Author Topic: FSG (*)  (Read 428391 times)

Offline ollick

  • Huge Dick..and a Big Knob too!
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,629
  • Arghhhh
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8800 on: April 21, 2017, 12:01:09 PM »
One of the first posts of a leading member of the anti-Al brigade..

"Again, as argued by a lot of people 2 years back, the point needs to be stressed. Fenway Sports Group and John W Henry are not rank amateurs. They know their sports industry. It might have been a masterstroke to take David Dein's recommendation to appoint Brendan, but ultimately, it was all FSG. They did the interview, they studied the ' 180 page manifesto', they interviewed both Martinez ( 4th place fight for Everton hello ! ) and Brendan and finally, they hired the man.

It was a massive gamble, but my word has it paid off. And not only will it positively impact LFC, it will reinforce the reputation of FSG as one of the shrewd-est entity in modern Sports management."




"Anti-Al brigade" give over mate. There is no such thing as that. There are people who question his 'facts' that is all. People may be frustrated by him but there is no brigade against him.

Unless you think that there is one against CraigDS and others too?

As you haven't quoted the actual post to include dates, when was that written and by whom? was it in the midst of a title challenge or when TAW was interviewing him and everyone thought how great it was to have a manager respected and liked by the general media?

Just had a little look and you've partiallly quoted a 3 year old post to a post that was written in 2012.

Ouch ! I claim hindsight and disagree with everything you said  :wave

Again, as argued by a lot of people 2 years back, the point needs to be stressed. Fenway Sports Group and John W Henry are not rank amateurs. They know their sports industry. It might have been a masterstroke to take David Dein's recommendation to appoint Brendan, but ultimately, it was all FSG. They did the interview, they studied the ' 180 page manifesto', they interviewed both Martinez ( 4th place fight for Everton hello ! ) and Brendan and finally, they hired the man.

It was a massive gamble, but my word has it paid off. And not only will it positively impact LFC, it will reinforce the reputation of FSG as one of the shrewd-est entity in modern Sports management.

If you went and read the post he was replying to about not knowing who FSG were and being sceptical and bearing in mind the league postition at the time and with the hindsight part you chose to miss out it did indeed seem that FSG had got it right with Rodgers.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2017, 12:08:01 PM by ollick »
Why do people quote other people for the sigs?  What' the point?

Offline Samie

  • The Timekeeper, ask him what time the action starts
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 26,251
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8801 on: April 21, 2017, 12:04:35 PM »
When the fuck did Rawk get an 'Anti Al Brigade"?

Online Johnny Foreigner

  • King of the Trabbies. Major Mod Thruster.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,891
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8802 on: April 21, 2017, 12:07:02 PM »
The owners haven't made a decision on the ARE yet have they? they said that they wouldn't until the MS was complete and they can find the balance of capacity/demand/ROI. Is there anything inherently wrong with that?

What is this quick profit that you talk of? They have charged the minimum interest financially and legally possible for the loan to develop the MS, that's hardly the sign of an ownership that is looking to make a quick profit out of the club (I believe that they have charged 3% less than they could have)


They haven’t made the decision yet, as the current customers/consumers – or supporters as some still call them – can’t pay the inflated prices to support a short-term payback..

Naturally I don’t have detailed information, but it looks to me like they are wanting return over a 3-5 years period..

It would be natural to allow for 10-15 years pay pack of such investment, if we were a football club foremost and not an investment vehicle. Actually an industrial company would/could settle for a 10 year payback…
It’s not even about individuality, it’s about the team. Our game was based on his controlling of the tempo. Squeeze the life out of the opposition and then strike. That is our game. Like a pack of pythons.

Offline ollick

  • Huge Dick..and a Big Knob too!
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,629
  • Arghhhh
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8803 on: April 21, 2017, 12:13:24 PM »
They haven’t made the decision yet, as the current customers/consumers – or supporters as some still call them – can’t pay the inflated prices to support a short-term payback..

Naturally I don’t have detailed information, but it looks to me like they are wanting return over a 3-5 years period..

