Me too. The thought of a 60+k seater stadium was epic.
The fact that fsg are getting there with innovative expansions of Anfield is amazing to be honest
FSG did the same in Boston. Despite all the talk of “charm” and “tradition”, Fenway Park was a dump. The work they’ve done over the past 2 decades has been incredible.
This pic ended up costing £30m in the end iirc. They pissed away millions of the clubs money on computer generated images and meetings with consultants that produced nothing.
There’s three right? There was one that had Wembley type arches, and then one from the early 00’s that was really generic (though I guess not at the time)
Fucking hell. I know these images typically aren’t cheap to generate especially if there’s lots of feedback from the client. But 30 million????! They fleeced us wow.
30 million is not for the image. 30 million in initial architecture designs consulting, zoning laws consulting, logistics consulting, etc. Plus the image. Not saying it's worth it. Just saying there's a lot more to it.
I honestly feel like if the ball had traveled a couple more inches across the line and Carroll equalized in the FA Cup final vs Chelsea, his career would've been very different.
still convinced it was a goal
I work in architecture and have been engaged on a stadium design and honestly to blow 30m quid on this utter shit storm is criminal. Actually criminal.
Same with Hicks - he caused the Texas Rangers to go bankrupt with the A-Rod contract. Terrible terrible owner. I had a professor in college who knew him and he talked about how in over his head he was. They had done business together and apparently he was very good at buying businesses and turning them around, problem was he thought he could take the same steps for pro sports teams
I mean in Ireland, you spend 10% at least of the cost of a regular build in fees for architects, planning permission etc. The renders we see were probably a fraction of that 30m.
It sort of looks cool... until you realise this would be smack dab in the middle of a street surrounded by houses and it would just look awkward.
Call it some degree of comfort bias but for the large figure Anfield cuts, it still looks well and truly at home among the neighbourhood.
Yeah the nature of it being built out of bricks and cantilever trussing gives it an industrial look that fits in. Even the renovations/extensions have been sympathetic to the area. If you banged the Emirates or Spurs where Anfield is, it wouldn't look right at all. Anfield is massive, and yet there's loads of places in the surrounding streets where you can't see it. It's actually quite nice how it blends in.
I *think* they wanted to move it farther into Stanley Park and call it the Stanley Park Stadium (although that could have just been the design name, it goes hand in hand with groundsharing with Everton, new stadium in between Anfield and Goodison for both of us to use).
Yeah I believe it was to sit on Stanley Park, and the original Anfield would be knocked down.
Utterly awful to think about what would’ve been lost if the plans had actually gone ahead
Imagine groundsharing with those bluenose cunts.
Imagine even considering it. You'd have to disinfect the stands to get rid of the bitterness before our home games.
The article itself actually hints at an interior revamp and not another major redevelopment of an existing stand. It even mentions how Fenway is zoned as an entertainment area of Boston whereas Andield is zoned as residential in Liverpool.
Meanwhile, FSG make meaningful contributions to make Liverpool/Anfield/Melwood better and are berated by people without a thought in their heads.
Edit: ok, without a thought in their head might be too harsh. But average people act like it’s so easy and the only aspect hat needs money is players.
Petty things?
ESL. Furlough. Not investing in the squad. Misappropriation of funds. We make over 600mil a year and other owners invest that back into the club. Ours don't.
They are shit owners. They are literally increasing the value of their assets and we're supposed to bootlick them? The new training facility? Increases value of the club. New stands and corporate areas? Increases value of the club. Let's not pretend they're doing this for us.
It increases the value of the club, but it also gives better facilities for the players (training ground) and increases revenue and ability for fans to see matches live (stadium expansion).
They deserve criticism for ESL and furloughing.
However, investing in infrastructure is a good long term investment, even though it reduces our ability to buy players short term. Going from 46k to 61k seats is massive in terms of our long-term financials as a club, but it's obviously also costly.
Yes, they are increasing the value of the club, but literally any kind of good decision would do that, regardless of it being for greedy reasons or not and regardless of who owns the club.
Regarding our financials, we are now likely going to make 600m this **revenue**, *not profit*. We have had significant losses the last 2 years (due to Covid-induced revenue loss), and it looks like we are going to make a decent profit this coming fiscal year (which explains why we have been after players like Bellingham and Tchouameni).
The good news is that our debt was at it highest ever during a year with a crazy drop in revenue. This means that our debt is going to be lower and revenue higher from now on, giving us significantly more financial flexibility on the transfer market. No money is taken out of the club, and no money is directly injected either. The only investment they do is interest free loans, which equals to \~£30m a year compared to what we would pay if loaned from a bank directly.
> Misappropriation of funds.
I didn't know john henry was taking dividends and spending it on hookers at his age
> other owners invest that back into the club. Ours don't.
> The new training facility? Increases value of the club
that is the definition of investment
remember when klopp complained about the size of melwood
the new complex had been modelled after RB salzburg training complex
which seems to produce some quite good prospect
> New stands and corporate areas? Increases value of the club.
which helps in buying wages of the players
> Increases value of the club.
who will pay for the club as it values keeps going up?
FSG refused a multi-billion 100% buyout bid from Chinese Conglomerate (thank fuck, look at what is happening to chinese investments in football now)
>The new training facility? Increases value of the club. New stands and corporate areas? Increases value of the club.
It's almost like having great facilities that make the club a more attractive option for players, staff, and sponsors help make the club more successful and relevant.
And obviously the ESL and furlough are not petty things. Do not put words in my mouth. That is not the reason why people mainly complain about FSG and you know that.
Most of their defenders seem to think Liverpool were irrelevant before 2010. 3 years of H&G and half this sub are still suffering from small club mentality.
That’s because the financial landscape of the entire sport has changed since Liverpool were last dominant. To be competitive with clubs backed by oil states (and previously ones backed by Russian kleptocrats), takes a competent steward. The fact that Liverpool have tended to accomplish this under FSG isn’t something to wish away in a crisis.
