Liverpool FC 09/10

Kimbo wrote:

Luis wrote:

Kimbo wrote:How many players do Liverpool have on their books?

Who's really bothered? does it make any difference to anyone?

If a youngster really is the real deal Benitez will put him in the team ahead of proven foreign talent. Benitez eats, breaths and sleeps football so he's going to take an interest in the youth system

Enough is enough Lulu, enough is enough!

From nearly all your posts on the big 4 you agree that enough is enough so why are you trying to ridicule it? you're really contradicting yourself lately old timer, perhaps relegation has gotten to you and you need some time out.

Luis wrote:

Kimbo wrote:

Luis wrote:

Kimbo wrote:How many players do Liverpool have on their books?

Who's really bothered? does it make any difference to anyone?

If a youngster really is the real deal Benitez will put him in the team ahead of proven foreign talent. Benitez eats, breaths and sleeps football so he's going to take an interest in the youth system

Enough is enough Lulu, enough is enough!

From nearly all your posts on the big 4 you agree that enough is enough so why are you trying to ridicule it? you're really contradicting yourself lately old timer, perhaps relegation has gotten to you and you need some time out.

Because despite saying enough is enough, you clearly don't fully agree. You would never agree to squad limits, transfer caps, wages caps etc.

Kimbo wrote:It's madness.

Not really, a healthy size squad would be around 25 players per squad.

Which would mean we have a squad in excess of around 12 players.

Newcastle United for example have a squad size of 65, it has been noted that there first team squad was too thin for a number of years.

If we were 12 shy, we'd have a squad of 76 - if Newcastle equally had 12 more in there squad they'd have 77.

Our excess of players useing the Newcastle hypothesis could be argued as to why we have been more successful on the pitch.

A nothing exploration of numbers really here for Liverpool FC, perhaps an eye opener for a Newcastle fan however.

Kimbo wrote:

Luis wrote:

Kimbo wrote:

Luis wrote:

Kimbo wrote:How many players do Liverpool have on their books?

Who's really bothered? does it make any difference to anyone?

If a youngster really is the real deal Benitez will put him in the team ahead of proven foreign talent. Benitez eats, breaths and sleeps football so he's going to take an interest in the youth system

Enough is enough Lulu, enough is enough!

From nearly all your posts on the big 4 you agree that enough is enough so why are you trying to ridicule it? you're really contradicting yourself lately old timer, perhaps relegation has gotten to you and you need some time out.

Because despite saying enough is enough, you clearly don't fully agree. You would never agree to squad limits, transfer caps, wages caps etc.

I'd agree to wage caps for sure.

I just don't see how us signing youngsters really has an effect on you? Unless you wanted them and you didn't receive the brochures that were sent out!

Football Genius wrote:

Kimbo wrote:It's madness.

Not really, a healthy size squad would be around 25 players per squad.

Which would mean we have a squad in excess of around 12 players.

Newcastle United for example have a squad size of 65, it has been noted that there first team squad was too thin for a number of years.

If we were 12 shy, we'd have a squad of 76 - if Newcastle equally had 12 more in there squad they'd have 77.

Our excess of players useing the Newcastle hypothesis could be argued as to why we have been more successful on the pitch.

A nothing exploration of numbers really here for Liverpool FC, perhaps an eye opener for a Newcastle fan however.

We don't have a small squad, we just lack talented back up players.

You can easily play both U18s and reserves games with the same squad, we do. You don't need separate 25 man squads for both.

Yes you may be successful because of your squad size, that's not really the point though, because not everyone can do that, it costs money and really there isn't enough players to go around. And as you're mentioning us, we prbably have too many players aswell, recently we've copied the fashion of buying in kids. We've spent millions on them in the past couple of years and none of them are have broken through.

Also the biggest point when it comes to academy players is whether moving to clubs like Liverpool actually helps them. IMO hanging around the youth and reserves leagues until you're 21/22, THEN leaving to make a name for themselves doesn't help them, in the past they would work their way up through the lower leagues which is surely a far better way of learning.