It would be natural to allow for 10-15 years pay pack of such investment, if we were a football club foremost and not an investment vehicle. Actually an industrial company would/could settle for a 10 year payback…


I think Warner/Ayre has gone on record saying that they would want a similar payback period as the one for the MS (6 years? but CraigDS or one of those stadium types would know more) and that they are continuing to look at how best to redevelop the ARE within those confines, given that there would be a lack of options for corporate or premium view seating.

Granted doesn't mean they will or won't just means that they are still investigating it, so nothing has changed either way. As a football club would you be happy to have £80 million in debt (plus whatever the interest rate would be about 4.5% per annum sitting on our books when we have only made a profit once in their ownership and have a large wage bill and demands to buy the best players available?

Personally I would take a stadium naming rights deal if it meant development could go ahead, that's something that I don't think they would ever get on board with so maybe rights for the MS and ARE would help?

But a pound to a pinch of shit, when they do or don't make a decision, there will be something that people will find to criticise them for.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2017, 12:19:46 PM by ollick »
Why do people quote other people for the sigs?  What' the point?

Offline Charlie Adams fried egg right

  • Main Stander
  • **
  • Posts: 220
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8804 on: April 21, 2017, 12:17:45 PM »
Jesus. Come one, 200+ pages in and you still can't debate seriously? It's not that simple, it never is in anything difficult.

Who are these people, Mark Lawerson? Robbie Fowler? Stan Collymore? The average Brit ex-footballer is a fucking moron. Random Hamburger SV ex-DoF? Europe is littered with failed DoF's. Even Cruyff has had bad stints where everyone at the club ended up hating him. Look at United, once Fergie left, it's nothing but a mixed bag of experience and wasted money. 

It always seems oh so easy from the armchair. But it's never a guarentee. That's why this thread is so toxic. The vision of these ex-football players could be behind the times. They might have lost a step. They might want to spend more time with their family instead of extra time negotiating the deal.  They might have trouble integrating into British and American culture. They might not want to deal with UK work Visa issues. They might not want to deal with the Roman's and Sheik's without equal money to back it up. They might just have a thing against Liverpool Football Club.

It takes an expert to put together the right mix of experienced football people. To have a full infrastructure, in place to make their jobs easier, Bayern, Atletico and Barca European and domestic domination did not just spring up over night.  And it takes time to become an expert in that process.
Good post.
I actually agree with Al's sentiments in this thread -which has been pretty painful  one at times. But if I'm right, Al does not necessarily want FSG out, but just wants them to have more footballing expertise.
As a concept it's difficult to disagree with, but more difficult to execute, and the post above shows some of the difficulties and the fact that it's not an overnight fix.
I agree about ex-players, you only have to look at some of ours and the crap that they spout(often about us) in front of a live mike - you wouldn't want them anywhere near a strategic decision or managing a budget.
What would be good though if the job that required this elusive "football expertise" was specced out into the skills and experience needed to be successful.
Could it be a bright ex player with the aptitude and profile but without the business skills or experience? (Barnes) but would they be willing to learn those skills - sometimes people get to a stage in life where they can't be arsed learning new stuff.
Could it be someone with a football background, but who didn't make it as a player, but has the academic and business skills - I've just described Edwards there.
Or is it an experienced "football administrator", but how do they become experienced in the first place and are they too entrenched in the club where they made their name?
We may, just may, hit the jackpot by recruiting externally, but I think we have to grow our own. We should be looking at current, recently retired, youngish ex players that have the aptitude and willingness to learn and get them involved in the business side of the club, there may be just one in a hundred capable, but wouldnt it be good if we could get one up to the right standard?
The sad thing for me is that I think that the Ayre years were wasted years. I can sort of see why FSG may have kept him around for continuity, but based on what I have seen the guy was over-promoted, and nowhere near what the leader of a £300m turnover business should be. Any decent leader would have sorted the spat between Rogers and the committee and there's loads of examples of unprofessional behaviour as well as keeping a low profile when it suited. I would love to know how the end came about for him.

