Henry comments on further expansion of Anfield

This topic contains 106 replies, has 17 voices, and was last updated by  gingerlfc 7 years, 6 months ago.

Viewing 20 posts - 61 through 80 (of 107 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1247847
    j c
    j c
    Participant
    • :

    SoS membership is what, 10,000 people at the most?

    How many fans are there of LFC around the world. Millions…

    #1247868

    gingerlfc
    Participant
    • :

    Yo certainly havnt beaten me in any arguement JC.
    I’ve backed my arguement with facts and figures while yours is opinion, assuptions and lies.
    It’s clear you down want to believe anything I say so I’m suggesting you do the most simplest of Internet searches to find out all you want about SoS without the info coming from me. You don’t want to do that though because you know you’ll be caught out. You have this obsession with them but refuse to do the simplest research on them. I encourage the rest of yous to do that research and you’ll see what JC has been saying is bullshit.

    Setting that aside a minute, whether the redevelopment of the Annie Rd end would be financially viable or not (it is) there is absolutely no call for the owners to make any reference whatsoever to the fans and their demands for frozen ticket prices being an obstacle for them redeveloping it. It’s unprofessional, unethical and just cheap.

    THAT is the crux of this matter.
    THAT is what I’ve been consistently saying all day.

    #1247895
    j c
    j c
    Participant
    • :

    Financially viable is quite a subjective term ginger. It’s for whoever is paying for it to decide if it’s viable.

    Henry didn’t mention the fans, not once. So why get so worked up about something he didn’t even say.

    You also tried to say FSG is unable or unwilling to do further redevelopment, he didn’t say that either. They made it quite clear that it’s something they are looking into.

    I’ve got no agenda against SoS. I don’t get paid to bash on then. SoS on the other hand, if they pay themselves any salary then doesn’t that mean technically, they are being paid to bash FSG?

    #1247913

    gingerlfc
    Participant
    • :

    Henry made reference to the “ticket issue” which obviously by implication involves the fans. You, yourself, as pointed out already, interpreted it that way also along with most other people.

    It’s crystal clear you have some problem with SoS. A blind man on a galloping horse riding at the dead of night can see that.
    Shit, you even say they’re paid to bash FSG in your last post without providing any evidence whatsoever.
    You said earlier they lie to further their own agenda without providing any evidence or answering what lies.

    They are regulated by the Financial Serivces Authority.
    SoS publish their accounts for every year since their inception.
    It’s all there for any one of us to look over.
    Looking that freely available info up would completely scupper your accusations against them though eh?!

    #1247937
    j c
    j c
    Participant
    • :

    If I’m wrong in assuming they take some salary (which is perfectly legal) out of the coffers, then I’ll happily admit I was wrong about that particular point. But I get the impression that you don’t know either. You haven’t exactly cleared that up, despite supposedly having all the answers at your fingertips.

    Yeah so even you admit he didn’t mention the fans. Nor say they weren’t doing it. Well what was the point making all this fuss then?
    He said the ticket price cap has a financial impact on expansion, that’s fair enough and competely true. It was true yesterday, it was true before JWH opened his mouth, and will still be true tomorrow.

    I’m not going to get worked up over him saying the obvious.

    #1247952

    gingerlfc
    Participant
    • :

    Here’s a crazy thought JC, stop assuming stuff about SoS and actually fact check them for yourself. You know how to work Google I bet, knock yerself out! Their info is easily accessible, ive looked at it. Have you?!

    If you want to pathetically go down the semantic line feel free but we all know Henry was referencing the ticket fiasco last year and the fans protest about it. If you think it’s ok with the owners publicly putting the responsibility of them possibly not refurbishing the Annie Rd end on the fans…..can’t have their cake and eat it to use your own words….that’s fine.
    I’ll show solidarity with my fellow fan instead who pays out plenty each year to follow the Reds.

    If they don’t want to build it, don’t build it then but don’t don’t pretend to blame the fans for that. That’s their decision not to do it, they have to live with their decisions.

