Various: N-O has lost the plot over potential end of Mike Ashley's tenure

[RS]

I am struggling to understand the “if it’s not the Saudis I’m done” argument? Liverpool are owned by Americans and they’ve done pretty fucking well. What if the American bidders were to invest in the team, the infrastructure, and build us towards a team challenging the top 6? You wouldn’t want that? And we get that without any of the baggage associated with the PCP bid? That attitude seems crazy to me. There are people writing them off as terrible owners and we don’t even know who they are? Seems bizarre to me. Stifler was writing about them aiming for 17th and keeping Bruce, based on essentially nothing.

 

Possibly because in general someone wants profit back and if that’s the case the only way to run a club like ours is the Ashley way.  We haven’t the profile of a top 6 club so to be successful and make a profit is a big ask.

It is the Saudis though. The deal is done.  Everything else is just noise due to there being no sports news. We have a chance of success as our new owners are not about making a profit. Yet.

[The Prophet]

https://mobile.twitter.com/neymar67211796/status/1254204490770796544/photo/1

[TRon]

I am struggling to understand the “if it’s not the Saudis I’m done” argument? Liverpool are owned by Americans and they’ve done pretty fucking well. What if the American bidders were to invest in the team, the infrastructure, and build us towards a team challenging the top 6? You wouldn’t want that? And we get that without any of the baggage associated with the PCP bid? That attitude seems crazy to me. There are people writing them off as terrible owners and we don’t even know who they are? Seems bizarre to me. Stifler was writing about them aiming for 17th and keeping Bruce, based on essentially nothing.

 

Liverpool's previous American owners almost finished them as a top club. This lot have done well in appointing Klopp, but it will still be about profits at the end of the day. Klopp's signings have been brilliant, he spent less money but got better players for that money. If it was a different manager buying different players, you might have seen them continue their decline.

 

The Saudis will spend whatever it takes and will go all in. That's the difference, and also the reason why other clubs are shitting themselves.

[ponsaelius]

I think it's inevitable that American owners with the clout to buy a club like Liverpool would be a success at Liverpool. You're buying what is essentially the finished article and fine tuning it into commercial machine ala a US sports franchise.

 

With us it's different. I don't think anybody competent would buy us and we're more likely to end up with a Randy Lerner or an Ellis Short. We're so far behind now that we need some significant sunk costs to catch up. I think most only believe that will happen where making money and growing the value of the club is only half the reason for the purchase. I also think a lot of people are willing to give Amanda Staveley significant benefit of the doubt because so much groundwork has already been laid within the city.

[LV]

Jesus, Martin Samuel looks and sounds like someone who sits in Spoons all day reading about how Brexit is the greatest thing ever and mumbling rantings about minorities.

 

Martin Samuel, the Brexit Bluto.

 

[ponsaelius]

I also think that Ashley would deliberately sell us to worse owners as a last fuck you (if the total money into his pocket was the same).

[TRon]

I am struggling to understand the “if it’s not the Saudis I’m done” argument? Liverpool are owned by Americans and they’ve done pretty f***ing well. What if the American bidders were to invest in the team, the infrastructure, and build us towards a team challenging the top 6? You wouldn’t want that? And we get that without any of the baggage associated with the PCP bid? That attitude seems crazy to me. There are people writing them off as terrible owners and we don’t even know who they are? Seems bizarre to me. Stifler was writing about them aiming for 17th and keeping Bruce, based on essentially nothing.

 

Liverpool's previous American owners almost finished them as a top club. This lot have done well in appointing Klopp, but it will still be about profits at the end of the day. Klopp's signings have been brilliant, he spent less money but got better players for that money. If it was a different manager buying different players, you might have seen them continue their decline.

 

The Saudis will spend whatever it takes and will go all in. That's the difference, and also the reason why other clubs are shitting themselves.

 

So one bad owner means all American owners are bad? I don’t see that logic. And you can’t speculate that without Klopp they’d be on the decline. They waited how long to buy VVD when they could have bought anyone at the time?

 

It doesn't mean they're all bad, but they could just as easily be bad as good.

[relámpago blanco]

I am struggling to understand the “if it’s not the Saudis I’m done” argument? Liverpool are owned by Americans and they’ve done pretty f***ing well. What if the American bidders were to invest in the team, the infrastructure, and build us towards a team challenging the top 6? You wouldn’t want that? And we get that without any of the baggage associated with the PCP bid? That attitude seems crazy to me. There are people writing them off as terrible owners and we don’t even know who they are? Seems bizarre to me. Stifler was writing about them aiming for 17th and keeping Bruce, based on essentially nothing.

