Liverpool 2016/17

[Metalartin]

Ozil and Sanchez weren't mega names. Ozil was the bigger name. But, they've won nothing in recent years either. City on the other hand have had massive media exposure in recent years, and winning the PL twice has really put us on the map and made our brand exciting. Arsenal make more from merchandising and matchday revenue than we do, we make our money from other streams (some of which are arguably questionable, depending on who you choose to believe!) - namely broadcasting and commercial. I would also argue that our choice of signing in recent years like Aguero, Tevez, Toure, Silva etc have a stronger appeal than Arsenal's - but it's debatable, for sure.

Of course it's complex, and we're doing fantastically well, but I think we have to accept that levels of investment necessary have been exceptional, and far greater than most other 'investors' could manage.

They say you need to speculate to accumulate, and because we've been able to speculate far more than others, that's why we've accumulated. Others simply haven't been able to speculate to the same degree (or have been unwilling to do so, because of the risks involved).

Both were well known highly respected the world over... there were plenty who wanted Sanchez before he moved to Barca his stock only increased after that I don't get how you could even argue with what I said there. Also Toure I don't really believe at the time everyone else in the prem knew what we were getting in him they said we overpaid and he was only here for the money etc Silva they said wouldn't cut it in the prem and was not seen as a marquee signing at the time he earned his respect while at City. Aguero yes when he signed he was seen as one of the hottest prospects a young world class striker.

 

[FanchesterCity]

I get what your saying but that's profits not revenue. As you said we have smart owners who've been able to grow our brand and revenue streams but there was not a lot stopping others getting creative either, that's being good at business not just throwing money around. United clearly have mastered a lot of it already looking at where they still are despite having no CL football and not challenging for the title for a while.

I think that's a twofold thing - some clubs have probably sat on their arses, while we've been very creative and secondly, we've had the money upfront to build things like a 300m training complex that's attracted sponsors like Etihad - whilst other clubs haven't had 300m lying around to do that.

Of course I know Etihad sponsored us before the complex, but they were always privy to the notion of the Etihad Campus, and bought into it early on knowing the Sheik wasn't fooling around and would deliver on his promise.

If you look at like for like deals, like kit sponsors, Liverpool and United are getting much better deals than us - we've just been more diverse. if you're a neutral, it's probably fair to have a little scepticism about some of the deals we have.

 

[FanchesterCity]

Ozil and Sanchez weren't mega names. Ozil was the bigger name. But, they've won nothing in recent years either. City on the other hand have had massive media exposure in recent years, and winning the PL twice has really put us on the map and made our brand exciting. Arsenal make more from merchandising and matchday revenue than we do, we make our money from other streams (some of which are arguably questionable, depending on who you choose to believe!) - namely broadcasting and commercial. I would also argue that our choice of signing in recent years like Aguero, Tevez, Toure, Silva etc have a stronger appeal than Arsenal's - but it's debatable, for sure.

Of course it's complex, and we're doing fantastically well, but I think we have to accept that levels of investment necessary have been exceptional, and far greater than most other 'investors' could manage.

They say you need to speculate to accumulate, and because we've been able to speculate far more than others, that's why we've accumulated. Others simply haven't been able to speculate to the same degree (or have been unwilling to do so, because of the risks involved).

 

[Metalartin]

I think that's a twofold thing - some clubs have probably sat on their arses, while we've been very creative and secondly, we've had the money upfront to build things like a 300m training complex that's attracted sponsors like Etihad - whilst other clubs haven't had 300m lying around to do that.

Of course I know Etihad sponsored us before the complex, but they were always privy to the notion of the Etihad Campus, and bought into it early on knowing the Sheik wasn't fooling around and would deliver on his promise.

If you look at like for like deals, like kit sponsors, Liverpool and United are getting much better deals than us - we've just been more diverse. if you're a neutral, it's probably fair to have a little scepticism about some of the deals we have.

What we get from the Etihad sponsorship is less than what Arsenal get from Emirates from what I've read which deals are you referring to?

 

[FanchesterCity]

Both were well known highly respected the world over... there were plenty who wanted Sanchez before he moved to Barca his stock only increased after that I don't get how you could even argue with what I said there. Also Toure I don't really believe at the time everyone else in the prem knew what we were getting in him they said we overpaid and he was only here for the money etc Silva they said wouldn't cut it in the prem and was not seen as a marquee signing at the time he earned his respect while at City. Aguero yes when he signed he was seen as one of the hottest prospects a young world class striker.

I'm not arguing that our signings were huge names at the time, I'm arguing that during the course of their careers at City, they have become big names, more so than Arsenal's players.
Sanchez and Ozil were Spanish giant 'rejects' (imo) as was Toure for that matter, but Toure's gone on to become a huge name whilst Ozil and Sanchez haven't gained a great deal in stature (Sanchez has to a reasonable degree).
I maintain Ozil was the bigger name (over Sanchez) for Arsenal, but still plenty of debate about how good he is. Many would now argue Sanchez is the more desirable player. I agree his stock as increased. No debate there.

 

[FanchesterCity]

What we get from the Etihad sponsorship is less than what Arsenal get from Emirates from what I've read which deals are you referring to?

If you're a cynic, the deals with Etihad, Etisalat, TCA, AABar, First Gulf Bank etc will all be questioned. On the one hand, of course we're bound to have a strong influence in the middle east, but on the other hand, we're open to the accusation that deals are questionable. The Etihad deal was strongly questioned when it first happened, and still gets brought up today despite it being lesser than many other deals - but still, the point remains, we were able to get such deals BECAUSE of the promise we offered - a promise not available to many other clubs. If Liverpool were able to build a new stadium and a campus they too would likely attract even better deals - but they are unable to. If Arsenal could renegotiate their deal and throw in an entire campus too, their deal might be better still.
Our Etihad deal was 400m over 10 years, Arsenal's Emirates deal as 90m over 15 years (since been renegotiated for 2014-19 to 150m).

Our global partners are sponsoring multiple clubs - with Arsenal, they're not. That's part of the appeal, and that's a direct benefit of us being able to afford multiple clubs, which Arsenal can't.
There's a correlation between what we've invested and the levels of corporate sponsorship we're getting. I don't think we'd be getting the same deals had we not won the PL twice, and didn't have multiple clubs, and didn't some of the players we have.

 

[CityFan94]

The players look exhausted, there's not the same intensity and aggression in their play - which is a huge part of how they play.

Conceding too many goals, no top striker, no plan B.

Liverpool will be lucky to finish top four at this rate.

 

[JPBB]

The players look exhausted, there's not the same intensity and aggression in their play - which is a huge part of how they play.

Conceding too many goals, no top striker, no plan B.

Liverpool will be lucky to finish top four at this rate.

They will be lucky to finish 6th.

Perhaps Everton can catch them

That 6 year Klopp contract after an 8th place finish looks like madness now

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Go on lad, pick yer hooter on Live TV...

That is absolutely disgusting. You never get any decent purchase unless you use your index finger.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

The players look exhausted, there's not the same intensity and aggression in their play - which is a huge part of how they play.

Conceding too many goals, no top striker, no plan B.

Liverpool will be lucky to finish top four at this rate.

Yes, agree with this. I said to a scouse mate months ago that Liverpool's 100mph from the off will eventually
take it's toll. They were blowing everyone away, but now have run out of puff.