    #1248003

    NotoriousBingo
    Participant
    • :

    Is this really an issue?

    Of course the protest and the outcome of the protest is going to affect their plans with the stadium. That´s not something that is hard to understand, their plans were based on projection plans with the tickets costing a certain amount. They needed scrap or chance their plans for the whole stadium because of it.

    and IMHO I thought SoS were a bit overboard with their protest, FSG did lower the tickets for a lot of fans and SoS were wrong to criticize the 1000 pound tickets.
    Honestly I would pay up to 2000 pounds for the right ticket to Anfield but having said that I don´t think ticket prices for the average fan should go much higher than 20 pounds but that´s not the going rate in the Premierleague.

    If FSG would continue to develop Anfield right away it would hurt the clubs ambition with the playing squad, they money comes from somewhere and it would be from out transfer budget. In five years when the new stand has been paid for I would still be very surprised if another stand was not developed.

    #1248006
    j c
    j c
    Participant
    • :

    It will probably still get built, and I won’t be getting the pitchfork out over it any time soon. But suit yourself ginger.

    SoS only represent their members, they don’t represent ‘all fans’. It even says so on their website in the FAQ…
    Along with the question, “Are we anti-FSG?”

    Hmm, they say “no” but I’ve seen people chanting “greedy yanks” at their ‘demonstrations’. But I’ll leave that one there…

    I did check out their finances by the way, and they do indeed spend some on wages, a good amount on travel and other expenses. About 20k deficit in 2014 and 2013, so not healthy financially. Maybe the anti-FSG stuff (not shown on the records yet) has led to an upturn in fortunes though? Guess we can find out when they publish records for 2016.

    If you care to take up a gentleman’s wager, I will bet they had more income this year, to back my sincere (no agenda) belief that anti FSG sentiments play into their hands.

    Will you take me up on that bet?
    Probably not… you’ll just keep telling me to “do my research”. 😉

    #1248009
    j c
    j c
    Participant
    • :

    By the way ginger sorry if I’m being harsh here, I just would like to see more solidarity sometimes between the fans and the owners.

    They’ve been pretty good for LFC and are taking us in the right direction.

    #1248015
    MrMakaveli
    MrMakaveli
    Blocked
    • :

    I have to say that on page 2, JC, you’re just being rude in post after post. Not a bad word was said to you but you continuously threw mud around. Yes Ginger made some mistakes in his calculation, he owned up to them. the mistakes werent small but for me they didn’t totally undermine his position, yet you were talking to him like he were dogshit.

    That kinda stuff is part of the reason that I left the thread for a few hours. That’s no way to carry on.

    #1248018
    MrMakaveli
    MrMakaveli
    Blocked
    • :

    I went on to read more and it just goes on and on. What a complete tool.

    #1248027
    j c
    j c
    Participant
    • :

    Fair enough Mak, if you want to call people names rather than debate.

    #1248036
    MrMakaveli
    MrMakaveli
    Blocked
    • :

    It certainly is what I prefer to do when the debate at hand is a constant stream of condescending tripe.

    #1248042
    gabara
    gabara
    Participant
    • :

    As taken from guardian:
    • Income Gate and match-day income £59m; TV and broadcasting £123m; Commercial £116m
    • Wage bill 5th highest in League £166m, up from £144m in 2014
    • Net debt £95m

    We have made the most from selling players since 2010 and we have not spent as much as other rivals during the same period. Our net debt could very well be covered by the main stand naming rights yet to be announced. If FSG could find no other way to further maximise our assets in the shortest time possible, will they sell up?

    #1248060
    j c
    j c
    Participant
    • :

    I could be in the minority here, but I think FSG do care about the football side and winning trophies. Even though it looks like a good time to sell on paper… with things looking promising on the pitch, I reckon they’ll stick around, hopefully long enough to win some trophies.

    @MrMak I don’t like seeing people slander the owners, in my view it’s out of order. If the owners ever genuinely say, “because of the fans, we will not redevelop the stadium” or the owners ever genuinely siphon funds out of LFC (which can be proved easily enough, like when H&G did it), then it would be a different story… and my attitude would be different.