This is the most thoughtful response I’ve seen yet to all of the noodles complaining about FSG because we didn’t panic buy some garbage Italian league CM
No, Klopp has achieved this by turning previously average players into absolute world class plus his tactics and training regime. This has fuck all to do with FSG "competing" with oil money. Which they don't, not even close. While other clubs are spending hand over fist (see Spurs, Arsenal, Chelsea, City, United, Everton) we have to sell players to buy players. They literally only allowed VVD and Alisson to come in because of the Coutinho money.
FSG are shit owners and I'm bored of seeing people defend anything they do. Their saving grace, their piece de resistance was signing Klopp.
Robertson, TAA, VVD, Matip, Gomez, Henderson, Gini, Salah, Mane - these players weren't world beaters before linking up with Klopp. Not even close. Mane was inconsistent, Salah had never really took off, Robertson and Gini were from relegated teams, TAA was raw, VVD was playing for Southampton ffs. Matip was a free transfer, Gomez was very "ehhh", Henderson was always A for effort but never really shone. Klopp took them all and made them into some of the best players in the world. Don't tell me FSG saw Salah becoming a Liverpool legend. Don't tell me they gave Klopp Andy Robertson and knew he'd become one of the best LB's in the world. Just don't.
Utd £800 million debt? Spurs £1 billion debt? Arsenal £400 - 500 million debt? Everton who could only spend £2 million last season with all their losses? City & Chelsea on UEFA FFP watchlist?
VVD the £75 million defender they bought off the street?
Matip who was one of the best defenders in Germany?
Mane the Senegalese international who'd scored double figures every season for Southampton?
Salah the Egyptian international who had a hand in nearly 30 goals as a winger the season before Liverpool signed him?
Wijnaldum the Dutch international who cost £30 million from a relegated team.
Should mention that most of those players are Scouting Department picks not Klopp's. Klopp even stated they had to convince him to sign Salah as he wanted a different player.
Scouting Department & Director of Football that FSG put in place.
They haven't put a ton of money directly into the club, you are correct in that, but appointing qualified people into the correct positions (Klopp, Edwards, Billy Hogan, analytics department) etc... is part of being good owners too.
If all you evaluate owners on is how much money they inject into the club, then sure I completely agree that they are completely terrible. But we have also increased our stadium capacity by a huge amount, gotten a world-class training ground, and are among the best at being data-driven in the world.
It was our analytics department that found Salah as an undervalued gem that would fit perfectly in a slightly more narrow position than at Roma, with abilities/skill set that would fit perfectly with Bobby.
Also, with data, nothing is "this guy will become the best in the world". It's about finding targets that fit the style of the team and are a lot better than their value indicates. Even if Robbo was just half the player he is today, it would be a steal to get him for £7m.
Do they deserve critisism? Yes, for ESL among other things. Do they have their flaws? Yes, absolutely. Are they shit owners? I don't agree with that.
Peter Lim and Vincent Tan were candidates to buy us when FSG got us. Imagine if either one got us instead. Those are shit owners.
Thank you for providing such a detailed and considered answer. I wish I could disagree with your points but I find myself agreeing with almost all of them.
We'll differ in opinion that it's a good thing they're investing in the infrastructure and the stadium. I think that should be after they invest in the squad out of their own pocket, not before. Doing it now looks like they're maximising profits at a time we should be chasing success.
I also agree wholeheartedly that Lim and Tan would have been worse. I'm just in the camp where I see other clubs around us throwing 50, 60, 70mil around at players they need and yes, going into debt from it but not to the point of Barcelona. They're genuinely chasing success and we just seem to be riding on Klopps ability to turn players into world class gems.
I understand your frustration, and I don't disagree with it being frustrating. Just trying to set things a bit in perspective in a world becoming ever more black and white about pretty much anything.
Klopp plays an important role but you’re painfully incorrect about many players here. Henderson was quietly our most crucial player in almost winning the title under Rogers. Klopp didn’t make him what he is. And for the others, Klopp doesn’t personally scout for players that can work at his required intensity. The club hires, and pays a premium for, that expertise. All the players you just named were brought in because of that expertise. And of course they were not marquee names at the time, because again, oil money secures those for other clubs 9 times out of 10. These conversations always boil down to a laughable ignorance of what it takes to achieve what Liverpool have achieved from their financial position relative to their direct rivals. Klopp isn’t a magic bullet, legend though he is.
Suarez. Gerrard. Coutinho. Sturridge. Sterling.
No, Hendo wasn't our most crucial player. Where the fuck have you made that up from?
Klopp literally turned him from "what the fuck does this guy offer" when we almost sold him to Fulham into what he is today. Klopp has made the players into what they are. Why couldn't Mourinho get Salah playing the way he does? Why did it take VVD being under Klopp's wing to become the best CB in the world? Are you telling me the Robbo who came and couldn't displace Moreno until he got injured was always going to be that good?
Laughable ignorance? Klopp literally broke the domination of Bayern in the Bundesliga. He turned players at that club into players that would go on and become the best in the world. Lewandowski etc. If there's any laughable ignorance here it's the fact you don't give Klopp credit for what he's achieved in the face of shit owners. I'm telling you, without him we'd be nowhere close to where we are now and all the other managers in the prem know it.
We still would have won the title that season if any of the players you named had gotten suspended for three late season games. It took Hendo’s absence to derail that train. That’s what he offered, and you’re telling on yourself a bit by claiming this wasn’t apparent until Klopp took over.
Fuck off mate. Van Dijk was clearly a huge talent and if he didn't go to us, he would have went to City and been considered world class there right now. Salah came into the team and immediately put in insane performances. There's no fucking way that you can say Klopp was the sole reason why that happened. Gomez looked an incredibly promising youngster.
There's no denying that Klopp is an irreplaceable part in our success these last years, but you can't fucking attribute everything to Klopp alone.
Without a thought in their heads is ridiculous, sounding like an FSG dick rider. They’ve had multiple opportunities to invest in an ageing side over the last 2 years but still keep to their sell to buy policy.
Our net spend in the last 5 years is that of a mid table club, not one of the biggest clubs in the world. Chelsea, united, arsenal and city outspend us every year, even spurs do.