Offline ollick

  • Huge Dick..and a Big Knob too!
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,629
  • Arghhhh
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8805 on: April 21, 2017, 12:23:22 PM »
Good post.
I actually agree with Al's sentiments in this thread -which has been pretty painful  one at times. But if I'm right, Al does not necessarily want FSG out, but just wants them to have more footballing expertise.
As a concept it's difficult to disagree with, but more difficult to execute, and the post above shows some of the difficulties and the fact that it's not an overnight fix.
I agree about ex-players, you only have to look at some of ours and the crap that they spout(often about us) in front of a live mike - you wouldn't want them anywhere near a strategic decision or managing a budget.
What would be good though if the job that required this elusive "football expertise" was specced out into the skills and experience needed to be successful.
Could it be a bright ex player with the aptitude and profile but without the business skills or experience? (Barnes) but would they be willing to learn those skills - sometimes people get to a stage in life where they can't be arsed learning new stuff.
Could it be someone with a football background, but who didn't make it as a player, but has the academic and business skills - I've just described Edwards there.
Or is it an experienced "football administrator", but how do they become experienced in the first place and are they too entrenched in the club where they made their name?
We may, just may, hit the jackpot by recruiting externally, but I think we have to grow our own. We should be looking at current, recently retired, youngish ex players that have the aptitude and willingness to learn and get them involved in the business side of the club, there may be just one in a hundred capable, but wouldnt it be good if we could get one up to the right standard?
The sad thing for me is that I think that the Ayre years were wasted years. I can sort of see why FSG may have kept him around for continuity, but based on what I have seen the guy was over-promoted, and nowhere near what the leader of a £300m turnover business should be. Any decent leader would have sorted the spat between Rogers and the committee and there's loads of examples of unprofessional behaviour as well as keeping a low profile when it suited. I would love to know how the end came about for him.


Believe it or not I also agree with Al555 on this (which is surprising as I think I'm part of the anti-Al brigade :D )

Here's a suggestion for us to consider.........

Alan Hansen

I remember seeing a doc about him a Kenny and he asked Kenny if he think he would make it as a manager and Kenny said no, he didn't have the grit to do it.

But I think Alan Hansen would be a great addition to the club and to be honest I can't believe he hasn't had a role already.  One of our greatest defenders, knowledgeable, bit more media savvy than most and has a great relationship with Kenny.

I think he could be brought in alongside Kenny as the 'face' and Hansen as the 'brains'

Ayre was a success commercially and was over-promoted on the back of that.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2017, 12:25:19 PM by ollick »
Why do people quote other people for the sigs?  What' the point?

Offline ollick

  • Huge Dick..and a Big Knob too!
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,629
  • Arghhhh
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8806 on: April 21, 2017, 12:32:53 PM »
Thanks mate. To be honest I'm in work and don't have the time :(

:D

Can't you just log back onto your Al555 account :lmao
Why do people quote other people for the sigs?  What' the point?

Offline Eel Lobo

  • Chief Suck Up.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,961
  • I'm hot for you Patricia
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8807 on: April 21, 2017, 01:23:45 PM »
When the fuck did Rawk get an 'Anti Al Brigade"?

 ;D

As soon as a mod agreed with him I believe
Hodgson was a decent manager, without doubt in the top 1% of Football managers

Offline PeterTheRed

  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,684
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8808 on: April 21, 2017, 01:46:21 PM »

Offline Lycan

  • Loves egg. Quite partial to a nipple too. Once came into contact with Jeremy Beadle and his tiny right hand.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,256
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8809 on: April 21, 2017, 01:58:24 PM »
Eeeewwww...Didn't think this thread could get any worse...
“There he goes. One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind, never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die.”

Offline ollick

  • Huge Dick..and a Big Knob too!
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,629
  • Arghhhh
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8810 on: April 21, 2017, 02:10:45 PM »
Eeeewwww...Didn't think this thread could get any worse...

hahaha I'd almost forgotten what those bastards had looked like.
Why do people quote other people for the sigs?  What' the point?

Offline NativityinBlack

  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,530
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8811 on: April 21, 2017, 02:16:28 PM »
One of the first posts of a leading member of the anti-Al brigade..

"Again, as argued by a lot of people 2 years back, the point needs to be stressed. Fenway Sports Group and John W Henry are not rank amateurs. They know their sports industry. It might have been a masterstroke to take David Dein's recommendation to appoint Brendan, but ultimately, it was all FSG. They did the interview, they studied the ' 180 page manifesto', they interviewed both Martinez ( 4th place fight for Everton hello ! ) and Brendan and finally, they hired the man.