    #1248267

    Sean the sailor
    Participant
    • :

    Jc accuses people of having an agendda againest certain players etc when he clearly has an agenda againest SOS. His opinion is always right when he clearly talks some amount of rubbish

    Fairplay ginger, very simple points to follow and spot on. Totally agree

    #1248381

    gingerlfc
    Participant
    • :

    Bingo- did the SoS led protest (not everyone who protested were SoS btw) help stop FSG gauge another £2mil a year from the already hard pressed fans? Yes it did, great work!
    The club had held several meetings with fans in the months previous to the announcement and ignored all their concerns. They proceeded with their plans to charge the VAST majority of fans more for their same seats ignoring their wishes.
    FSG bought the club for approx £300mil. It’s been recently valued at £1.1 billion. Even if that’s overestimated by a few hundred mil they still have made 100s and 100s of millions of pounds profit on their investment.
    To build the new Annie Rd stand is estimated to cost £50mil so unless they WANT to take money out of the transfer kitty they don’t NEED to, to rebuild the stand.

    Im not anti FSG. Im not pro FSG. I’ve defended them many times on these pages mostly around accusations that they don’t invest any of their own money which is patently nonsense since they gave the club an interest free loan to rebuild the main stand. However I will criticise them also when necessary especially when they try to focus on the fans. FSG are nothing but trustees of this club. They will leave at some stage and by the looks of it with a massive profit. However the fans will remain as will the club. That’s where I have my allegiances.

    My point is though, regardless if they build the stand or not, don’t try to push the responsibility for them not building it onto the fans not wanting to pay more for tickets. As I said previously its disingenuous when FSG could afford to build it no bother.

    #1248405
    sandsthfc
    sandsthfc
    Participant
    • :

    Gabara, not sure where you found numbers to support your claim:

    “We have made the most from selling players since 2010 and we have not spent as much as other rivals during the same period.”

    Tottenham for one have made significantly more from players sales in that time period and due to a couple of barren transfer windows have virtually broken even. Chelsea have also made more from player sales than Liverpool.

    It is hard finding links to support a lot of these kinds of debates but I found one which looks consistent with general media snippets:

    http://www.transferleague.co.uk/premier-league-last-five-seasons/transfer-league-tables/premier-league-table-last-five-seasons

    Here you will see that Liverpool are actually in the top 6 of net spend over the past 5 seasons and the top 4 for purchases.

    #1248408

    gingerlfc
    Participant
    • :

    So JC you’ve eventually decided to do the teeny tiniest bit of research on SoS by visiting their own website. Wasn’t hard was it?!
    So the SoS website must have been covered in anti-FSG rhetoric demanding they leave the club with lies told about them???
    No?!!!! Amazing!!

    Surely after all your accusations about them there must have been overwhelming evidence to support your claims?
    Again no! Amazing!!

    You want to make a bet that SoS anti-FSG agenda (still no evidence to prove that btw, in fact YOUVE actually offered evidence that they’re not anti-FSG) will increase their coffers???
    How would you ever go about proving that link??
    You can’t even offer evidence that they are anti-FSG NOW, nevermind directly correlating their increase in their coffers to any bias against them in the future.
    It’s simply yet another bizzarre statement you’ve made on this thread to add to the others.

    Recently there’s been plenty of goodwill towards the owners due to the new stand being opened, appointing a quality manager in Klopp and decent results but it was FSG that came out and made their statement that has dissolved some of that goodwill. As pointed out previously they didn’t need to say anything and certainly not bring the fans in to it.

    And if anyone’s slandering/libelling anyone it’s you with your pet obsession SoS!

    #1248417

    gingerlfc
    Participant
    • :

    Sands- not sure if that’s directed to me and if it is im not sure how it relates to what I’ve been saying.

Viewing 20 posts - 61 through 80 (of 107 total)

You must be logged in to reply this topic.