I don't see who is going to benefit from this system.

So he is comfortable in Liverpool.

He has fond memories of Pellegrini, and accepts Barca have an excellent team.

Expect a 'Pellegrini: COME GET ME PLEA' in the papers tomorrow.

It seems he is happy for the time being however, and there are no quotes that say 'i'd love to play for x club' or 'My wife is unhappy at Liverpool'

I'm fairly satisfied with these comments, no doubt the papers will spin it tomorrow though.

Football Genius wrote:So he is comfortable in Liverpool.

He has fond memories of Pellegrini, and accepts Barca have an excellent team.

Expect a 'Pellegrini: COME GET ME PLEA' in the papers tomorrow.

It seems he is happy for the time being however, and there are no quotes that say 'i'd love to play for x club' or 'My wife is unhappy at Liverpool'

I'm fairly satisfied with these comments, no doubt the papers will spin it tomorrow though.

Welcome to our world

I feel comfortable in Liverpool are the only words in 5 lines where you can take anything 'positive' from it. Seems more like he's flirting with both Madrid and Barca to me. Ronaldo at least managed to actually say i feel good here i am happy here before fucking off. Masch cant even manage that

Kimbo wrote:

Football Genius wrote:

Kimbo wrote:It's madness.

Not really, a healthy size squad would be around 25 players per squad.

Which would mean we have a squad in excess of around 12 players.

Newcastle United for example have a squad size of 65, it has been noted that there first team squad was too thin for a number of years.

If we were 12 shy, we'd have a squad of 76 - if Newcastle equally had 12 more in there squad they'd have 77.

Our excess of players useing the Newcastle hypothesis could be argued as to why we have been more successful on the pitch.

A nothing exploration of numbers really here for Liverpool FC, perhaps an eye opener for a Newcastle fan however.

We don't have a small squad, we just lack talented back up players.

You can easily play both U18s and reserves games with the same squad, we do. You don't need separate 25 man squads for both.

Yes you may be successful because of your squad size, that's not really the point though, because not everyone can do that, it costs money and really there isn't enough players to go around. And as you're mentioning us, we prbably have too many players aswell, recently we've copied the fashion of buying in kids. We've spent millions on them in the past couple of years and none of them are have broken through.

Also the biggest point when it comes to academy players is whether moving to clubs like Liverpool actually helps them. IMO hanging around the youth and reserves leagues until you're 21/22, THEN leaving to make a name for themselves doesn't help them, in the past they would work their way up through the lower leagues which is surely a far better way of learning.

I don't see who is going to benefit from this system.

Doing a little research with regards to direct comparison of Liverpool FC and Newcastle United;

Your revenues are approx £100m - Ours £133.9 - Your wage bill is £73m, ours £90m.

Our wage to revenue % is 67% and yours 73%. We finished second, and you got relegated.

The model Liverpool, United, Arsenal, Chelsea adopt is to have lots of competition through the first, reserve and youth team because competition drives development.

My point is, you could have financially have competed within the confines of this policy as your finances would allow this, instead you have lots of your wages tied up in a handful of highly paid players.

Instead of venting your frustrations at other clubs abilties to operate more efficiently, perhaps again take a look at your own club and recognise the faults are not in other clubs being far more prudent with their budgets / revenues, as opposed to how poorly you have been.

"I still have three years on my contract with Liverpool and I am happy there," he told TyC Sports.
"I am comfortable and thinking only of Liverpool. I don't know anything about an approach from Barcelona or any other club."

Quotes

You're distracting from the point. Anyway your numbers are way off.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deloitte_Football_Money_League#Rankings_for_the_2007.2F08_season

Kevin Perineum wrote:"I still have three years on my contract with Liverpool and I am happy there," he told TyC Sports.
"I am comfortable and thinking only of Liverpool. I don't know anything about an approach from Barcelona or any other club."