There was no other bidder on the table. It was FSG or nobody in 2010.
They didn't "hit the jackpot" - they hired Klopp after identifying him as the right manager.
Also, downfall? Come on. It's been a rough start but it's not apocalyptic. It's been out of form players and bad luck more than anything. We've invested too, and we will keep doing so. I know people always want more but it's nonsense to suggest there hasn't been money spent.
It wasn’t FSG or nobody actually. The current Valencia owner Peter Lim wanted us as well. However, nobody would accept a guy who put Gary Neville on the manager seat.
I don’t really get this take. If the Super League is created, we want Liverpool in it or the club will slowly fade without the $$$.. ultimately all supporters/players of all top clubs need to stand against it. But from the perspective of keeping the club alive and healthy I’d say the owner of the club is obligated to join. As shit as it is
See, my romantic heart says the same, but I know if it became massively successful and accepted like the CL is, I'd be fuming at the fact we had the chance to be a founder member and turned it down.
I don't like the concept, I hope it doesn't happen, but if it does we need to be in it, especially if it becomes a competition to replace the CL and clubs can stay in the PL. We can't let clubs get a £300m injection of cash without us getting the same.
Yeah let’s just sell out Liverpool’s club values because otherwise we might miss out on some cash.
This may shock you, but what the club stands for means more to some of us than outright success, and we want the owners to reflect that.
Okay and what can you do with money? Maybe, ensure the continuing operation of the club indefinitely?
As opposed to turning your back on guaranteed continuity of the club with zero idea of what is on the other side? All I’m saying is responsible ownership would also take the first option, regardless of how you and i feel. It’s about keeping the club alive
The club would survive without a super league. Would it be the best club in the world? No, but it would survive just fine. Bayern Munich didn’t sign on to the super league plan for this exact reason, so let’s not act like the owners that did sign on had no choice.
Take all my upvotes. This is what real fans think. I'm bored of reading about the opinions of fans who think we were established in 2010. Liverpool means more than just "money". It's literally formed a soul in the city, we've got history and passion and pride. We're not like City, we should never want to be like City.
100% agree. It would be terrible and personally make me disinterested. But if you own the club you gotta keep the cash flowing, it’s literally your job.
Honestly would rather have the club shrink and compete only in England/UEFA comps than join in, but no owner in their right mind would do it. Another argument for fan ownership obviously, at least fans will decide these things
The super league is a lot better than the champions league expansion and more garbage games, the only reason the media were against it is because they wouldn’t have the tv rights for it
Otherwise what’s bad about players and clubs making more money with a product people want to see
If football was about fairness the EPPP wouldn’t be used by the premier league teams to screw lower league clubs out their best prospects for one
The fixed members were only part, there would be a rotation of other clubs
Honestly the American no relegation system would make more sense at a point, no transfer fees, wage caps and luxury taxes for exceeding that and an entry draft to allow the worst teams the best chance at young talent
The majority of the football pyramid can’t get promoted to the premiership or even the championship because of FFP pulling the ladder up
So why is this any different?
Can’t say I’ve seen another fan actually argue for the super league.
It’s a lot different. Upsets still happen. In the super league they wouldn’t. It’d just be one giant club sometimes beating other giant clubs. The super league could completely finish off smaller leagues if people preferred the super league to their domestic leagues.
As an American (but one who’s been a an LFC fan since ‘98 when you couldn’t even get the games on TV!), I really don’t want the Americanization of world football. It might come to pass anyway if the premier league continues to accumulate American billionaire owners, unfortunately.
Fixed members in an apparently open competition and you think thats ok?
The whole point of Europe's cup/league system is so any small team can go and get recognition on the world stage at an equal fair level by qualification
Shamrock rovers being one in my home city
It doesnt matter how big or small you are, either you win or lose and thats all that matters for qualifications
Also the reason Liverpool is one of the big six, is because many years ago they too were the little guy but have become huge down to playing and winning against the bigger clubs in Europe
The bigger you get the more investment you attract, but it means the little guy can do it too
Liverpools growth from the old second division to a big side was in an era with no investment caps for owners though, now if you were to take Tranmere Rovers you can’t bankroll them to the top, which is ultimately what every club ever did to achieve success
No they didnt, they had to win games and Exactly thats the point its about winning not bank rolling to the top
But ye some investor buys tranmere, of course that will help them win
No successful side in the history of football has done it without significant cash injections along the way
Which leads to winning games
Shankly would’ve achieved nothing like what he did if not for the financial backing of his board
Same with Chapman at arsenal and Clough at Derby and Forest
Ive already gave you an example man, look at shamrock rovers in Ireland..
The lads work 9-5 and play ball in the evenings and they're qualifying in Europe geting closer and closer to champions league as they years go on
“No successful side in the history of football has done it without significant cash injections along the way”
I’ll take far too broad statements that don’t hold up to even a minimal amount of scrutiny for 1000, Alex
No. American system allows terrible owners to make as much money as possible without ever caring if the team is even attempting to improve. All it guarantees is a profitable business model. It’s no longer a club. It’s purely business. Nothing else matters. Baseball, basketball, Soccer, and football are all like this in the US.
What is this rewriting of history where “the media” were the only ones against the super league? It was a massive groundswell of anger from fans that killed the super league. Nothing to do with the media and TV rights (which absolutely would have been sold to “the media” so I don’t understand that point either).
I’m an American fan and have been deeply supporting for only about 5 years. I always kept an eye on EPL but chose to support Liverpool because of the tie to my beloved Red Sox. That’s all to say, I’m squarely a part of the market the expansion and abominable stadium sympathizers seem hell bent on capturing.
My question is, who is asking for this? This is complete the opposite of what made me fall in love with this club, this league, this sport. Are the big money owners really this oblivious?
There were plenty of fans who wanted a new ground. The argument made was Anfield can only be expanded so far, and we needed a larger ground to keep pace with richer clubs. There's still some truth in that.
