Why FSG is struggling to sell Liverpool
- Thread starter sglowrider
- Start date
This makes sense with us being on Sale but now that someone is bidding 3.75 billion for Spurs it doesn't make any sense that no one is in for them
Doesnt Liverpool have an 4b asking price? Wouldnt Spurs be cheaper than Liverpool? Not just because of Liverpool being a much bigger and better club but Spurs just got a new stadium that wont require any investments from a new owner. Spurs being based in London would also be a selling point i would assume. Maybe a potential buyer seems more room for growth in Spurs and less in Liverpool.
Adam Crafton spot on in saying that Manchester United are perhaps the only club who could have survived the Glazer ownership in the way we have.
Anyone else would have been destroyed by it. Look at Hicks and Gillette with Liverpool.
They where the exact same but under Fergie we where too big to fail.
Anyone else would have been destroyed by it. Look at Hicks and Gillette with Liverpool.
They where the exact same but under Fergie we where too big to fail.
It's an interesting one - I get an investor might see Spurs as having more money making potential though. Just look at the figures from their stadium revenue and they've got all the extra stuff they're pushing hard for like NFL, Beyonce etc. which is significant income. London also allows an obscene ticket price - Spurs, Arsenal, Fulham, WHUM are the top 4 season ticket prices from last year according to Statista which you can't really get away with in a city like Liverpool.
You either want the biggest PL brand there is in United and all the pain that will come with it or something newer but with more growth. Liverpool are somewhat in between, not quite as globally known as United given their dominance was pre PL but still needing an entire team rebuilt whilst competing against Saudi FC, Abu Dhabi FC, potentially Qatar FC, Boehly FC.
You either want the biggest PL brand there is in United and all the pain that will come with it or something newer but with more growth. Liverpool are somewhat in between, not quite as globally known as United given their dominance was pre PL but still needing an entire team rebuilt whilst competing against Saudi FC, Abu Dhabi FC, potentially Qatar FC, Boehly FC.
Fat Spanish Gobshites
I'd be cautious about the veracity of the 3.75 bn for Spurs claim. That said, 2 things that help Spurs though are that the club in in London and they have a spanking new stadium ( that cheese room is about to payoff).
Liverpool dwarf Spurs in history and worldwide recognition though.
But does that matter when Man City had nada to offer when bought and transported to the top of the ponzi…spurs have a much better footing
Because Breck Road is available on Google Street View?
Who would want to buy a stadium that stinks of piss?
Ironically Uniteds success might have been one of the main reasons City was bought in the first place. That's what they had to offer.
As PL is getting even more globalised (or closer to a superleague - Premier Leagues wet dream) the writing on the wall is that future sportswashing-projects will continue to shy away from London (for it's own reasons) while the London-based clubs will have more and more foreign private owners that basically just wants a toy close to where they live.
It baffles me that various government agencies in England doesn't do more to protect the football heritage that's built on everything else but Abramoviches and sportswashers. Half decent owners is literally getting pushed out for the worse and it's been like this for 20 years now.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
No sources sighted here
It's on Sky Sports now, no full sale, but still looking for an investor.
RAWK going to be lit now that we are competing and looking at qatar and they genuinely believing we pocketing the refs once again.
Excellent.
Feed me tears 
They feel incredibly proud they not will not be involved with sportswashing owners. The Saints of all things football now.
Gives me a bit of hope that Qatar won't buy them if their bid for us fails. That would be a horrible scenario.
Whether they’re coming back into form or not, Liverpool will always be in our shadow, we’ve got a much bigger global following.
Listened to one of their supporters trying to say that Utd should go with the Ineos Sir Jim bid on TalkSPORT. You could clearly hear the agitation in his voice, he was bricking it at the thought of the Qataris becoming our new owners.
Listened to one of their supporters trying to say that Utd should go with the Ineos Sir Jim bid on TalkSPORT. You could clearly hear the agitation in his voice, he was bricking it at the thought of the Qataris becoming our new owners.
Does this mean RAWK will have to have a whip round for Bellingham in the summer now seeing as they aren’t getting new owners?
For those that recall, is it true that even in the period in which Liverpool were dominant in the 70's and 80's, that we was still be best attended team in the league despite winning nothing all those years?
Brilliant. News related to United recently just keeps getting better and better.
Probably because they can't sell it for the right price.
I mean who would want to buy Liverpool when you can buy the biggest club in the world.
Curious why the Saudis never went for them. More fun building up a club from the bottom table?
There’s a certain Elliot group looking to invest in a football club. Couldn’t think of a better match for them than LFC.
Realised today that FSG stands for For Steven Gerrard. Crazy.
It seems like they were never fully on sale, only after an investor
Can we all sing YAWN at the top of the hour as a mark of respect for the death of the sale.
Never forgotten
Never forgotten
they were for sure for sale. It’s a climb down now they couldn’t seal the deal
Be great if they get him in as their next manager.
Nah if you delved deeper into the statement released at the time it never looked like they were for sale. It was a strangely clickbait headline on an Ornstein article that suggested otherwise
Not something you see with Ornstein work either
Confused wasn't it well known form the start they were looking for a partial investment ? I'm sure this was well reported.
Yep
“FSG has frequently received expressions of interest from third party seeking to become shareholders in Liverpool. FSG has said that before under the right terms and conditions we would consider new shareholders if it was in the best interests of Liverpool as a club.
“FSG remains fully committed to the success of Liverpool, both on and off the pitch.”
A large part of our fan base don't realize that this is not necessarily a good news for us. FSG might have decided not to sell for two reasons:
1. No buyers - popular assumption (fantastic if true)
2. More profitable to sell minority stakes - continue to Milk the club more
The 2nd reason looks more probable from a business point of view. There is talk of some hedge fund backing Glazers to continue milking us. This FSG decision could be an ominous precursor.
1. No buyers - popular assumption (fantastic if true)
2. More profitable to sell minority stakes - continue to Milk the club more
The 2nd reason looks more probable from a business point of view. There is talk of some hedge fund backing Glazers to continue milking us. This FSG decision could be an ominous precursor.
I remember a second division game at Old Trafford against Sunderland that had a crowd of over 60,000. I think Liverpool were averaging around 45,000 at Anfield in the seventies. United were averaging around the same, but ironically, after we were relegated, our average attendance rose to the low 50,000s for the remainder of the decade.
Last edited: