FSG OUT

[Halmeister]

Our recruitment used to be spot on. It's rancid now. £120m plus on Cackpo and Nunez is abysmal.

 

[binomial]

That 120m shouldv'e gone on Antony and Jesus

 

[Halmeister]

Tbf, Nunez i can at least some potential in. Though I fear he's too thick and technically lacking to make it here.

Gakpo, though, is an absolute nothing player, no redeeming qualities mentally or physically, who plays in one of the few positions we actually happen to be well stocked. On top of this, he was bought in place of addressing more pressing concerns. Absolute amateur hour.

 

[King Binny]

signed Nunez: paid £47m of initial £64m fee, £21m in add-ons
sold Mane: £27.5m, £5m in add-ons

 

[bluebell]

if true, this is more of the same

 

[MomoWASright]

Anfield Watch are the same load of my hoop as the Anfield Wrap.

 

[bluebell]

Anfield Watch are the same load of my hoop as the Anfield Wrap.

Which is why it's not a new thread. It's all over twitter... However, the news seems more realistic.

 

[MomoWASright]

Twitter is a load of my hoop too

 

[rubans]

FSG’s attitude and current commiment would imagine have some sort impact and we haven’t spent it wisely.
However, I thought pre Nunez signing, general forum consensus was we wanted him?
We just don’t spend enough to be able to waste it and for FSG to spend a whole year whoring us out to other buyers. We had some discussions on here previously about spending to protect their investment but they have failed to do that and just like the current players failing to protect Klopp.

 

[keniget]

You can’t run a football club expecting 100% success rate in the transfer market.

You also can’t preach the data driven approach for years, allow half your back room staff to leave without replacements and then expect high performance recruitment.

The argument that because we’ve spent 100M or so (belatedly) on attackers recently shows that “we’ve had money” is just Dreamy-esque contrarianism.

 

[Squiggles]

NEW: The search for investment into Liverpool by Fenway Sports Group will likely hot up in February and March as interested parties potentially make their moves formal.⁣ ⁣ The next month or so could well see some of the interest that has yet to show itself formally crystallise, with US institutional investors and private equity firms and money from the MENA region likely to be assessing their options.⁣ ⁣

FSG would prefer to find a 'strategic partner' that could aid their goals, reduce some risk and burden on their shoulders.⁣ ⁣ This would also provide them with an exit route in the future through any minority investor accreting their interest into a majority stake over time.⁣ ⁣ A potential route for FSG, could be the selling of a piece of the club to a sports investment group that has already established a multi-club model.⁣

Multi-club models, while not universally popular, have the potential to be a very useful tool when it comes to recruitment, especially given how it has become more challenging for English clubs to acquire foreign players following Brexit, this is down to the the Governing Body Endorsement [GBE] regulations that work on a points-based system that players have to reach before being granted a work permit. #lfc [liverpool echo]

 

[rubans]

FSG should ask the PL if they can put rest of the games on hold while they look to raise some cash.

 

[King Binny]

[article]Turning his focus to the issues around the club's ownership, Carragher refused to single out FSG for the club's current performance issues. He said: "A lot of people are looking at the ownership. What's happening right now, I do not blame FSG one bit for that. I don't. I will now get criticised by certain sections of the supporters for being an apologist for the ownership. I've got no job at Liverpool. I don't know no (sic) owner at Liverpool. There's been no ex-players that's ever been more critical of this ownership than me, in terms of ticket prices, furloughing staff and the Super League.

"But you have to look at it properly and say this, for me, is down to the staff and the players and the recruitment team. The reason I go back to the recruitment team is that for the last four or five years, everybody has used Liverpool as a model for everybody in this country and Europe to follow. Buy cheap sell high. And people say they haven't put enough money in. But what Liverpool have been the best at is actually selling and bringing money in to allow them to go and spend £75million on a centre-back, £60million on a goalkeeper, £50-odd million on Naby Keita. But right now, they've got to the end of last season and the staff - there was money there for a midfield player.

"They tried to buy the lad who went to Real Madrid (Aurelien Tchouameni) so there was £60-£70million there for a midfield player. They couldn't get him and Jurgen Klopp and his staff, or the recruitment team decided 'we don't need to buy a midfielder'. That is on them. And then they've got to this season and from day one against Fulham, they haven't been able to cope with the intensity of a Premier League game of football and they've just been absolutely ran over in every Premier League game that they've played, virtually."[/article]

 

[My_Blood_Bleeds_Red]

You can’t run a football club expecting 100% success rate in the transfer market.

You also can’t preach the data driven approach for years, allow half your back room staff to leave without replacements and then expect high performance recruitment.

The argument that because we’ve spent 100M or so (belatedly) on attackers recently shows that “we’ve had money” is just Dreamy-esque contrarianism.

The thing is almost every top club would have a data department by now and the datasets are all the same. Algorithms don’t change and it’s all public knowledge. So essentially there’s nothing really that separates anybody or gives any club the edge. There are many companies who will gladly sell the data to you too.

So eventually it all comes down your negotiation team in getting the best bargains and closing deals.