Relaxation of FFP rules due to Covid-19

Greggery Peccary said:
So you spending over a billion in the last decade which dwarfs all other transfer activity has had nothing to do with you being successful? Of course you need more than just money, but you seem pretty set on this angle. I can only imagine what the money men are thinking when you’ve spent nearly four times as much as we have in that time and a team that spent far less oversaw a fifty point swing at the top of the table. Don’t know why you want to argue such a fatuous point, but I’ve just realised who I’m replying to which makes sense and as such I’ll leave it there.
Click to expand...
You argue that Liverpool haven't spent big by focusing on Klopp's time and dismiss any player he hasn't signed when looking at spend. Yet here you back up your stance by citing a decade of spending at City ???
 
stonerblue said:
You argue that Liverpool haven't spent big by focusing on Klopp's time and dismiss any player he hasn't signed when looking at spend. Yet here you back up your stance by citing a decade of spending at City ???
Click to expand...

Liverpool got together with United, Arsenal, Spurs and Everton to carve up a tv deal that gave them a bigger share than the rest of the clubs in the Premier League back in 1992. They enjoyed a period in the 2000s when champions league qualification was a closed shop of them United, Arsenal and Chelsea.

How was any club going to break that monopoly? It won’t be by playing nicely and developing players that the big teams could pick off when they showed promise. Big investment is the only way that the gap can be closed, City had to spend in a decade to erode away the advantage that the likes of United, Liverpool and Arsenal had for over 30 years.

Let’s not kid ourselves that Liverpool winning the league is some magical fairytale like Napoli winning seria a in the 80s. It was bound to happen and should have happened a lot sooner than now with the loaded dice they have had in their favour for 3 decades.
 
Greggery Peccary said:
I don’t think you understand how the ownership of Liverpool works with FSG. They don’t take one penny out of us, the money that comes in belongs to the football club.
Click to expand...
They've lent you money that you're repaying, which was with interest a while back but I think is now interest free. so they're not taking money out via dividends and they don't appear to be taking money via consultancy agreements. However you owe them over £250m so if yu're sold, they'll take that £250m back, on top of any moeny for the shares they hold as well.
 
feedmpenzaandhewillscore said:
Liverpool got together with United, Arsenal, Spurs and Everton to carve up a tv deal that gave them a bigger share than the rest of the clubs in the Premier League back in 1992. They enjoyed a period in the 2000s when champions league qualification was a closed shop of them United, Arsenal and Chelsea.

How was any club going to break that monopoly? It won’t be by playing nicely and developing players that the big teams could pick off when they showed promise. Big investment is the only way that the gap can be closed, City had to spend in a decade to erode away the advantage that the likes of United, Liverpool and Arsenal had for over 30 years.

Let’s not kid ourselves that Liverpool winning the league is some magical fairytale like Napoli winning seria a in the 80s. It was bound to happen and should have happened a lot sooner than now with the loaded dice they have had in their favour for 3 decades.
Click to expand...
I think the fact that being able to change financial rules in any sector of business is an advantage.
Despite this our owners Business Plan managed to produce golden years for City so that in itself is a massive achievement.
The fact that any history club has at last managed on the field competition should have been expected but at least Pool have done it.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
They've lent you money that you're repaying, which was with interest a while back but I think is now interest free. so they're not taking money out via dividends and they don't appear to be taking money via consultancy agreements. However you owe them over £250m so if yu're sold, they'll take that £250m back, on top of any moeny for the shares they hold as well.
Click to expand...

That £250m was given to us as a part interest loan when the deal was completed. That has long since been paid back, the info is in the company accounts. Again, to reiterate, I don’t see them as some kind of benevolent guardian who sees us as their ward. They, like all owners, are dirty, grubby little parasites who are only interested in what’s in it for them. None of them give a shit about the fans, a few cursory gestures will satisfy the masses for the most part.
 
feedmpenzaandhewillscore said:
Liverpool got together with United, Arsenal, Spurs and Everton to carve up a tv deal that gave them a bigger share than the rest of the clubs in the Premier League back in 1992. They enjoyed a period in the 2000s when champions league qualification was a closed shop of them United, Arsenal and Chelsea.

How was any club going to break that monopoly? It won’t be by playing nicely and developing players that the big teams could pick off when they showed promise. Big investment is the only way that the gap can be closed, City had to spend in a decade to erode away the advantage that the likes of United, Liverpool and Arsenal had for over 30 years.

Let’s not kid ourselves that Liverpool winning the league is some magical fairytale like Napoli winning seria a in the 80s. It was bound to happen and should have happened a lot sooner than now with the loaded dice they have had in their favour for 3 decades.
Click to expand...

You talk about that period in the 2000s like it was rigged towards those clubs. The fact is that all of the clubs mentioned either won the CL, were on a final or a combination of both. And due to the cyclical nature of European football, it was England’s turn in the big yellow thing in the sky. Much like it is now. Like then, all the current CL teams are killing Europe at the moment, nobody wants to draw the English.
Again, I don’t really have a problem with you spending money per se. It’s part of the modern game whether we like it or not. But let’s not pretend that yours and PSG’s spending hasn’t remodelled the transfer markets here and abroad. You personally have spent more money than any club on this planet in the last decade, that’s a fact. Again, there’s nothing wrong with that but don’t say that it’s the ONLY way that you were able to catch up. That’s certainly not true.
 
Greggery Peccary said:
You talk about that period in the 2000s like it was rigged towards those clubs. The fact is that all of the clubs mentioned either won the CL, were on a final or a combination of both. And due to the cyclical nature of European football, it was England’s turn in the big yellow thing in the sky. Much like it is now. Like then, all the current CL teams are killing Europe at the moment, nobody wants to draw the English.
Again, I don’t really have a problem with you spending money per se. It’s part of the modern game whether we like it or not. But let’s not pretend that yours and PSG’s spending hasn’t remodelled the transfer markets here and abroad. You personally have spent more money than any club on this planet in the last decade, that’s a fact. Again, there’s nothing wrong with that but don’t say that it’s the ONLY way that you were able to catch up. That’s certainly not true.
Click to expand...

The CL cash trough the sky4 cartel snorted in year after year made it virtually impossible for any other team to break into therefore making it impossible to catch up.
 
Shirley said:
The CL cash trough the sky4 cartel snorted in year after year made it virtually impossible for any other team to break into therefore making it impossible to catch up.
Click to expand...

How many of those teams, with mainly CL money chugging through the coffers, are doing well now? The reason United, Arsenal and Spurs, Chelsea etc aren’t up on their haunches is because football is cyclical in nature. That’s how it works at the top end - just having money isn’t enough. You’re one of the richest clubs on the planet but it’s the footballing people you appoint that make the difference. The Man City of 2014 wouldn’t get near the Guardiola team, nowhere near. And Leicester and others have proved you don’t always have to spend big money. Klopp’s £300m net in five years or so backs that up. That doesn’t invalidate what you’ve achieved, far from it, but it clearly proves there are many ways to break up those on top.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.