.g. Sunderland spent really a lot of money in the last 10 seasons but are still stuck in relegation fights every season - why because poor recruitment choices whereas Southampton a recently promoted team make transfer profit like every year and finish above midtable consistently since coming up and even above us last season.

[Eeyore]

I'd love a poll thread about ownership, choose only one of:

- Fan ownership?
- A new British owner who understand the club totally but can't afford to be a sugar daddy?
- FSG to stay on, better the devil you know?
- a Chinese company with billions who see red as lucky?
- a Sheikh who wants to play championship manager with his oil money?

Personally I would ban the term sugar daddy. People tend to throw it around as a derogatory term when in essence it is usually people investing in their businesses . When you point that out they usually counter with the argument that they massively over pay and will never get a proper return on their investment. For me that is pretty much the definition of a premier league football fan.

I wonder if the lads who trekked up to Hull at the weekend thought they got a decent return on their investment.

[ToneLa]

I simply mean it to imply unlimited funds. It is a bit overused!

Which of my options would you choose Al? Feel free to offer your own spin if you think I've limited it too much

[Suareznumber7]

Exactly this, nothing wrong with it but lets not be hiding behind stuff which doesn't exist.

Just open a new thread titled 'what I want from an owner'

And if we ever get one the same people complaining that FSG don't spend enough will be complaining about the "mercenaries" that have been brought into the club that don't care about the shirt. 

[CraigDS]

The thing is though if we didn't have a problem keeping squad players under FSG then we wouldn't have such a paper thin squad.

What squad players have we struggled to keep which weren't clearly the managers choice to move on?

[So… Howard Philips]

After skimming through the past 15-20 pages it seems that the majority here want a super rich sugar daddy to buy the club.  Which is fine, but people should be honest about it instead of beating around the bush about it.

The thing is would the sugar daddy pass the morality test? You know the one that Shankly initiated about socialism?

Mind you I suppose Chinese state ownership would be a form of socialism I suppose.

And this is not support for FSG.

[west_london_red]

I simply mean it to imply unlimited funds. It is a bit overused!

Which of my options would you choose Al? Feel free to offer your own spin if you think I've limited it too much

Or even simpler, if you could pick one set of oweners from a PL club, which clubs owners would it be?

[ToneLa]

Ooh that's a good one.

Everton?

[So… Howard Philips]

Or even simpler, if you could pick one set of oweners from a PL club, which clubs owners would it be?

I suppose if we want consistent success over a decade it must be Abramovic.

He has supported all of his managers, bought quality, hoovered up young talent and made a profit on them.

He'd have saved a few bob if he bought us as he wouldn't have needed the plastic flags.

[ToneLa]

Abramovic supporting his managers?? 

[CraigDS]

Abramovic supporting his managers?? 

14 managers in 13 years.

[So… Howard Philips]

Abramovic supporting his managers?? 

He spent a fortune on players and gave them huge payouts when they were sacked.

If they weren't winning trophies they were sacked but they all had the opportunity (probably not Rafa) to buy top players.

[ToneLa]

I think the clear downside is he wouldn't suffer a non-immediately-achieving manager for long. Would Klopp be gone already with last season's finish, no cups now, and a small run of bad results keeping us far behind the league leaders?

I don't mind it taking a while to build, I just don't want artificial limits on it

[Carlito Roberto]

Well in that case you're only hope is a multi millionaire buying the club lock, stock and barrel. But that will be the day I close my door on football, as the club I have grown up with will cease to exist entirely.

I find your argument difficult to understand mate. Our current owners are an investment group from Boston, whose principal shareholder John Henry is worth £1.9 billion and swans around the globe on a recently purchased £68m yacht. A far cry from some loveable scouse businessman from Norris Green made good. Why have you not walked away already?

[west_london_red]

Ooh that's a good one.

Everton?

To be honest I am more interested in what Al thinks