Re: Summer Transfer Window 2012-Rumor Crazy Months!

by Fahim89 Tue Jul 24, 2012 12:19 pm

Honestly i really hate this when a discussion of us being "Financially struggling" arises . . cause in no way are we struggling. . The 49m loss we incurred the cost of letting go Roy Hodgson and his team for whom we had to pay for the entire year plus our debts came down from more then 200m to 49m. Many top clubs have debts or losses far far above 100m mark. So this discussion about financially weakened position is totally illogical at this moment when we are actually improving financially as every day goes by.

Secondly transfers should be commanded or decided according to the wants of the manager & who he thinks is suitable for his plans. NOT SELL FIRST THEN BUY! So if a player fits in the system i am pretty sure he will try and get that player. So no point in discussing SELL THEN BUY!

Currently players that are being targeted are more of lower wages because we there is need to cut down on wage bill . . that's it for me its a little to simple to be made complicated. Very Happy

by Art Morte Tue Jul 24, 2012 1:00 pm

Fahim89 wrote:Honestly i really hate this when a discussion of us being "Financially struggling" arises . . cause in no way are we struggling.

Depends how do you mean 'struggling'.

We are not struggling to keep our operations going.
We are not struggling to pay wages and bills.
We are not struggling to buy players - apparently.

We are struggling to match the spending power /revenue of Manchester United and City, Chelsea and Arsenal.
We are struggling to break-even.

And if we don't sell first and buy then, we will be struggling with our wage bill. Our wages-to-turnover ratio is already above 70%.

by Fahim89 Tue Jul 24, 2012 1:14 pm

Art Morte wrote:
Fahim89 wrote:Honestly i really hate this when a discussion of us being "Financially struggling" arises . . cause in no way are we struggling.

Depends how do you mean 'struggling'.

We are not struggling to keep our operations going.
We are not struggling to pay wages and bills.
We are not struggling to buy players - apparently.

We are struggling to match the spending power /revenue of Manchester United and City, Chelsea and Arsenal.
We are struggling to break-even.

And if we don't sell first and buy then, we will be struggling with our wage bill. Our wages-to-turnover ratio is already above 70%.

Manchester United have 5 times the debt we have & we would never be able to match the inhuman spending capacity of Chelsea & City (cause only PSG have tried & succeeded Razz

) . . . not matching the spending capacity of Arsenal??? Are you serious?

Now losses & matching spending power are two different areas entirely . . so i am not sure which you are talking about. Also with spending comes expenditure cause buying a player like Aguero for example will add to the wage bill immensely. The question is are we willing to do that? I guess not.

Plus the debt in the times of Hick & Gillete and now is ENTIRELY different which is a huge positive i believe.

Finally i am not against selling at all but i feel the two should not be related when the new manager is trying to groom the squad according to his needs.

by Art Morte Tue Jul 24, 2012 2:06 pm

Grooming and growing are different things.

We shouldn't just buy players Rodgers fancies if we don't manage getting rid of players we don't need but who do have a significant impact on the wage bill. We are not owned by a sugar daddy and if we let our wage bill grow too big, there will be trouble in the medium-to-long-term. Just look at AC Milan, for instance. For years Berlusconi bankrolled them and they got themselves an enormous wage bill. Now Berlusconi has stopped throwing money away and they're cash-strapped.

by RedOranje Tue Jul 24, 2012 10:39 pm

Allen looking more and more likely. Still seems an odd move for me, but I'll wait and see how the window and season pan out.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-fc/liverpool-fc-news/2012/07/25/liverpool-fc-closing-in-on-deal-to-bring-swansea-city-and-wales-midfielder-joe-allen-to-anfield-100252-31466516/#ixzz21ZdyVxLC

by Red Alert Wed Jul 25, 2012 6:16 am

Get. The. *bleep*. In. :D

Allen is absolute beast.

by Red Alert Wed Jul 25, 2012 6:20 am

Art Morte wrote:Depends how do you mean 'struggling'.

We are not struggling to keep our operations going.
We are not struggling to pay wages and bills.
We are not struggling to buy players - apparently.

We are struggling to match the spending power /revenue of Manchester United and City, Chelsea and Arsenal.
We are not. A quote from Tom Werner himself:
This is a very financially strong organisation, LFC. We, in the past, I believe – not just in the previous season, but in the past – we have overspent for players and the results were not what we have expected.

"We do have the resources to be competitive, but at the same time, we are going to operate in a way that will be a self-sustaining model.

"I think you will see that you don't necessarily have to go out and spend £50 million on one player to see success."

