Liverpool 2016/17

[FanchesterCity]

Surpass us how? I don't get what you're saying sorry. You just said it yourself look how much United have spent are we that worried about them?

They have a larger fanbase and more recognised brand - given the right megabucks investment, they would probably surpass us quite quickly in terms of revenue and quite possibly success on the pitch too (but that's much harder to guarantee). But they don't have that investment so that's good news for us.
IF they could afford to build a new 70K stadium, they'd probably fill it - whilst we would have to work much harder to fill ours. They would be in a better position to exploit corporate clients than we are, with success on the pitch, would once again because a very attractive club to join.

The Liverpool proposition is a very different one to City. Liverpool is a big club gone off the boil, City was a smaller club being transformed into a big one. It's a very different story. We were an attractive proposition because a lot of stuff was in our favour - a ready made stadium, an owner who wanted to sell up in a fire sale, and a relatively 'clean' brand that Abu Dhabi could do something with. A club like Liverpool or United is much harder to do something with as a brand, because it's already so well established, which can work against you. But still, I am saying that IF Liverpool were as lucky as us in getting a similar type of owner, then I have little doubt they'd rapidly increase their revenues too, and surpass us. They just don't have that right now with FSG's pockets.

 

[SAXON_GB]

Having a bad spell is common, but these cnuts have had it in a period that has obliterated their entire season.

It really couldn't happen to a nicer football club...........sorry, cult.

Unlike the cult you have at city?

 

[FanchesterCity]

Surpass us how? I don't get what you're saying sorry. They are hardly paupers they've spent plenty compared to most in recent years, they are above Spurs in terms of revenue too:
http://www.skysports.com/football/n...t-featuring-17-premier-league-clubs-in-top-30

You just said it yourself look how much United have spent are we that worried about them?

We should be worried about United, yes. They aren't going to just fade away without a fight - we've already seen the levels of spending they are wiling to engage in, and it's not over yet. Damn right we should be worried (although 'worried' isn't the best term). They are competition, let's put it that way, and anybody who thinks they won't be a threat for some time is deluded. They will be.

 

[SAXON_GB]

They have a larger fanbase and more recognised brand - given the right megabucks investment, they would probably surpass us quite quickly in terms of revenue and quite possibly success on the pitch too (but that's much harder to guarantee). But they don't have that investment so that's good news for us.
IF they could afford to build a new 70K stadium, they'd probably fill it - whilst we would have to work much harder to fill ours. They would be in a better position to exploit corporate clients than we are, with success on the pitch, would once again because a very attractive club to join.

The Liverpool proposition is a very different one to City. Liverpool is a big club gone off the boil, City was a smaller club being transformed into a big one. It's a very different story. We were an attractive proposition because a lot of stuff was in our favour - a ready made stadium, an owner who wanted to sell up in a fire sale, and a relatively 'clean' brand that Abu Dhabi could do something with. A club like Liverpool or United is much harder to do something with as a brand, because it's already so well established, which can work against you. But still, I am saying that IF Liverpool were as lucky as us in getting a similar type of owner, then I have little doubt they'd rapidly increase their revenues too, and surpass us. They just don't have that right now with FSG's pockets.

The bottom line is that it would cost a fucking fortune to buy Liverpool and then you would need to throw money at the problem which would make it financialy unfeasible.

 

[Proy]

Unlike the cult you have at city?

My apologies. I didn't put the word religious in front of it.

 

[SAXON_GB]

My apologies. I didn't put the word religious in front of it.

?

 

[Proy]

?

That's right. Ignorance is bliss.

It's fooling nobody.

 

[SAXON_GB]

That's right. Ignorance is bliss.

It's fooling nobody.

No can you explain the religious bollocks?

 

[FanchesterCity]

The bottom line is that it would cost a fucking fortune to buy Liverpool and then you would need to throw money at the problem which would make it financialy unfeasible.

Yes, especially for owners who want a return.
An owner who doesn't want a financial return (like a Sheik) is a different thing - his 'return' isn't money, it's other matters - like promoting Abu Dhabi PR and business etc. With that sort of owner, Liverpool could do as City have done - but they are few and far between.

There is a nice little saying: If want to end up as a millionaire owner, you need to start off as a billionaire.

To spend what City have done, and get your money back with profits would probably be a 20 year project - and not many investors will wait that long for what is STILL a gamble. The likes of FSG probably expect a return in 10 years, and without the huge initial investment like City. As you say, it's just not feasible for a 'normal' investor.

 

[Metalartin]

They have a larger fanbase and more recognised brand - given the right megabucks investment, they would probably surpass us quite quickly in terms of revenue and quite possibly success on the pitch too (but that's much harder to guarantee). But they don't have that investment so that's good news for us.
IF they could afford to build a new 70K stadium, they'd probably fill it - whilst we would have to work much harder to fill ours. They would be in a better position to exploit corporate clients than we are, with success on the pitch, would once again because a very attractive club to join.

The Liverpool proposition is a very different one to City. Liverpool is a big club gone off the boil, City was a smaller club being transformed into a big one. It's a very different story. We were an attractive proposition because a lot of stuff was in our favour - a ready made stadium, an owner who wanted to sell up in a fire sale, and a relatively 'clean' brand that Abu Dhabi could do something with. A club like Liverpool or United is much harder to do something with as a brand, because it's already so well established, which can work against you. But still, I am saying that IF Liverpool were as lucky as us in getting a similar type of owner, then I have little doubt they'd rapidly increase their revenues too, and surpass us. They just don't have that right now with FSG's pockets.

Again though I remind you of FFP, it would slow them down you need to check just how far behind they are in revenue.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deloitte_Football_Money_League

Arsenal currently have a bigger stadium than us that sells out(not even mentioning the ticket prices), they have a bigger worldwide fanbase and brand recognition too... look where they are.

You're oversimplifying pretty much everything, from revenue streams, to success on the pitch, brand perceptions etc. I'm not claiming to be an expert in it but clearly you're not either.