It was a massive gamble, but my word has it paid off. And not only will it positively impact LFC, it will reinforce the reputation of FSG as one of the shrewd-est entity in modern Sports management."

WTF ? Has 'context' completely been obliterated here ?

That post was a reply to FS, who ranted for half a page about how FSG 'didn't know sports' and how we LFC fans weren't supposed to trust them. In 2012 ! It was after Kenny was sacked and a clear emotional response, which was completely understandable. I took advantage of us challenging for the title to present a counterview. In fact, that post should reinforce the things that FSG have done right.

Offline Crimson_Tank

  • Rhyming Slang. RAWK Virgil. Knows a proper spit-roast when he sees one.....something to do with the law of the bi.....Is truly a giant amongst the short staff.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 14,815
  • "Time is an illusion, Lunchtime, doubly so." F.P.
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8812 on: April 21, 2017, 02:18:21 PM »
hahaha I'd almost forgotten what those bastards had looked like.

I get reminded every time I watch LOTR.

Oh yeh and good on the Club and the owners for standing up to Barca and their shitty tactics.
My wife laughed so hard her tits shook.

Offline King Brian Blessed

  • Gordon's ALIVE? Practically Bear Grylls. Backwards Bluesman Bastard.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 39,292
  • Super Title: Feedback Tourist #4
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8813 on: April 21, 2017, 02:18:48 PM »
In regards to the ARE, I think it is bullshit if they don't increase capacity, and I don't buy their excuses either. So the increase in ticket prices won't pay back the investment quick enough? What happened to planning for the next 16 years and beyond, or whatever that quote was? And even if that is accepted, then when the Main Stand is paid off, use the extra revenues from that stand to pay back the ARE. To say the only way ARE gets done is if it pays for itself is absolutely bull shit.

Some coincidence that the hesitation over ARE came fairly soon after the protest about ticket price increases.


I do think we have improved over the last couple of years. Klopp is clearly a managerial upgrade, and we got to two cup finals. The league had to be sacrificed, but it was already gone by the time he became manager anyway. This year we'll finish 4-5 places higher than last year, and had an overall good summer transfer window. With the extra competition and extra money, there is no excuse for FSG this summer, and it will be make or break for them. Get in whoever Klopp wants, bolster the squad and keep quiet.

Offline ollick

  • Huge Dick..and a Big Knob too!
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,629
  • Arghhhh
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8814 on: April 21, 2017, 02:19:03 PM »
I get reminded every time I watch LOTR.



:D

That's offence to that Orc!!
Why do people quote other people for the sigs?  What' the point?

Offline CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,936
  • YNWA
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8815 on: April 21, 2017, 02:22:23 PM »
In regards to the ARE, I think it is bullshit if they don't increase capacity, and I don't buy their excuses either.

There has been no excuse as there has been no decision made, other than it's still clearly being looked at.

Offline Eel Lobo

  • Chief Suck Up.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,961
  • I'm hot for you Patricia
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8816 on: April 21, 2017, 02:28:31 PM »
There has been no excuse as there has been no decision made, other than it's still clearly being looked at.

For the sake of argument though, is it not better to assume the decision has been made?
Hodgson was a decent manager, without doubt in the top 1% of Football managers

Offline ollick

  • Huge Dick..and a Big Knob too!
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,629
  • Arghhhh
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8817 on: April 21, 2017, 02:33:28 PM »
For the sake of argument though, is it not better to assume the decision has been made?

Until they make a decision it is pure speculation other than they've said they are still investigating it.

But for arguments sake lets just assume they are, until they say otherwise. Cool.
Why do people quote other people for the sigs?  What' the point?

Offline CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,936
  • YNWA
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8818 on: April 21, 2017, 02:35:13 PM »
For the sake of argument though, is it not better to assume the decision has been made?

Seems the norm.

Online Johnny Foreigner

  • King of the Trabbies. Major Mod Thruster.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,891
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8819 on: April 21, 2017, 02:37:14 PM »
Making no decision is also a decision.
It’s not even about individuality, it’s about the team. Our game was based on his controlling of the tempo. Squeeze the life out of the opposition and then strike. That is our game. Like a pack of pythons.