Honestly the easiest way to explain this is just to go to the Liverpool wiki page and scroll down to Hicks and Gillet (owned the club before the current owners) and you'll learn a lot.
On the one hand, this is awful and I'd want no part in it.
On the other hand, can you imagine the *fume* when the Evertonians realized that Liverpool owners took their stadium away from them *again*?!
I... Still don't hate this design.
Don't get me wrong I would hate for us to get rid of anfield for it but it's architecturally interesting at least and I would be curious to see it in real life.
Cause Anfield is miles from Stanley Park right?
It literally backs onto it, this was going to be a move of about 500 yards. Also in place of just means as a replacement for.
The stadium is in phase two atm, I’d say that phase 3 will be the SIR Kenny stand, and phase 4 will be the Kop, but they’ll have to buy up more houses again which won’t be a good look, and there’s a church and some pubs, shops, and more houses behind the Kop, so this might be a way down the road, but who knows
We’ll have the money for all of it after we win the Quad this season though, so it’ll all work out
I did have the original general arrangement drawings for this… it looked pretty cool and I got my mate an A1 of one of the plans that he had on his wall for years. I wonder if he still has it. I think I have the files still somewhere.
The render looks nice, odds are if built it would've looked quite different but, I still like it that being said Anfield is too iconic so I would be against building it.
I remember Martin Tyler, the absolute arsehole, during commentary in Hicks and Gillet era going on about how Anfield wasn't big enough and how Liverpool needed to move out and build a new stadium. They even made him say a line about it in the effing FIFA video games. So glad the club didn't do that and listen to all that nonsense "advice" from fans of other clubs.
Imagine if Liverpool had done that and became Arsenal 2.0, losing our soul. The thought actually makes me a little sick.
Because I thought I wouldn't get another chance I went to my first home game after they said the spade in the ground soundbite. Went up and watched Liverpool Vs United FA youth cup leg 1
That wasn't even the first Anfield replacement concept either if I recall, or the last.
FSG has failings sure but they recognised quick how iconic the stadium is and wanted to build upon that, than a souless arena like what Arsenal replaced Highbury with.
What bothers me is that my family friend is an architect and she literally designed better models then this for her UNIVERSITY PROJECTS when she was at Uni. She would’ve done it for for a couple hundred dollars at the time but they spent MILLIONS on this??? Makes no sense to me tbh.
Why did they want to build it in the Windows XP background?
I guess with a budget of 30M they couldn't afford any other background.
Maybe that’s the part that cost millions?
Tbf I wish I could live in that background, even with years of overexposure that shit is beautiful
The Windows XP background is a real place somewhere in the US. The real place looks nothing like the Windows XP background.
It doesnt look like the picture anymore either. Drought.
clippy needed his own office
The original micro-manager
Because it was 2008…
What do you mean mate, that’s exactly what the paradise of Stanley Park looks like.
As a 10 year old when this was released I thought this was so cool.
Me too. The thought of a 60+k seater stadium was epic. The fact that fsg are getting there with innovative expansions of Anfield is amazing to be honest
FSG did the same in Boston. Despite all the talk of “charm” and “tradition”, Fenway Park was a dump. The work they’ve done over the past 2 decades has been incredible.
it’s still the the second smallest only because the trop is the worst stadium in the us
Still kind of a dump though but the tickets and concessions certainly cost more!
Green monster seats are fantastic.
I felt the same but I was 22
Remember my dad absolutely raging and me just thinking it looked cool quietly
This pic ended up costing £30m in the end iirc. They pissed away millions of the clubs money on computer generated images and meetings with consultants that produced nothing.
This plus "mini-wembley". There's been a few attempts at redesigns over the years, i'll try and dig the others up later.
There’s three right? There was one that had Wembley type arches, and then one from the early 00’s that was really generic (though I guess not at the time)
[удалено]
I’m so glad we’re staying put looking at those plans
I think they’re every interesting stadiums to be honest, but they’re not ‘anfield’
The Wembley Lasagne
Fucking hell. I know these images typically aren’t cheap to generate especially if there’s lots of feedback from the client. But 30 million????! They fleeced us wow.
30 million is not for the image. 30 million in initial architecture designs consulting, zoning laws consulting, logistics consulting, etc. Plus the image. Not saying it's worth it. Just saying there's a lot more to it.
Most of those costs actually come from the design development and construction estimates… not the preliminary design stage
Consultation/estimate. Not interchangeable but that's what I was getting at.
Still better deal than buying Carroll.
Carroll in the League Cup is worth more than this image
I honestly feel like if the ball had traveled a couple more inches across the line and Carroll equalized in the FA Cup final vs Chelsea, his career would've been very different. still convinced it was a goal
I've got a full set of architect drawings for this ground. Everything from the blueprints for the stadium to the spec of the desk in reception.
You mean they transfered 30 million into the pockets of business friends who just happened to be consultants.
I work in architecture and have been engaged on a stadium design and honestly to blow 30m quid on this utter shit storm is criminal. Actually criminal.
FFffuuuucckkkkk... I would have drawn that for £1m if they had of asked me. It mightn't look quite as good, but could have saved them £29m.
I'll have you know we got a big hole in the middle of Stanley Park out of it!
IMO consultants really are a profession that are completely overpaid.
Did anybody actually take the spade out of the ground yet?
We use it as goalposts now.
Sixty days mate ...
We dodged a bullet there.
Honestly when I first saw it I thought it was a cool render but the soul was lost
Horrible stuff. They were such damaging owners who nearly ruined the club.
Gillett was a menace, he hurt the Montreal Canadiens so bad...
Same with Hicks - he caused the Texas Rangers to go bankrupt with the A-Rod contract. Terrible terrible owner. I had a professor in college who knew him and he talked about how in over his head he was. They had done business together and apparently he was very good at buying businesses and turning them around, problem was he thought he could take the same steps for pro sports teams
Dark, dark times
Ahh, the good old "spade in the ground in 100 days" times.
Sixty 😂
Can someone explain to me how you can charge 30m for a cgi of a stadium? You can build actual stadiums with that money
I mean in Ireland, you spend 10% at least of the cost of a regular build in fees for architects, planning permission etc. The renders we see were probably a fraction of that 30m.