 

Liverpool's previous American owners almost finished them as a top club. This lot have done well in appointing Klopp, but it will still be about profits at the end of the day. Klopp's signings have been brilliant, he spent less money but got better players for that money. If it was a different manager buying different players, you might have seen them continue their decline.

 

The Saudis will spend whatever it takes and will go all in. That's the difference, and also the reason why other clubs are shitting themselves.

 

So one bad owner means all American owners are bad? I don’t see that logic. And you can’t speculate that without Klopp they’d be on the decline. They waited how long to buy VVD when they could have bought anyone at the time?

 

It doesn't mean they're all bad, but they could just as easily be bad as good.

Shite

Randy Lerner

Ellis Short

Gillettes

Glazers

 

Good

Fenway Sports

 

 

[Sean]

I am struggling to understand the “if it’s not the Saudis I’m done” argument? Liverpool are owned by Americans and they’ve done pretty f***ing well. What if the American bidders were to invest in the team, the infrastructure, and build us towards a team challenging the top 6? You wouldn’t want that? And we get that without any of the baggage associated with the PCP bid? That attitude seems crazy to me. There are people writing them off as terrible owners and we don’t even know who they are? Seems bizarre to me. Stifler was writing about them aiming for 17th and keeping Bruce, based on essentially nothing.

 

Same. If given the choice I'd personally much prefer someone else with a lot less money but I think a lot of people have already started dreaming about being the richest club on earth and can't turn around.

 

Yeah I think so too, but honestly I don’t care about being the richest club on the planet. We’ve seen on this board many times people complaining about City and the atmosphere, that would eventually happen to us too. I would take how Wolves are doing it over City any day.

 

I just want rid of Ashley.

 

Anyway, haven't we been told to ignore all this American bullshit already?

[Miggys First Goal]

Wonder who the wealthy American individual is that Winter was talking about.

[relámpago blanco]

Wonder who the wealthy American individual is that Winter was talking about.

Unless its Bezos or Russ Hahnemann I'm not interested

[RS]

I am struggling to understand the “if it’s not the Saudis I’m done” argument? Liverpool are owned by Americans and they’ve done pretty f***ing well. What if the American bidders were to invest in the team, the infrastructure, and build us towards a team challenging the top 6? You wouldn’t want that? And we get that without any of the baggage associated with the PCP bid? That attitude seems crazy to me. There are people writing them off as terrible owners and we don’t even know who they are? Seems bizarre to me. Stifler was writing about them aiming for 17th and keeping Bruce, based on essentially nothing.

Possibly because in general someone wants profit back and if that’s the case the only way to run a club like ours is the Ashley way.  We haven’t the profile of a top 6 club so to be successful and make a profit is a big ask.

It is the Saudis though. The deal is done.  Everything else is just noise due to there being no sports news. We have a chance of success as our new owners are not about making a profit. Yet.

 

How do you know they want profit back? Do wolves owners? Leicester? They didn’t have too 6 profile, and I actually think we do. More so than those two at least. Rafa had a plan to get us in the top 6 didn’t he and that was under Ashley.

I don’t. I’m making an assumption based on standard business models. What I can be sure of is that the Saudis aren’t coming in for the profit but want success for their project. From a chance of success point of view I think they’re our best bet.

[Kid Icarus]

American owners doesn't really mean anything though does it? You could be talking about people and business outlooks as diverse as Warren Buffet or Charles Koch.

[Guest chopey]

Wonder who the wealthy American individual is that Winter was talking about.

Unless its Bezos or Russ Hahnemann I'm not interested

 

He said he was very rich even by American standards

[Whitley mag]

I am struggling to understand the “if it’s not the Saudis I’m done” argument? Liverpool are owned by Americans and they’ve done pretty f***ing well. What if the American bidders were to invest in the team, the infrastructure, and build us towards a team challenging the top 6? You wouldn’t want that? And we get that without any of the baggage associated with the PCP bid? That attitude seems crazy to me. There are people writing them off as terrible owners and we don’t even know who they are? Seems bizarre to me. Stifler was writing about them aiming for 17th and keeping Bruce, based on essentially nothing.

 

Think the majority of us can handle baggage if it means fu#%ing trophies.

 

Admire you moral stance but for me it’ all about the club. This is on a different level to anything we could have dreamed of.

 

Who’s to say this takeover will not help bring about further change in Saudi for the good anyway.

[Ikon]

I have no idea how FFP works more than that it's some sort of revenue/spend balance and that you have a maximum level of loss per year which you cant exceed and so on.

Say that Saudi Aramco turns out to be our new sponsors, can they give us lets say 600m over a few years for that deal? Surely there's something regulated against these kind of deals if the owner owns the other company? If so, surely there are ways around it? I imagine that this is similar to what City and PSG have done earlier through the years but that they have now changed the FFP rules in some way.