Offline CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,936
  • YNWA
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8820 on: April 21, 2017, 02:39:44 PM »
Making no decision is also a decision.

Making a decision once the Main Stand is completed, which is what they said since before the Main Stand started, is not making no decision.

Don't let that get in the way of a good moan though.

Offline Day1983

  • Main Stander
  • **
  • Posts: 222
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8821 on: April 21, 2017, 02:41:59 PM »
:D

Can't you just log back onto your Al555 account :lmao

Haha I'm far too negative to be al

Offline King Brian Blessed

  • Gordon's ALIVE? Practically Bear Grylls. Backwards Bluesman Bastard.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 39,292
  • Super Title: Feedback Tourist #4
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8822 on: April 21, 2017, 02:43:54 PM »
Seems the norm.
If it is still being looked at, is that not backtracking? A few years ago Warner said ARE expansion was planned. That only changed after the protests to it's still being looked at.

Offline CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,936
  • YNWA
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8823 on: April 21, 2017, 02:47:23 PM »
If it is still being looked at, is that not backtracking? A few years ago Warner said ARE expansion was planned. That only changed after the protests to it's still being looked at.

Incorrect.

It has ALWAYS been a case of a decision being fully made once the Main was completed. It is why there is only outline planning for it and not full.

The rumours seem to be pointing towards a larger Anny than originally mentioned (taking us to around 62k). This could well be in reaction to demand since the Main opened, which is why doing it like this makes much more sense.

Offline Eel Lobo

  • Chief Suck Up.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,961
  • I'm hot for you Patricia
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8824 on: April 21, 2017, 02:56:39 PM »
Until they make a decision it is pure speculation other than they've said they are still investigating it.

But for arguments sake lets just assume they are, until they say otherwise. Cool.

It's a discussion board though.

Rather than waiting for a decision to be made, the logical thing is to assume the worst case scenario and argue that, surely? It's the same as the summer activity, logically we need to assume the manager won't be backed and we'll sign some terrible players. I don't see how this thread can continue if we don't start assuming terrible mistakes and decisions being made in the future.
Hodgson was a decent manager, without doubt in the top 1% of Football managers

Offline Day1983

  • Main Stander
  • **
  • Posts: 222
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8825 on: April 21, 2017, 02:56:50 PM »
In regards to the ARE, I think it is bullshit if they don't increase capacity, and I don't buy their excuses either. So the increase in ticket prices won't pay back the investment quick enough? What happened to planning for the next 16 years and beyond, or whatever that quote was? And even if that is accepted, then when the Main Stand is paid off, use the extra revenues from that stand to pay back the ARE. To say the only way ARE gets done is if it pays for itself is absolutely bull shit.

Some coincidence that the hesitation over ARE came fairly soon after the protest about ticket price increases.


I do think we have improved over the last couple of years. Klopp is clearly a managerial upgrade, and we got to two cup finals. The league had to be sacrificed, but it was already gone by the time he became manager anyway. This year we'll finish 4-5 places higher than last year, and had an overall good summer transfer window. With the extra competition and extra money, there is no excuse for FSG this summer, and it will be make or break for them. Get in whoever Klopp wants, bolster the squad and keep quiet.

It wasn't a coincidence, Ian Ayre said the payback for the ARE doesn't make economic sense and JWH has said “I don’t know if there is a next step because ticket prices are an issue in England. That may foreclose further expansion. We’ll have to see.”
The club is valued at £800m-£1b, They bought the club for around £300m so if they built the ARE for £70m they have spent £370m. They could do it and NOT be paid back for it and still have massive equity left.

Offline King Brian Blessed

  • Gordon's ALIVE? Practically Bear Grylls. Backwards Bluesman Bastard.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 39,292
  • Super Title: Feedback Tourist #4
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8826 on: April 21, 2017, 03:04:55 PM »
Incorrect.

It has ALWAYS been a case of a decision being fully made once the Main was completed. It is why there is only outline planning for it and not full.