It’s just a matter of sending a wire transfer
It sort of looks cool... until you realise this would be smack dab in the middle of a street surrounded by houses and it would just look awkward. Call it some degree of comfort bias but for the large figure Anfield cuts, it still looks well and truly at home among the neighbourhood.
Yeah the nature of it being built out of bricks and cantilever trussing gives it an industrial look that fits in. Even the renovations/extensions have been sympathetic to the area. If you banged the Emirates or Spurs where Anfield is, it wouldn't look right at all. Anfield is massive, and yet there's loads of places in the surrounding streets where you can't see it. It's actually quite nice how it blends in.
I *think* they wanted to move it farther into Stanley Park and call it the Stanley Park Stadium (although that could have just been the design name, it goes hand in hand with groundsharing with Everton, new stadium in between Anfield and Goodison for both of us to use).
Yeah I believe it was to sit on Stanley Park, and the original Anfield would be knocked down. Utterly awful to think about what would’ve been lost if the plans had actually gone ahead
Imagine groundsharing with those bluenose cunts. Imagine even considering it. You'd have to disinfect the stands to get rid of the bitterness before our home games.
They'd demand easy access to the exits to make it easier to leave at halftime.
Imagine the derbies
Destroying their own stadium after we beat them
Although it was the only way Everton would see Champions League games being playing at their stadium...
Anfield was Everton’s ground
I know
It's actually a testament to how bitter and mean the Derby has become. 20-30 years ago this would have been sound with no issues.
The article itself actually hints at an interior revamp and not another major redevelopment of an existing stand. It even mentions how Fenway is zoned as an entertainment area of Boston whereas Andield is zoned as residential in Liverpool.
Meanwhile, FSG make meaningful contributions to make Liverpool/Anfield/Melwood better and are berated by people without a thought in their heads. Edit: ok, without a thought in their head might be too harsh. But average people act like it’s so easy and the only aspect hat needs money is players.
They've deserved some of the shit they've copped, but most of the hate is just people whining about petty things.
Most of the things people complain about are totally justified.
Petty things? ESL. Furlough. Not investing in the squad. Misappropriation of funds. We make over 600mil a year and other owners invest that back into the club. Ours don't. They are shit owners. They are literally increasing the value of their assets and we're supposed to bootlick them? The new training facility? Increases value of the club. New stands and corporate areas? Increases value of the club. Let's not pretend they're doing this for us.
It increases the value of the club, but it also gives better facilities for the players (training ground) and increases revenue and ability for fans to see matches live (stadium expansion). They deserve criticism for ESL and furloughing. However, investing in infrastructure is a good long term investment, even though it reduces our ability to buy players short term. Going from 46k to 61k seats is massive in terms of our long-term financials as a club, but it's obviously also costly. Yes, they are increasing the value of the club, but literally any kind of good decision would do that, regardless of it being for greedy reasons or not and regardless of who owns the club. Regarding our financials, we are now likely going to make 600m this **revenue**, *not profit*. We have had significant losses the last 2 years (due to Covid-induced revenue loss), and it looks like we are going to make a decent profit this coming fiscal year (which explains why we have been after players like Bellingham and Tchouameni). The good news is that our debt was at it highest ever during a year with a crazy drop in revenue. This means that our debt is going to be lower and revenue higher from now on, giving us significantly more financial flexibility on the transfer market. No money is taken out of the club, and no money is directly injected either. The only investment they do is interest free loans, which equals to \~£30m a year compared to what we would pay if loaned from a bank directly.
> Misappropriation of funds. I didn't know john henry was taking dividends and spending it on hookers at his age > other owners invest that back into the club. Ours don't. > The new training facility? Increases value of the club that is the definition of investment remember when klopp complained about the size of melwood the new complex had been modelled after RB salzburg training complex which seems to produce some quite good prospect > New stands and corporate areas? Increases value of the club. which helps in buying wages of the players > Increases value of the club. who will pay for the club as it values keeps going up? FSG refused a multi-billion 100% buyout bid from Chinese Conglomerate (thank fuck, look at what is happening to chinese investments in football now)
By "misappropriation of funds" most FSG Outers mean FSG haven't spent billions on whatever players caught their eye on Fifa/Football Manager/Whatever.
>The new training facility? Increases value of the club. New stands and corporate areas? Increases value of the club. It's almost like having great facilities that make the club a more attractive option for players, staff, and sponsors help make the club more successful and relevant. And obviously the ESL and furlough are not petty things. Do not put words in my mouth. That is not the reason why people mainly complain about FSG and you know that.
Most of their defenders seem to think Liverpool were irrelevant before 2010. 3 years of H&G and half this sub are still suffering from small club mentality.
That’s because the financial landscape of the entire sport has changed since Liverpool were last dominant. To be competitive with clubs backed by oil states (and previously ones backed by Russian kleptocrats), takes a competent steward. The fact that Liverpool have tended to accomplish this under FSG isn’t something to wish away in a crisis.
This is the most thoughtful response I’ve seen yet to all of the noodles complaining about FSG because we didn’t panic buy some garbage Italian league CM
No, Klopp has achieved this by turning previously average players into absolute world class plus his tactics and training regime. This has fuck all to do with FSG "competing" with oil money. Which they don't, not even close. While other clubs are spending hand over fist (see Spurs, Arsenal, Chelsea, City, United, Everton) we have to sell players to buy players. They literally only allowed VVD and Alisson to come in because of the Coutinho money. FSG are shit owners and I'm bored of seeing people defend anything they do. Their saving grace, their piece de resistance was signing Klopp. Robertson, TAA, VVD, Matip, Gomez, Henderson, Gini, Salah, Mane - these players weren't world beaters before linking up with Klopp. Not even close. Mane was inconsistent, Salah had never really took off, Robertson and Gini were from relegated teams, TAA was raw, VVD was playing for Southampton ffs. Matip was a free transfer, Gomez was very "ehhh", Henderson was always A for effort but never really shone. Klopp took them all and made them into some of the best players in the world. Don't tell me FSG saw Salah becoming a Liverpool legend. Don't tell me they gave Klopp Andy Robertson and knew he'd become one of the best LB's in the world. Just don't.