We are struggling to break-even. [Based on what? The "losses" will be for the sacking of Dalgish and Commolli.]
And if we don't sell first and buy then, we will be struggling with our wage bill. Our wages-to-turnover ratio is already above 70%.[Hence get rid of the likes of Cole, Adam etc. These normally get done at the end of the transfer window.]

by RedOranje Wed Jul 25, 2012 11:13 pm

WE'RE LINKED WITH A BACK-UP KEEPER! OUR WINDOW IS COMPLETE!

On another note, that Swansea statement makes the club and Rodgers look very, very bad over the Allen approach.

by stevieg8 Thu Jul 26, 2012 12:04 am

RedOranje wrote:WE'RE LINKED WITH A BACK-UP KEEPER! OUR WINDOW IS COMPLETE!

On another note, that Swansea statement makes the club and Rodgers look very, very bad over the Allen approach.

If we were violating the agreement we had with them, wouldn't they just be well within their rights to tell us to f*** off?

by RedOranje Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:46 am

By all accounts they initially did, but Allen had his head turned... I wouldn't be particularly surprised if they brought us up on tapping up charges, to be honest. It would be just our luck to get stuck in that kind of shite.

by McAgger Thu Jul 26, 2012 5:15 am

WTF is going with Doni? He's not with the squad in Boston and he didn't have any international duties to deserve extra rest. Has BR forgotten he's still under contract with us??

by RedOranje Thu Jul 26, 2012 5:45 am

He's going to be sold, hence the interest in De Vries.

by Emaharg Thu Jul 26, 2012 8:50 am

Weird situation with Allen considering he has a clause that X clubs can approach him for 15mil, yet BR isn't supposed to go after Swansea players for 12 months.
Situation should come down to Allen.

by Red Alert Thu Jul 26, 2012 12:19 pm

As much as I'd hate to say it, we shouldn't be "nice" to any other club - we should look after ourselves and ourselves only.

by Guest Thu Jul 26, 2012 4:53 pm

nice guys finish last.

rip ynwa....i hope we become the "c*ntiest" of clubs

by RedOranje Thu Jul 26, 2012 7:40 pm

I don't.

A football club, like a person, can be successful while still being respectful. There's a difference between bidding for players that clubs want to keep, and playing the game, and breaking a written agreement with a club and tapping up players. The former I am just fine with. If a club comes out and gets upset with us because we went after one of their better best players that's their issue. However, when the club do their transfer business in the media it bothers me. I don't like it when clubs do it to us (Barca with Masch) so I don't feel comfortable when the club do it to others. The written agreement part should really not need to be explained. That's the type of thing that can land to club in hot water legally. It's just not a good idea and it lacks any and all class.

by Fahim89 Thu Jul 26, 2012 8:47 pm

Summer Transfer Window 2012-Rumor Crazy Months! - Page 25 AywD-aBCcAAafAh

Bring him home Luis . . :bow:

by stevieg8 Thu Jul 26, 2012 9:11 pm

RedOranje wrote:I don't.

A football club, like a person, can be successful while still being respectful. There's a difference between bidding for players that clubs want to keep, and playing the game, and breaking a written agreement with a club and tapping up players. The former I am just fine with. If a club comes out and gets upset with us because we went after one of their better best players that's their issue. However, when the club do their transfer business in the media it bothers me. I don't like it when clubs do it to us (Barca with Masch) so I don't feel comfortable when the club do it to others. The written agreement part should really not need to be explained. That's the type of thing that can land to club in hot water legally. It's just not a good idea and it lacks any and all class.

I agree with the sentiment, but not sure about the interpretation of this specific situation... The only statement about Allen I've seen from the club was made well after the first reports in the media. If anyone turned Allen's head, it wasn't Rodgers - at least not through the public. If he did cause Allen to want to come, it was privately through the bids, which Swansea would be well within their rights to reject and not inform Allen himself of. Instead, it leaked somehow and he got wind of it through the press, and after a week and a half of speculation Rodgers responded to questions. I'm not incredibly in favor of him talking in the press, which he's been doing more than Dalglish, and if it turns out the leak about the bid came from us, I'd agree with you wholeheartedly. But that's not certain, so at the moment all we have is a club frustrated they're losing one of their top players, which I think would've happened with or without our interest.

by RedOranje Thu Jul 26, 2012 9:31 pm

In the case of the Allen situation, my concern is over the fact that we apparently broke a written agreement not to approach Swansea players. The statement about doing business through the media is more of a general statement in relation to Sepi's wish for the club to act more twat-ish in the market.

by donttreadonred Fri Jul 27, 2012 1:00 am

So Twitter has lit up with reports of Gaston Ramirez's agent being in England for talks with a PL club. Many automatically assuming it's Liverpool. Unless I see a more reliable source than the Metro, I refuse to believe that the club is us. I would love to see it happen, but I think it's a combination of previous interest (under totally different management staff) and his national link to Suarez and Coates. Nothing more, unfortunately.