The rumours seem to be pointing towards a larger Anny than originally mentioned (taking us to around 62k). This could well be in reaction to demand since the Main opened, which is why doing it like this makes much more sense.
There is an interview with Warner published 5th June, 2014 with him talking about doing it in phases, with ARE to follow the Main. There is nothing about waiting and seeing. It could be said that you take what you want from the quotes. The fact that the wait and see was explicitly stated after the protest says it all to me. And just from my post further up, you can see I don't mind praising or criticising FSG as needed :)

(The Warner interview was with Bascombe, so I hesitate to stick up a link or quotes on here, but it's out there if you want a read)

Offline CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,936
  • YNWA
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8827 on: April 21, 2017, 03:10:49 PM »
There is an interview with Warner published 5th June, 2014 with him talking about doing it in phases, with ARE to follow the Main. There is nothing about waiting and seeing. It could be said that you take what you want from the quotes. The fact that the wait and see was explicitly stated after the protest says it all to me. And just from my post further up, you can see I don't mind praising or criticising FSG as needed :)

(The Warner interview was with Bascombe, so I hesitate to stick up a link or quotes on here, but it's out there if you want a read)

If I've got the right interview, the only comment on the ARE is this one, "That makes our approach much more sensible, allowing for further expansion of the Anfield Road."

He's talking about doing it in stages there (increasing capacity), and it being done in such a way that the improvements pay for themselves.

As said, it's always been a case of the ARE decisions comes after the Main is built. Hence the outline planning only, hence the consistent quotes saying as such.

Offline Day1983

  • Main Stander
  • **
  • Posts: 222
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8828 on: April 21, 2017, 03:16:15 PM »
If I've got the right interview, the only comment on the ARE is this one, "That makes our approach much more sensible, allowing for further expansion of the Anfield Road."

He's talking about doing it in stages there (increasing capacity), and it being done in such a way that the improvements pay for themselves.

As said, it's always been a case of the ARE decisions comes after the Main is built. Hence the outline planning only, hence the consistent quotes saying as such.

John Henry has said ticket prices are a problem and this may stop further expansion.

Offline CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,936
  • YNWA
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8829 on: April 21, 2017, 03:18:36 PM »
John Henry has said ticket prices are a problem and this may stop further expansion.

He said they'll have to see, which is exactly what has been the case all along...once the Main is built does demand, potential income, cost, etc. make sense for it to happen.

Offline Frizzo

  • Having a Bad Hair Life.
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,747
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8830 on: April 21, 2017, 03:19:12 PM »
But guys what about what Torres said?

Offline King Brian Blessed

  • Gordon's ALIVE? Practically Bear Grylls. Backwards Bluesman Bastard.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 39,292
  • Super Title: Feedback Tourist #4
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8831 on: April 21, 2017, 03:20:05 PM »
If I've got the right interview, the only comment on the ARE is this one, "That makes our approach much more sensible, allowing for further expansion of the Anfield Road."

He's talking about doing it in stages there (increasing capacity), and it being done in such a way that the improvements pay for themselves.

As said, it's always been a case of the ARE decisions comes after the Main is built. Hence the outline planning only, hence the consistent quotes saying as such.
There is also this about Anfield, "I also like the idea of a phased approach so we will develop in stages.”

"will develop in stages."

The JWH and Ayre quotes later on, after the protest, contradict this.

To put in bluntly, I do not accept any excuse not to expand the ARE, unless it was "It can't be filled".

Offline CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,936
  • YNWA
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8832 on: April 21, 2017, 03:22:28 PM »
There is also this about Anfield, "I also like the idea of a phased approach so we will develop in stages.”

"will develop in stages."

The JWH and Ayre quotes later on, after the protest, contradict this.

To put in bluntly, I do not accept any excuse not to expand the ARE, unless it was "It can't be filled".

Yes, we will develop in stages.

Main Stand first, anything else after. Such as the bits at the back of the Kop this summer. The added seats in the Upper Centenary this summer.

Will is not a statement of intent.

Offline King Brian Blessed

  • Gordon's ALIVE? Practically Bear Grylls. Backwards Bluesman Bastard.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 39,292
  • Super Title: Feedback Tourist #4
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8833 on: April 21, 2017, 03:24:02 PM »
You really are an FSG stooge ;D

Offline Al 555

  • Number 1 is Carragher. Number 2 is Carragher. Number 3 is Carragher. Number 4 is Carragher. Likes to play God in his spare time.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 16,978
  • JFT 96
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8834 on: April 21, 2017, 03:24:37 PM »
If I've got the right interview, the only comment on the ARE is this one, "That makes our approach much more sensible, allowing for further expansion of the Anfield Road."