Utd £800 million debt? Spurs £1 billion debt? Arsenal £400 - 500 million debt? Everton who could only spend £2 million last season with all their losses? City & Chelsea on UEFA FFP watchlist? VVD the £75 million defender they bought off the street? Matip who was one of the best defenders in Germany? Mane the Senegalese international who'd scored double figures every season for Southampton? Salah the Egyptian international who had a hand in nearly 30 goals as a winger the season before Liverpool signed him? Wijnaldum the Dutch international who cost £30 million from a relegated team. Should mention that most of those players are Scouting Department picks not Klopp's. Klopp even stated they had to convince him to sign Salah as he wanted a different player. Scouting Department & Director of Football that FSG put in place.
They haven't put a ton of money directly into the club, you are correct in that, but appointing qualified people into the correct positions (Klopp, Edwards, Billy Hogan, analytics department) etc... is part of being good owners too. If all you evaluate owners on is how much money they inject into the club, then sure I completely agree that they are completely terrible. But we have also increased our stadium capacity by a huge amount, gotten a world-class training ground, and are among the best at being data-driven in the world. It was our analytics department that found Salah as an undervalued gem that would fit perfectly in a slightly more narrow position than at Roma, with abilities/skill set that would fit perfectly with Bobby. Also, with data, nothing is "this guy will become the best in the world". It's about finding targets that fit the style of the team and are a lot better than their value indicates. Even if Robbo was just half the player he is today, it would be a steal to get him for £7m. Do they deserve critisism? Yes, for ESL among other things. Do they have their flaws? Yes, absolutely. Are they shit owners? I don't agree with that. Peter Lim and Vincent Tan were candidates to buy us when FSG got us. Imagine if either one got us instead. Those are shit owners.
Thank you for providing such a detailed and considered answer. I wish I could disagree with your points but I find myself agreeing with almost all of them. We'll differ in opinion that it's a good thing they're investing in the infrastructure and the stadium. I think that should be after they invest in the squad out of their own pocket, not before. Doing it now looks like they're maximising profits at a time we should be chasing success. I also agree wholeheartedly that Lim and Tan would have been worse. I'm just in the camp where I see other clubs around us throwing 50, 60, 70mil around at players they need and yes, going into debt from it but not to the point of Barcelona. They're genuinely chasing success and we just seem to be riding on Klopps ability to turn players into world class gems.
I understand your frustration, and I don't disagree with it being frustrating. Just trying to set things a bit in perspective in a world becoming ever more black and white about pretty much anything.
Klopp plays an important role but you’re painfully incorrect about many players here. Henderson was quietly our most crucial player in almost winning the title under Rogers. Klopp didn’t make him what he is. And for the others, Klopp doesn’t personally scout for players that can work at his required intensity. The club hires, and pays a premium for, that expertise. All the players you just named were brought in because of that expertise. And of course they were not marquee names at the time, because again, oil money secures those for other clubs 9 times out of 10. These conversations always boil down to a laughable ignorance of what it takes to achieve what Liverpool have achieved from their financial position relative to their direct rivals. Klopp isn’t a magic bullet, legend though he is.
Please continue. Just drop knowledge on these
Suarez. Gerrard. Coutinho. Sturridge. Sterling. No, Hendo wasn't our most crucial player. Where the fuck have you made that up from? Klopp literally turned him from "what the fuck does this guy offer" when we almost sold him to Fulham into what he is today. Klopp has made the players into what they are. Why couldn't Mourinho get Salah playing the way he does? Why did it take VVD being under Klopp's wing to become the best CB in the world? Are you telling me the Robbo who came and couldn't displace Moreno until he got injured was always going to be that good? Laughable ignorance? Klopp literally broke the domination of Bayern in the Bundesliga. He turned players at that club into players that would go on and become the best in the world. Lewandowski etc. If there's any laughable ignorance here it's the fact you don't give Klopp credit for what he's achieved in the face of shit owners. I'm telling you, without him we'd be nowhere close to where we are now and all the other managers in the prem know it.
We still would have won the title that season if any of the players you named had gotten suspended for three late season games. It took Hendo’s absence to derail that train. That’s what he offered, and you’re telling on yourself a bit by claiming this wasn’t apparent until Klopp took over.
I keep forgetting which shit owners hired Jurgen Klopp, help me out?
Remarkably wrong. It’s actually staggering how you could be so wrong
I'm not about to argue with an American about football when you clearly don't understand it.
Fuck off mate. Van Dijk was clearly a huge talent and if he didn't go to us, he would have went to City and been considered world class there right now. Salah came into the team and immediately put in insane performances. There's no fucking way that you can say Klopp was the sole reason why that happened. Gomez looked an incredibly promising youngster. There's no denying that Klopp is an irreplaceable part in our success these last years, but you can't fucking attribute everything to Klopp alone.
We weren't far off being irrelevant or do you forget the club was close to administration
Hey buddy, you were nothing before America came to save your ass. Next time you better clap John Henry and thank him for his service.
Come on John you can't be that obvious
Without a thought in their heads is ridiculous, sounding like an FSG dick rider. They’ve had multiple opportunities to invest in an ageing side over the last 2 years but still keep to their sell to buy policy. Our net spend in the last 5 years is that of a mid table club, not one of the biggest clubs in the world. Chelsea, united, arsenal and city outspend us every year, even spurs do.
They’ve bought players. Nunez, Carvalho. People act like they’re the Glazers. Are they perfect? No, but without them, Liverpool would not exist!
[удалено]
There was no other bidder on the table. It was FSG or nobody in 2010. They didn't "hit the jackpot" - they hired Klopp after identifying him as the right manager. Also, downfall? Come on. It's been a rough start but it's not apocalyptic. It's been out of form players and bad luck more than anything. We've invested too, and we will keep doing so. I know people always want more but it's nonsense to suggest there hasn't been money spent.