Quotes

Bizarre an article titled Mascherano happy at Liverpool, missed out the quotes with him actually saying he's happy at Liverpool

this is my fault?

we wouldn't sell that mob a virus

L-r d wrote:

Kevin Perineum wrote:"I still have three years on my contract with Liverpool and I am happy there," he told TyC Sports.
"I am comfortable and thinking only of Liverpool. I don't know anything about an approach from Barcelona or any other club."

Quotes

Bizarre an article titled Mascherano happy at Liverpool, missed out the quotes with him actually saying he's happy at Liverpool

I don't think you understand how the English media works Lrd.

For example when Gerrard said "I will be 33 at the end of my contract in 2013 and I don't know if I will go any further," The Times wrote a headline of 'Steven Gerrard may call time on Liverpool'. Misleading much?

Kimbo wrote:You're distracting from the point. Anyway your numbers are way off.

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deloitte_Football_Money_League#Rankings_for_the_2007.2F08_season

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deloitte_Football_Money_League#Rankings_for_the_2007.2F08_season[/quote[/url]]

My figures were from the season before last, i've dug up the official accounts i had saved for Liverpool from the previous season and our revenue was £159,052m and wage bill £89,729m

So the figures entered by some random on wikipedia are incorrect in anycase.

Do you have a reliable source for Newcastle's revenue and wage bill, you'd be happy for me to use.

I've got the Liverpool whole end of year accounts so my figures are accurate. Can post if you'd like to display just how inaccurate your 'WIKI' figures are.

The Wiki article is using Deloitte's information and they are pretty accurate and are world wide regarded as a reliable source of information in this kind..... you always seem to have different figures from everything FG.

No those figures are 'claimed' to have been from deloitte.

Here are the full Liverpool account figures which are public knowledge and available without having to sign upto deloitte, its an audit report of the last 3 years. This does no co-incide with what WIKI (anyone can write anything) Pedia has.
Liverpool FC & Athletic Grounds Limited

Key Figures

		2008		2007		% Change
Turnover		159,052		133,910		19%
Cost of Sales		16,523		16,417		0.6%
Admin Expenses		145,240		143,160		1.5%
Profit/(Loss) Before Tax		10,199		(21,655)		n/a
Net Debt		86,017		43,868		96%
Cashflow from Operating Activites		22,863		39,996		(43)%
Gross Transfer Expenditure		69,966		69,972		0%

Turnover

This is broken down as thus

	2008		2007		% Change
Media	68,358		52,161		31%
Matchday	39,215		38,442		2%
Commercial	49,849		41,794		19%
Museum & OSC	1,630		1,513		7.7%

Healthy increases in media was expected with the advent of the current premier league tv deal. However a small amount of the increase is also due to the steep fall in sterling in the latter part of the season. While there was a compensating item for failing to reach the european cup final.

Matchday turnover increased as a result of the standard increase in ticket prices. With Anfield operating at near enough full capacity the scope for increases here are limited.

Commercial revenue increased as a result of both merchandise sales increasing aswell as an increase in the value of the club's sponsorship deal with Carlsberg. The carlsberg deal accounted for approx £2.5m of this increase.

Admin Expenses

	2008		2007		% Change
Staff Costs	89,729		77,589		16%
Amortisation of Players Registrations	32,497		31,121		4.4%
Impairment on Players Registrations	-		2,005		(100%)
Other Operating Charges	20,406		16,991		20%

Net Debt

	2008		2007		% Change
Bank Debt	21,546		43,868		(51)%
Inter-Company Loans	79,911		-		N/A
Cash at bank and in hand	16,284		441
Total Net Debt	86,017		43,868		96%

The net debt to external parties (ie banks) has decreased, however this is more than surpassed by loans from the parent companies of LFC. The bank debt carries an interest charge of Libor + 3.5%. The intercompany loans were provided from the Caymen Islands company.

Since the year end and additional £21.3m was received from Kop Football Limted (ultimately from Kop Football (Caymans)) for working capital requirements.