 

Anyone know this FFP stuff well enough to make a simple explanation of how it works? Im sure I'm not the only one clueless about this?

 

[TRon]

I am struggling to understand the “if it’s not the Saudis I’m done” argument? Liverpool are owned by Americans and they’ve done pretty f***ing well. What if the American bidders were to invest in the team, the infrastructure, and build us towards a team challenging the top 6? You wouldn’t want that? And we get that without any of the baggage associated with the PCP bid? That attitude seems crazy to me. There are people writing them off as terrible owners and we don’t even know who they are? Seems bizarre to me. Stifler was writing about them aiming for 17th and keeping Bruce, based on essentially nothing.

Possibly because in general someone wants profit back and if that’s the case the only way to run a club like ours is the Ashley way.  We haven’t the profile of a top 6 club so to be successful and make a profit is a big ask.

It is the Saudis though. The deal is done.  Everything else is just noise due to there being no sports news. We have a chance of success as our new owners are not about making a profit. Yet.

 

How do you know they want profit back? Do wolves owners? Leicester? They didn’t have too 6 profile, and I actually think we do. More so than those two at least. Rafa had a plan to get us in the top 6 didn’t he and that was under Ashley.

I don’t. I’m making an assumption based on standard business models. What I can be sure of is that the Saudis aren’t coming in for the profit but want success for their project. From a chance of success point of view I think they’re our best bet.

 

Boom.

 

End of discussion for me anyway. I admit I selfishly want us to do as well as possible though.

[Kid Icarus]

Because why would it? Nothing else has done it, why would owning a football club?

[relámpago blanco]

Mental how the discussions in the threads have gone from wondering if we'll sign anyone and not sell our best players to talking about how we can get around FFP.

[New Beginnings]

I understand the Staveley or noone arguement

 

This is the one chance we have to get in the big time

 

Clubs struggling financially

Man City, Liverpool aside other clubs are transitioning

Due to Ashley (and in no fanboy) are spending power due to current FFP compliance is huge! (That's without improved sponsor deals)

Reduced transfer fees

Stadium and Training ground regeneration and quick!

 

We have so much opportunity for growth its untrue

 

That's the football side

 

The community side

 

The Saudis/Reubens will want to turn us into a super city, a super hub of the North. The regeneration will be amazing in terms of jobs and investment

They wont settle for anything other than the best with their reputations!

 

If it's someone else, it's like going from Shearer to Gayle! Hell do a job and is better than Joelinton (Ashley) but will never be good enough  to make us challenge

[Guest godzilla]

I have no idea how FFP works more than that it's some sort of revenue/spend balance and that you have a maximum level of loss per year which you cant exceed and so on.

Say that Saudi Aramco turns out to be our new sponsors, can they give us lets say 600m over a few years for that deal? Surely there's something regulated against these kind of deals if the owner owns the other company? If so, surely there are ways around it? I imagine that this is similar to what City and PSG have done earlier through the years but that they have now changed the FFP rules in some way.

 

Anyone know this FFP stuff well enough to make a simple explanation of how it works? Im sure I'm not the only one clueless about this?

 

Think we're going to have to see what happens; as with this dreadful virus there are a number of reports that FFP may be relaxed due to the current economy. Also, there is an opinion that the fees paid for players will be reduced, as the majority of football clubs may have to 'cut their cloth' to make ends meet. It maybe the absolute ideal time to buy a new club, but we will just have to see how it pans out.

[Kid Icarus]

What is a club in any case? Not the buildings or the directors or the people who are paid to represent it. It's not the television contracts, get-out clauses, marketing departments or executive boxes. It's having loads of money to spend on players and ignoring everything else. the noise, the passion, the feeling of belonging, the pride in your city.

[Tiresias]

What is a club in any case? Not the buildings or the directors or the people who are paid to represent it. It's not the television contracts, get-out clauses, marketing departments or executive boxes. It's having loads of money to spend on players and ignoring everything else. the noise, the passion, the feeling of belonging, the pride in your city.

 

[TRon]

What is a club in any case? Not the buildings or the directors or the people who are paid to represent it. It's not the television contracts, get-out clauses, marketing departments or executive boxes. It's having loads of money to spend on players and ignoring everything else. the noise, the passion, the feeling of belonging, the pride in your city.

 

Ironically, having owners who will invest in the club, the buildings and the city will bring back the noise, the pride and the passion IMO. It's been the exact opposite when we've been run like a cold hard business.

[Darth Crooks]

What is a club in any case? Not the buildings or the directors or the people who are paid to represent it. It's not the television contracts, get-out clauses, marketing departments or executive boxes. It's having loads of money to spend on players and ignoring everything else. the noise, the passion, the feeling of belonging, the pride in your city.