http://www.metro.co.uk/sport/football/906352-gaston-ramirezs-agent-arrives-in-england-for-liverpool-talks

by Fahim89 Fri Jul 27, 2012 7:42 am

donttreadonred wrote:So Twitter has lit up with reports of Gaston Ramirez's agent being in England for talks with a PL club. Many automatically assuming it's Liverpool. Unless I see a more reliable source than the Metro, I refuse to believe that the club is us. I would love to see it happen, but I think it's a combination of previous interest (under totally different management staff) and his national link to Suarez and Coates. Nothing more, unfortunately.

http://www.metro.co.uk/sport/football/906352-gaston-ramirezs-agent-arrives-in-england-for-liverpool-talks

The rumors was up on ESPN too . . .

Now The Times reporting . . WHU have made a bid of 2m+full wage loan offer & if they stay in top flight they will pay 16m pounds next summer for Andy Carroll.

by Red Alert Fri Jul 27, 2012 2:49 pm

Schweini wrote:nice guys finish last.

rip ynwa....i hope we become the "c*ntiest" of clubs

When did I die? Sad

Why am I being RIP'd? D:

RedOranje wrote:I don't.

A football club, like a person, can be successful while still being respectful. There's a difference between bidding for players that clubs want to keep, and playing the game, and breaking a written agreement with a club and tapping up players. The former I am just fine with. If a club comes out and gets upset with us because we went after one of their better best players that's their issue. However, when the club do their transfer business in the media it bothers me. I don't like it when clubs do it to us (Barca with Masch) so I don't feel comfortable when the club do it to others. The written agreement part should really not need to be explained. That's the type of thing that can land to club in hot water legally. It's just not a good idea and it lacks any and all class.

I agree with you - but in terms of transfers it's time we stop feeling 'generous' and get on with it. We paniced with the signing of Carroll, and that signing help build a competitor club who's actually challenging for a Europe spot against us! [Personally believe we'll easily overtake them next season, mind.]

We also felt 'generous' with Villa and spent 20m big ones for Downing which was a complete waste tbh.

Not sure why I keep going with generous but it seem's like it fits with everything at the moment!

We've also been too "nice" to other clubs and have got nothing in return... we're hailed as racists, cheats and glory hunters from other club supporters, so they can go do themselves! Not even going to mention the *bleep* abuse of being "murderers" when I wasn't even alive when the whole Heysel disaster happened. Evil or Very Mad

by Red Alert Fri Jul 27, 2012 2:53 pm

Oh, and the "agreement" for not poaching Swansea players unless another bid from another club was made. With Arsenal, both Mancs interested, Allen is fair game imo and I couldn't care less where Swansea finished. I just want to see us get the 19th already! Not once seen us lift the premiership, and I want to experience that feeling. Most of my mates go for City and United, and gloat... and if Rodgers feels that Allen is the right way to go, he has my full backing!

Sorry if none of my posts make sense, but I only usually come to this forum unless I'm blind. Just proves you guys are awesome. Wink

by stevieg8 Fri Jul 27, 2012 2:54 pm

Reports saying that West Ham is bidding 17 mil for Carroll, other reports saying 2 mil for loan with option to buy at 16 for next summer and full wages. Essentially confirmed by West Ham's chairman's son stating on twitter that they're shattering the club's transfer record with a bid they're putting in. Liverpool will supposedly reject the offer.

If we're saying no to 17 mil, I'd take it as a good sign he's staying for the year.

by RedOranje Fri Jul 27, 2012 3:35 pm

The agreement was that a player became open to a Liverpool bid once another club bid on him and he "was placed on the market", not just when a club showed interest in him. I'm perfectly fine with playing hardball in terms of negotiations, and trying to get a good price and all that. I'm accepting of the club commenting on a transfer target after the other club has already made a statement on the subject confirming interest and/or there are other extenuating circumstances (see Allen and Dempsey respectively). I'm find commenting on a potential target out of the blue far less acceptable (not that this has happened, just clarifying my position), but I only find it dissatisfactory, rather than upsetting. But breaking a verbal agreement, much less a written one, is something that does upset me. It is not only morally problematic but can result in the club getting into legal trouble. It's not a risk that needs be taken or insult (to Swansea) that needs be done. We have a great number of CMs already, and even if we did need one surely there are enough options (Strootman, Sahin, Bannan) available that we could have avoided what would be considered a breach in contract with Swansea.

by Fahim89 Fri Jul 27, 2012 6:46 pm

Here Allen is playing the exact role of Lucas. . & to be honest had some super clearances . . Thumbs up

by Sponsored content