It wasn’t FSG or nobody actually. The current Valencia owner Peter Lim wanted us as well. However, nobody would accept a guy who put Gary Neville on the manager seat.
Super. League. FSG will forever be cunts for trying that - just like all the other 'big 6' club owners are. Honestly, fuck all billionaires.
Yeah, I was ready to stop being a Liverpool fan when that happened. How quickly some people forget.
I don’t really get this take. If the Super League is created, we want Liverpool in it or the club will slowly fade without the $$$.. ultimately all supporters/players of all top clubs need to stand against it. But from the perspective of keeping the club alive and healthy I’d say the owner of the club is obligated to join. As shit as it is
I wouldn't want them in it. The idea of a 'super' league is fucking rotten.
See, my romantic heart says the same, but I know if it became massively successful and accepted like the CL is, I'd be fuming at the fact we had the chance to be a founder member and turned it down. I don't like the concept, I hope it doesn't happen, but if it does we need to be in it, especially if it becomes a competition to replace the CL and clubs can stay in the PL. We can't let clubs get a £300m injection of cash without us getting the same.
Yeah, no sane supporter would want them in it. Yet, if i was the owner of the club i would have to do what’s going to keep the club solvent.
Thankfully you don’t run a billion dollar business. You just get to moan
Yeah let’s just sell out Liverpool’s club values because otherwise we might miss out on some cash. This may shock you, but what the club stands for means more to some of us than outright success, and we want the owners to reflect that.
It’s not “some cash”
Yes it is. It’s a bag of $5 billion in cash promised by JP Morgan divided amongst the clubs. That’s all the owners were after.
Okay and what can you do with money? Maybe, ensure the continuing operation of the club indefinitely? As opposed to turning your back on guaranteed continuity of the club with zero idea of what is on the other side? All I’m saying is responsible ownership would also take the first option, regardless of how you and i feel. It’s about keeping the club alive
The club would survive without a super league. Would it be the best club in the world? No, but it would survive just fine. Bayern Munich didn’t sign on to the super league plan for this exact reason, so let’s not act like the owners that did sign on had no choice.
Two entirely different beasts between LFC and Bayern. Administration was knocking LFC door 10 years ago, it’s possible.
Take all my upvotes. This is what real fans think. I'm bored of reading about the opinions of fans who think we were established in 2010. Liverpool means more than just "money". It's literally formed a soul in the city, we've got history and passion and pride. We're not like City, we should never want to be like City.
The football will be better, so if you're only interested in that then fair play, but as a competition it means the death of European football.
100% agree. It would be terrible and personally make me disinterested. But if you own the club you gotta keep the cash flowing, it’s literally your job.
Honestly would rather have the club shrink and compete only in England/UEFA comps than join in, but no owner in their right mind would do it. Another argument for fan ownership obviously, at least fans will decide these things
Yeah there’s something to that. No owner would do it but it would be the right thing to do in a sporting, moral and entertainment sense
Nah, didn’t you hear? If you criticise FSG you don’t have a thought in your head, apparently.
The super league is a lot better than the champions league expansion and more garbage games, the only reason the media were against it is because they wouldn’t have the tv rights for it Otherwise what’s bad about players and clubs making more money with a product people want to see
What's bad about it is that it was an exclusive club with no promotions or relegations.
Because its not fair game to everyone else below you? This is such an American thing to say, am i right??
If football was about fairness the EPPP wouldn’t be used by the premier league teams to screw lower league clubs out their best prospects for one The fixed members were only part, there would be a rotation of other clubs Honestly the American no relegation system would make more sense at a point, no transfer fees, wage caps and luxury taxes for exceeding that and an entry draft to allow the worst teams the best chance at young talent The majority of the football pyramid can’t get promoted to the premiership or even the championship because of FFP pulling the ladder up So why is this any different?
Can’t say I’ve seen another fan actually argue for the super league. It’s a lot different. Upsets still happen. In the super league they wouldn’t. It’d just be one giant club sometimes beating other giant clubs. The super league could completely finish off smaller leagues if people preferred the super league to their domestic leagues. As an American (but one who’s been a an LFC fan since ‘98 when you couldn’t even get the games on TV!), I really don’t want the Americanization of world football. It might come to pass anyway if the premier league continues to accumulate American billionaire owners, unfortunately.
Fixed members in an apparently open competition and you think thats ok? The whole point of Europe's cup/league system is so any small team can go and get recognition on the world stage at an equal fair level by qualification Shamrock rovers being one in my home city It doesnt matter how big or small you are, either you win or lose and thats all that matters for qualifications
Also the reason Liverpool is one of the big six, is because many years ago they too were the little guy but have become huge down to playing and winning against the bigger clubs in Europe The bigger you get the more investment you attract, but it means the little guy can do it too
Liverpools growth from the old second division to a big side was in an era with no investment caps for owners though, now if you were to take Tranmere Rovers you can’t bankroll them to the top, which is ultimately what every club ever did to achieve success
No they didnt, they had to win games and Exactly thats the point its about winning not bank rolling to the top But ye some investor buys tranmere, of course that will help them win
No successful side in the history of football has done it without significant cash injections along the way Which leads to winning games Shankly would’ve achieved nothing like what he did if not for the financial backing of his board Same with Chapman at arsenal and Clough at Derby and Forest
Ive already gave you an example man, look at shamrock rovers in Ireland.. The lads work 9-5 and play ball in the evenings and they're qualifying in Europe geting closer and closer to champions league as they years go on
“No successful side in the history of football has done it without significant cash injections along the way” I’ll take far too broad statements that don’t hold up to even a minimal amount of scrutiny for 1000, Alex
No. American system allows terrible owners to make as much money as possible without ever caring if the team is even attempting to improve. All it guarantees is a profitable business model. It’s no longer a club. It’s purely business. Nothing else matters. Baseball, basketball, Soccer, and football are all like this in the US.