Contingent Assets/Liabilities

If certain conditions are met the club has potential income of £11.6m (of which £2.6m has since been realised) and potential expenditure of £19.8m (of which £1.6m has since been realised) on transfer fees.

Transfer Expenditure

The one area that causes the biggest debate. Every year we have fans complaining about the amount of money spent on players and every year they get it wrong, massively. These are the true figures for the last 3 financial years.

(figures in £000s)

Financial Year Ending	2008		2007		2006
Purchases	69,966		69,972		41,753
Sales	29,740		25,946		16,838
Net Transfer Activity	40,226		44,026		24,915

These values include relevant levies to the premier league, VAT and agents fees. Signing on fees go straight to the Profit & Loss at time of payment.

Since the year end Albert Riera, Peter Gulasci and Victor Palsson were bought by the club for total transfer fees of £7m (I assume this includes VAT and agents fees, but am not certain)

Since the year end the club sold Robbie Keane and Steve Finnan for a total guaranteed income of £12.8m. However this amount will increase significantly should certain conditions be met.

The Immediate Future

The immediate future is now very difficult to predict, will we be sold again or won't we. Will the stadium go ahead or not, will refinancing be granted or not? So many questions so little answers. There is only a limited area of certainty.

1) The latest Premier League tv deal. This will continue for the next 4 years, but there is the uncertainty of Setanta.

2) The increased sponsorship revenue from Carlsberg continues until the end of next season, while other improved sponsorship/advertising deals have been agreed.

3) The supporter pet hate, ticket prices, this will go the other way for the coming season, for the season just gone there will likely be a net fall due to the number of games played at home in the season.

4) The club has the full benefit of owning the company that runs the website and LFC TV. This will increase turnover by approx £4m per year and profits from it will double from previous levels.

Benchmarking against our rivals

With this I aim to show how the top 4 compare in the revenue, core costs (player amortisation and wages) and transfer expenditure stakes.

The figures relate to the season 2006/07 and are taken from the published accounts of all 4 clubs. There is a slight difference in accounting reference dates but I believe these are insignificant. The figures also relate to footballing activity only (arsenal have a property development going on at present, chelsea have the hotel etc)

(in £000s unless stated)

	Liverpool		Manchester United		Chelsea		Arsenal
Turnover	159,052		256,239		199,339		207,723
Media	68,358		90,723		Not Avail		68,360
Matchday	39,215		101,468		Not Avail		94,580
Commercial	49,849		64,048		Not Avail		44,311
Amortisation of Player Registrations	32,497		35,481		57,281		21,757
Staff Wages	89,729		121,080		171,620		101,302
Staff Wages as % of Turnover	56%		47%		86%		49%
Gross Transfer Expenditure	69,966		14,338		80,727		27,490
Net Transfer Expenditure	40,226		(13,254)		48,106		(13,707)

It must be noted that the following events occurred after the balance sheet dates.

Manchester United bought players for fees totalling £34.4m, with £1.6m recouped from sales. Contingent Liabilities on transfers stand at £14.8m

The figures for Chelsea only relate to football activites, hotel revenues are excluded to make the figures more comparable. The Staff Wages includes termination costs of £23.1m

Chelsea sold players for a profit of £8.5m since the balance sheet date. Contingent Liabilities on transfers stand at £3.7m

The figures for Arsenal are for footballing activities only. Since the year end Arsenal received £1.5m net on transfer fees. Contingent Asset/Liabilities on transfers stand at £6.3m/£12.3m respectively


LFC.tv Limited

This is appears to be a success story at present. Nothing much to say on it.

Turnover £7.9m (from 2008/09 onwards all of this will be a wholey owned subsidiary of LFC as opposed to being a joint venture)
Profit Before Tax £2.9m

Turnover is split as follows

Website £4.7m
Television £3.2m (this is an increase from £0.5m the year before).

This suggests that the deal with setanta could be worth £2.5m per annum. If this is true then I would say it's a great deal.


