Hicks says we must stop spending

[Seosa]

This is coming from one half of a duo that has put a club like Red Dippers in fuck harsh debt. He needs to go back to learnin BTEC Business instead of criticsising proper business men.

 

[Miami Weiss]

Yes I have to agree that "running it like a buisness" and buying the likes of Lucas, Babel, Dossena and all of the other over priced, over rated pieces of shit that Rafa has brought in with title contentions but falling short again, again and again is a much better option.

ADUG aren't even that good of a buisness.

 

[LazyArse]

Erm, isn't he just saying what Hughes said recently, that this level of spending is unsustainable in the future?

But why miss a chance to be outraged over fuck all. It's what the internet is all about.

 

[Batman]

Liverpool co-owner Tom Hicks insists Manchester City will have to curb their lavish transfer spending.

City are mounting a serious challenge to the Premier League's established elite and their new-look, star-studded squad has made a 100 per cent start to the new season.

Eastlands boss Mark Hughes has been given unprecedented funds which are the envy of his rival managers, but Hicks feels City's super-rich Middle East owners will be forced to tighten the purse strings.

"It's not sustainable at City, they won't continue to invest like that as it doesn't make good economic sense," Hicks said.

"Hopefully they will make the improvements they need to make and then run it more like a business. The smart clubs operate for the long term and you must look at who have had success for many years."

The Anfield outfit's American supremo, who recently saw the club's coffers bolstered with a £20million-a-year shirt sponsorship deal with Standard Chartered Bank, is keen to balance on-field success with off-field prudence.
Commitment

"You have to look at cash flow rather than accounting and we intend to operate Liverpool where it has a very strong positive cash flow so we have the resources to be as competitive as possible on the pitch. That's our commitment," Hicks added.

"We had strong, positive cash flows last year. Our debt levels are at a very comfortable level and we are going to continue bringing it down.

"Our goal is to have less debt than any of the top clubs and that's a commitment we have made and will continue to make."

Hicks expects manager Rafa Benitez to be requesting funds from the recent sponsorship deal to improve his squad in the January transfer window and hopes further investment into the club will enable the board to approve further spending.

"Knowing Rafa Benitez, I suspect he's got his eye on part of it," he said.

"As we build our revenues it gives the ability to be more competitive on the pitch and this is a very important one, but we think we have other opportunities in the future as well."

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11095_5562622,00.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 22,00.html</a>


Shoot me if it's been posted but I couldn't spot out. Well that's it then guys, stop the spending! Hopefully our owners will copy Hicks and wont spend a penny! And the scousers wonder why we're catching up so quickly...

Correct me if im wrong, but benetiz wasnt given a penny of these over the summer, the only money he got was from the alonso deal?

 

[lee-mcfc]

lmao wtf its it got to do with him the nutter!

 

[dingdingding]

Erm, isn't he just saying what Hughes said recently, that this level of spending is unsustainable in the future?

But why miss a chance to be outraged over fuck all. It's what the internet is all about.

Exactly.

What has Hicks actually said? Reading his quotes, he's said that City won't spend 120M in transfer fees every year, that we'll invest heavily now so that we don't have to invest as much in the future. Is he wrong? No. Why do so many people get so annoyed by this?

And I've never understood slagging United and Liverpool fans over who their owners are. There are so many things to slag them about, why choose the one thing that they have no control over? There but for the grace of God were we. Some City fans would do well to remember that.

 

[johnmc]

Erm, isn't he just saying what Hughes said recently, that this level of spending is unsustainable in the future?

But why miss a chance to be outraged over fck all. It's what the internet is all about.

Exactly.

What has Hicks actually said? Reading his quotes, he's said that City won't spend 120M in transfer fees every year, that we'll invest heavily now so that we don't have to invest as much in the future. Is he wrong? No. Why do so many people get so annoyed by this?

And I've never understood slagging United and Liverpool fans over who their owners are. There are so many things to slag them about, why choose the one thing that they have no control over? There but for the grace of God were we. Some City fans would do well to remember that.

It is Hughes business to comment though not Hicks. Can you imagine Hughes saying that they need to spend a lot more if they want to win the league. Do you think they would say fair enough, no they would say, and rightly so, that it isnt hughes business

 

[Dacrozz]

Although it has nothing to do with him, he is right.

At some point the owners will have to stop spending. At some point they will insist that the club become self sufficent. They have probably set aside a certain amount of money to buy the club, investment in players and investment in the infastructure, the grounds and surrounding areas. When the club has spent that amount, then we will have to become self sufficent. They will not keep throwing money at us year on year forever. That's why they are looking to increase the stadium capacity and promote the club around the world, in order to increase the income the club can make each year.

The more income the club can generate and the more trophies we can win, will increase the value of the club and increase there initial investable return.

But I do imagine there is still a few hundred million more yet to spend.

 

[dingdingding]

It is Hughes business to comment though not Hicks. Can you imagine Hughes saying that they need to spend a lot more if they want to win the league. Do you think they would say fair enough, no they would say, and rightly so, that it isnt hughes business

Well it's not the same thing. A fair comparison would be Khaldoon commenting that they need to spend more to win the league. I agree he's unlikely to do this, but I would imagine that Hicks is just responding to a direct question from a journalist about City.

He's been asked about our spending and he says it's unlikely to continue forever. Which is true, so why do we get so offended?

 

[johnmc]

It is Hughes business to comment though not Hicks. Can you imagine Hughes saying that they need to spend a lot more if they want to win the league. Do you think they would say fair enough, no they would say, and rightly so, that it isnt hughes business

Well it's not the same thing. A fair comparison would be Khaldoon commenting that they need to spend more to win the league. I agree he's unlikely to do this, but I would imagine that Hicks is just responding to a direct question from a journalist about City.

He's been asked about our spending and he says it's unlikely to continue forever. Which is true, so why do we get so offended?

Ok fair comment re hughes and to be honest I just don't think he should comment. I am not that bothered.

If our chairman was asked I think he would say you would have to speak to Liverpool about it.

No big deal, just whiffs of fear.