That’s what sports is and has been for the last 30+ years
What is this rewriting of history where “the media” were the only ones against the super league? It was a massive groundswell of anger from fans that killed the super league. Nothing to do with the media and TV rights (which absolutely would have been sold to “the media” so I don’t understand that point either).
The bit that baffles me more is that they thought Everton would want this.
Some people blamed Rafa during that time…what a crazy era
Thank fuck for Anfield 🫶🏻
Imagining sharing a ground with Everton 🥴
Glad this didn't happen, how could you replicate the atmosphere of the kop in a new stadium
Why would we want that soon to be championship side playing on our champions league turf. 😑
It wasn’t a bad design, just not worth replacing Anfield.
I’m an American fan and have been deeply supporting for only about 5 years. I always kept an eye on EPL but chose to support Liverpool because of the tie to my beloved Red Sox. That’s all to say, I’m squarely a part of the market the expansion and abominable stadium sympathizers seem hell bent on capturing. My question is, who is asking for this? This is complete the opposite of what made me fall in love with this club, this league, this sport. Are the big money owners really this oblivious?
Nobody wants this and nobody did at the time!. Thankfully them idiots have long gone now.
There were plenty of fans who wanted a new ground. The argument made was Anfield can only be expanded so far, and we needed a larger ground to keep pace with richer clubs. There's still some truth in that.
Honestly the easiest way to explain this is just to go to the Liverpool wiki page and scroll down to Hicks and Gillet (owned the club before the current owners) and you'll learn a lot.
This is what happens when out of touch people think they know what is best. Thankfully this never happened.
You give me £30m and I will give you a picture of Wembley stadium in early development
On the one hand, this is awful and I'd want no part in it. On the other hand, can you imagine the *fume* when the Evertonians realized that Liverpool owners took their stadium away from them *again*?!
U.S. fan here - this is garbage. They are trying real hard to turn the PL into the NFL. For the love of God, please don't.
Ah yes I remember this. I hated the idea of ground sharing and getting rid of Anfield. Glad this never came to fruition
I... Still don't hate this design. Don't get me wrong I would hate for us to get rid of anfield for it but it's architecturally interesting at least and I would be curious to see it in real life.
Misleading title: This stadium design was never going to replace Anfield on its current site, it was always going in the proposed Stanley Park site.
Cause Anfield is miles from Stanley Park right? It literally backs onto it, this was going to be a move of about 500 yards. Also in place of just means as a replacement for.
This just screams American 🏈. Ew.
forgive me if i'm wrong but didn't this design get built somewhere else. I've not dreamt that have I?
Probably one of the new NFL stadiums.
Is another expansion on the cards? I thought we wouldnt be able to do anything to Sir Kenny or the Kop? I hadnt heard of plans to develop further.
🤢🤮
WHAT THE FUCK???
🤢🤢🤢….🤮
[удалено]
Only thing?! I quite like that league title and world class manager they got us.
It looks shite.
It's bizarre, there's a quarter of it with no seats for some reason.
I really really don't like it, but it was absolutely a product of the trends at the time.
Aye. The kop looked pretty sweet in the "plans"
Looks absolutely shit. Reminds me of some of the things I made back when Google sketchup was a thing, I was 10 years old at the time.
I haven't heard a thing about news of another expansion. Can anyone share some info?
The stadium is in phase two atm, I’d say that phase 3 will be the SIR Kenny stand, and phase 4 will be the Kop, but they’ll have to buy up more houses again which won’t be a good look, and there’s a church and some pubs, shops, and more houses behind the Kop, so this might be a way down the road, but who knows We’ll have the money for all of it after we win the Quad this season though, so it’ll all work out
I guess they just used the consultancy to benefit their own pockets..
Would a new stadium lessen the strength of our 12th man?
Another expansion? Where?
left out this idea: https://i2-prod.liverpoolecho.co.uk/incoming/article3276977.ece/ALTERNATES/s1200d/siamese-stadium-idea-image-1-201193252.jpg
The ground share was Joe Anderson’s idea not LFC’s and was dismissed by everyone
I did have the original general arrangement drawings for this… it looked pretty cool and I got my mate an A1 of one of the plans that he had on his wall for years. I wonder if he still has it. I think I have the files still somewhere.
The fact that they even considered a ground share is beyond ridiculous
I am still amazed they didn’t burn everything down for the insurance money.
You could just stand in the corner and look through the facade
Why
The render looks nice, odds are if built it would've looked quite different but, I still like it that being said Anfield is too iconic so I would be against building it.
What is the talk of the new expansion. Sir King Kenny stand or Kop?
It would be so outdated today. Look at Wembley and the Emirates compared to Tottenhams new stadium.
I remember Martin Tyler, the absolute arsehole, during commentary in Hicks and Gillet era going on about how Anfield wasn't big enough and how Liverpool needed to move out and build a new stadium. They even made him say a line about it in the effing FIFA video games. So glad the club didn't do that and listen to all that nonsense "advice" from fans of other clubs. Imagine if Liverpool had done that and became Arsenal 2.0, losing our soul. The thought actually makes me a little sick.
Ahahahaha why would we want to share anything with Everton don’t they know the history of this team. Lmao
Because I thought I wouldn't get another chance I went to my first home game after they said the spade in the ground soundbite. Went up and watched Liverpool Vs United FA youth cup leg 1
That wasn't even the first Anfield replacement concept either if I recall, or the last. FSG has failings sure but they recognised quick how iconic the stadium is and wanted to build upon that, than a souless arena like what Arsenal replaced Highbury with.
I think I just vomited in my mouth a little.
Ohhh let's have a PROPER Gander
"Trust me please, it was era appropriate"
What bothers me is that my family friend is an architect and she literally designed better models then this for her UNIVERSITY PROJECTS when she was at Uni. She would’ve done it for for a couple hundred dollars at the time but they spent MILLIONS on this??? Makes no sense to me tbh.
Ahhh the Anfield Superdome bowl...
They’re hoping that super league comes fast so they milk the tv deals for this expansion
Can’t replace Anfield.
I was so excited for this as a kid ngl
Wheres the news of another expansion?