Kop Football (Holdings) Limited

Loss Before Tax £40.9m

Net Debt £299.5m.

Gross debt £320m of which £261m owed to banks, £58.2m owed to parent companies and £7.5m of financing costs capitalised to the balance sheet.

Cash balances £20.6m

Interest charged £36.5m

Interest paid £35.2m

Net debt increased by £55m in the year. This includes monies received from parent companies (charged at 10% per annum, interest not yet paid).


Expenses Claimed

2008 - reimbursable third party consulting, travel and other expenses with Hicks and affiliated companies £192,000

2008 - reimbursable third party consulting, legal, travel and other expenses with Hicks and affiliated companies £129,000


AUDIT REPORT

The major issue arrising from the accounts this time, however, relates to the KPMG report on Going Concern. Due to the facilities being due for repayment on 24 July 2009 and with no refinancing agreed/announced at the time of sign off by KPMG they have raised an emphasis of matter on the going concern status of the holding companies and club. The club/owners are in discussions to refinance the facilities and looking for possible equity finance. I don't think there is too much to say on this as I am sure everyone will have their views on this, and the results.

I will say that as a standalone company LFC should have no problems. I'd imagine they would get refinancing for club debt, however the millstone of the purchase debt is having an effect. This may explain some of the rumours going round recently about the owners being told to pay down the debt over the next couple of years.

There is a comment in the report about revised stadium plans going to the council in Q2 2009, however the refinancing issue needs to be settled before this can really be taken forward.

Future prospects are both bleak and positive. Positively the club is back in the black and has increasing revenues again, especially in the commercial area (the one area at present that the club can really increase revenues by it's own actions). The tv deal will provide a stable platform for the next 4 years and LFC.tv is improving year on year.

Bleakly the club needs to have the refinancing/takeover saga sorted quickly. It always has, however with the new contracts, both staff and commercial, there must be a large amount of optimism that the refinancing will occur. However it needs to be for longer than a year to ensure short to medium term stability.

Now lets see LRD, whats looks more concise and accuarate, these full accounts or your 'anybody can write on Wikipedia'

It's Deloitte, it's not random. Anyway here's an article saying you're taking in £167m. Our revenue is something like £99m with a wage bill like you said.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7884780.stm

I don't know what the point of this is, it has nothing to do with my original point. Are you trying to prove to me that Newcastle have been poorly run? We were one of the richer clubs, but as the CL money took hold we fell away, and in a desperate and foolish attempt to get back up there we put ourselves in debt. We were once as rich as Liverpool, now we're not in the same stratosphere.

I recognise you posted that as i posted mine Kimbo, so i'll allow yourself to assess whether a BBC article is more accurate than the Audit provided.

My point was simple, even without the Champions League money we generate, your income allbeit less than ours is still competitive, as proven by your comparitiely similar wage bill.

Instead of being prudent you've locked up much of your budget in a handful of players.

You seem disguted that clubs such as Liverpool can harbour 88 professional footballers, as opposed to your 65.. my point is that this method is successful for the club as proven by the onfield results.

My arguement is you could also implement such a method, however your club / playing staff is not efficently run. As a result your onfield performances have resulted in you get relegated.

Don't bitch whine moan at clubs who are efficiently operated, when your club was effectively in a position to be competitive in the top 8 clubs in the EPL. Your downfall is a result of your own failing, not other clubs prudent structures.

FG you are somewhat a bit loony. What a way to completely go off on another issue to somehow prove a point with irrelevent figures.

Rafa has signed all these youngsters are fuck all has come from it. Probably harmed some of kids development while wasting money having so many players and signing so many in the process. He clearly is hoping sign random young highly rated players and hope for the best. Well you need to be able to spot talent it appears Rafa just doesn't have this touch. Babel

Yeah, well i know Newcastle are poorly run FG, there have been a few clues over the years. I also don't necessarily blame Liverpool for their tactic, as you say it is working for them, i blame the authorities for allowing it, they allow too much. Also that post says you have an income of £160m, you realise that is over twice as much as the likes of Villa and Everton? You need to ignore Newcastle and look at the rest, it's a freak club that has wasted it's potential.