He's talking about doing it in stages there (increasing capacity), and it being done in such a way that the improvements pay for themselves.

As said, it's always been a case of the ARE decisions comes after the Main is built. Hence the outline planning only, hence the consistent quotes saying as such.

I for one think it is quite sensible to expand in stages and to gauge the capacity needed once the Main Stand is up and running. There are also planning considerations and the impact getting those extra fans to and from the Stadium is going to cause on the area and it's infrastructure.

The main consideration for me is that the decision is based on what is best for 'LFC' and it's fans. For me Clubs should be representative of the community and that means pricing that allows the next generation of fans to be able to afford to attend games. Let's face it without the next generation of fans the Club faces a bleak future.

As for the timing of the ARE can the Club on it's own actually afford to fund payments for two stands at the same time.
One thing does need to be said: in the post-Benitez era, there was media-led clamour (but also some politicking going on at the club) to make the club more English; the idea being that the club had lost the very essence of what it means to be ‘Liverpool’. Guillem Ballague 18/11/10

Offline CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,936
  • YNWA
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8835 on: April 21, 2017, 03:25:18 PM »
You really are an FSG stooge ;D

Not really. I've pointed out plenty of faults they've done and plenty of areas I'd personally improve.

However they've been pretty consistent on the ARE expansion, and the placement of "will" in a quote really doesn't change that.

Offline Al 555

  • Number 1 is Carragher. Number 2 is Carragher. Number 3 is Carragher. Number 4 is Carragher. Likes to play God in his spare time.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 16,978
  • JFT 96
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8836 on: April 21, 2017, 03:29:10 PM »
Not really. I've pointed out plenty of faults they've done and plenty of areas I'd personally improve.

However they've been pretty consistent on the ARE expansion, and the placement of "will" in a quote really doesn't change that.

As the leading member of the Anti Craig brigade. ;D

Can I ask you a question mate. Do you think it is likely that the ARE will only happen after the 'Club' has paid for the Main Stand.
One thing does need to be said: in the post-Benitez era, there was media-led clamour (but also some politicking going on at the club) to make the club more English; the idea being that the club had lost the very essence of what it means to be ‘Liverpool’. Guillem Ballague 18/11/10

Offline King Brian Blessed

  • Gordon's ALIVE? Practically Bear Grylls. Backwards Bluesman Bastard.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 39,292
  • Super Title: Feedback Tourist #4
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8837 on: April 21, 2017, 03:31:04 PM »
Not really. I've pointed out plenty of faults they've done and plenty of areas I'd personally improve.

However they've been pretty consistent on the ARE expansion, and the placement of "will" in a quote really doesn't change that.
You complained about speculation, and give an actual quote and you complain about that?

I also bet you'd be hard pressed to find anyone when the expansion was announced who thought it referred to a few seats on the Kop, and not the Main and ARE.

Offline CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,936
  • YNWA
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8838 on: April 21, 2017, 03:32:30 PM »
As the leading member of the Anti Craig brigade. ;D

Can I ask you a question mate. Do you think it is likely that the ARE will only happen after the 'Club' has paid for the Main Stand.

Not paid for mate, built. So now. I'd be surprised if we don't have a solid update before the end of the year (and by that I'm more hoping for full planning application).

The additional revenue from the Main is paying for it's payments (and possibly then some, not sure what the figures are). I imagine the idea is for the additional ARE revenue to do the same - maybe this means it will be over longer than 5 years, no idea.

Offline CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,936
  • YNWA
Re: FSG (*)
« Reply #8839 on: April 21, 2017, 03:34:27 PM »
You complained about speculation, and give an actual quote and you complain about that?

I complained about your interpretation of a single word as commitment to the ARE.

Quote
I also bet you'd be hard pressed to find anyone when the expansion was announced who thought it referred to a few seats on the Kop, and not the Main and ARE.

Of course. However it's an example of going about it in stages.