Here's the Deloitte press release, backing up the wiki article.
http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/press_release/0,1014,sid%253D2834%2526cid%253D246948,00.html

L-r d wrote:FG you are somewhat a bit loony. What a way to completely go off on another issue to somehow prove a point with irrelevent figures.

Rafa has signed all these youngsters are fuck all has come from it. Probably harmed some of kids development while wasting money having so many players and signing so many in the process. He clearly is hoping sign random young highly rated players and hope for the best. Well you need to be able to spot talent it appears Rafa just doesn't have this touch. Babel

Djemba Djemba

All clubs purchase players who don't make the grade. Whats your point?

Would you like me to post how many players United have on their books?

I'm not sure how many youngsters Fergle has brought through since Rafa has been in charge

Deloitte possibly are using 'Kop Holdings Ltd' as opposed to Liverpool FC & Athletic Grounds Limited

Kop Holdings is the parent company, Liverpool FC & Athletic Grounds Limited deals with the operation of the club.

However the figures are very similar in anycase.

We effectively have a 67% greater revenue than Newcastle, which is substantial. A large chunk of that will be Champions League revenue.

However the funds allocated to wages are not that different.

[quote="Kimbo"]Yeah, well i know Newcastle are poorly run FG, there have been a few clues over the years. I also don't necessarily blame Liverpool for their tactic, as you say it is working for them, i blame the authorities for allowing it, they allow too much. Also that post says you have an income of £160m, you realise that is over twice as much as the likes of Villa and Everton? You need to ignore Newcastle and look at the rest, it's a freak club that has wasted it's potential.


Here's the Deloitte press release, backing up the wiki article.
http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/press_release/0,1014,sid%253D2834%2526cid%253D246948,00.html[/quote]

It is true that there is a huge disparity between the top 4 and the 'rest' - however theres a huge disparity between Villa, Everton and Preston for example.

Consistant successful campaigns allow you the platform to continue being successful.

Everton and Villa are becoming consistantly stable clubs moving forward step by step each season, if they raise their bench mark and one of the top 4 clubs drops theirs then the competition is still on.

I'm not entirely sure how you can make the system anymore competitive, if you put wage caps in place, players will still go to the clubs who are winning which currently will be the same old faces. Perhaps a loyalty contract of some sort where the player cannot transfer until the last year of their contract, then the fee's would be lower and players would probably sign shorter deals, which again doesn't really help.

Any practical ideas?

We've signed another youngster by the way

Liverpool have completed the signing of 15-year-old Jesus Joaquin Fernandez from Cadiz, according to one Spanish newspaper.

The Reds are said to have beaten off competition from Barcelona, Real Madrid, Sevilla and Villarreal for the midfielder's services.

After a significant amount of time negotiating the deal the player's family have finally accepted Liverpool's offer.

Cadiz, currently in Spain's second division, are also said to be happy with the transfer after they were handsomely rewarded in terms of compensation.

The youngster is thought to have signed a five-year contract on Merseyside, according to the newspaper Diario de Cadiz.

The teenage sensation is a left-footed player and is thought to possess an innate footballing brain

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11669_5394698,00.html

http://www.setanta.com//uk/Articles/Football/2009/06/21/Premier-League-Liverpool-to-sign-Suso/gnid-57789/

Kevin Perineum wrote:I'm not sure how many youngsters Fergle has brought through since Rafa has been in charge

Richardson
Pique
Rossi
Evans
Gibson
Rafael
Fabio
Welbeck
Macheda
Campbell
Eagles
Jones
Ebanks-Blake
and many more

almost all of those players were already at the club when Rafa took over Liverpool. Is Gibson so much better than Guthrie? Is Rafu/Fafu so much better than Insua? I think not.