Jump to content

Thoughts On Liverpool's Takeover?


 Share

Recommended Posts

I was looking around the net for an Everton forum to get some honest views on the takeover of my club, Liverpool, for a bit of perspective. I came across one which said it was for 'Thinking Evertonians', seemed ideal to me.

 

So, what do you think about it all?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was looking around the net for an Everton forum to get some honest views on the takeover of my club, Liverpool, for a bit of perspective. I came across one which said it was for 'Thinking Evertonians', seemed ideal to me.

 

So, what do you think about it all?

 

One thing I aint seen mentioned yet, have they got the cash or is it a Glazer type morgage situation??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole thing is just a continuation of the downward spiral of football. It is largely no longer wholey about talent, but wealth.

 

I also think its funny that Liverpool fans have chanted "USA, USA, USA!" at Man Utd about the Glazer situation and now they find themselves in exactley the same situation and don;t really care.

 

At the end of the day if Liverpool go on to win the league within the next three years it will be the money that has won it for them. Their pre-takeover squad and managment would not win the league, they would not even get close. Im not trying to be disrespectful of Liverpool but its the truth.

 

In certain papers it has been said that this has been the most exciting premiership ever. What a joke! just becasue for one week it looked like there was an outisde chance of it being a 4 horse race, however that was never going to be the case and Man Utd have been top all season (bar one week when chelsea ent top) that is not exciting, its just surprising that chelsea arn;t top.

 

I don;t like the whole takeover, "teams being richmans playthings" situation. The gaps between teams are getting larger and larger, and without a huge cash injection the gap in unbridgable. The Rich will get richer, the poor will get poorer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah, they've got the money. Gillett got knocked back at first because Moores was worried about his ability financially to run a team long term, and was worried that we'd end up with a Man U type situation. Gillett went away and came back with an even richer bloke as well.

 

I think that, aside from their nationality, this takeover is as far from the Glazer one as possible. When Glazer 1st visited Old Trafford he was made to leave in the back of a police van becasue the bizzies feared for his life!

 

 

Thing is, there'll be plenty of people giving us shit about being owned by the yanks, but anyone else could end up in the same situation down the line, I doubt we will be the last. Most probably crave it.

 

For me, I'm not sure at the moment what I think, all we've had so far is one surreal press conference and a shit load of speculation.

They're going to call the new stadium something daft though :( The Microsoft Anfield Arena or some such tosh. At least Kit Kat and McCain Ovan Chips have prior commitments.

Edited by johny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both of these lads have a good grounding in sports and will be an asset to the RS. As to how the future will pan out, not too sure on that score. Learner at Villa seems to have the clubs interest at heart, but he is an individual, you have a partnership and I feel that could well lead to problems down the line.

 

ATB

 

Mac

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest once-a-blue!
The whole thing is just a continuation of the downward spiral of football. It is largely no longer wholey about talent, but wealth.

 

At the end of the day if Liverpool go on to win the league within the next three years it will be the money that has won it for them. Their pre-takeover squad and managment would not win the league, they would not even get close. Im not trying to be disrespectful of Liverpool but its the truth.

 

Just maybe somebody at Anfield realised that without a major injection of capital they would not achieve their long term objectives and decided to do something positive. Sport all over the world is huge business and we worry more about paying a few quid back to the bank than strengthening our squad. How far away are we from being a very good team? Yes it feels great to take 3 points off Liverpool but surely we want more than that. Years of relegation battles caused us a lot of embarrassment and I for one couldn't give a flying fck where the money comes from if it put's us in a position to be a real threat. Why are we so preoccupied about who invests in a football club. Let's face it a lot of Evertonians are very pleased with Chelsea as it has made it even more difficult for Liverpool to win anything! Time to worry about ourselves and stop being accountants! We are football fans for fcks sake. If Liverpool do win the Premiership in the next few seasons it will be down to business planning and making sure that they have the funds to give them success. Just maybe we can learn from that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just maybe somebody at Anfield realised that without a major injection of capital they would not achieve their long term objectives and decided to do something positive. Sport all over the world is huge business and we worry more about paying a few quid back to the bank than strengthening our squad. How far away are we from being a very good team? Yes it feels great to take 3 points off Liverpool but surely we want more than that. Years of relegation battles caused us a lot of embarrassment and I for one couldn't give a flying fck where the money comes from if it put's us in a position to be a real threat. Why are we so preoccupied about who invests in a football club. Let's face it a lot of Evertonians are very pleased with Chelsea as it has made it even more difficult for Liverpool to win anything! Time to worry about ourselves and stop being accountants! We are football fans for fcks sake. If Liverpool do win the Premiership in the next few seasons it will be down to business planning and making sure that they have the funds to give them success. Just maybe we can learn from that!

 

I dont think many Evertonians would turn their nose at a billionaire take over, but this is a thread disscussing Liverpoos take over, which is fair comment, and open for debate.

 

I think moores got the best deal possible, but all they mega money take overs look good dont they in the short term. The Anfield 39rs are now just a private buisness to two investors (as mac said this could lead to trouble) who dont give a feck about anything but making money, theirs no love or passion in them, despite what they may say. As long as the team do the business, the supporters wont care. I suppose we'll have to wait and see, you wont see the fall out for another 10 years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest once-a-blue!
I dont think many Evertonians would turn their nose at a billionaire take over, but this is a thread disscussing Liverpoos take over, which is fair comment, and open for debate.

 

I think moores got the best deal possible, but all they mega money take overs look good dont they in the short term. The Anfield 39rs are now just a private buisness to two investors (as mac said this could lead to trouble) who dont give a feck about anything but making money, theirs no love or passion in them, despite what they may say. As long as the team do the business, the supporters wont care. I suppose we'll have to wait and see, you wont see the fall out for another 10 years

 

So what has changed? Lot's of faceless wonders investing money in sport to try and make a few quid. Do Chelsea supporters think to themselves, "well if it hadn't been for Roman we would still be winning nothing! Do they fck - they are loving every minute of their success and so they should. If it all falls to pieces in 10 years what do you think they would have preferred? If Liverpool add to their trophy cabinet are they going to be bothered - I don't think so! Let's face it we could all be dead tomorrow and I would rather take success with me than failure. Personally I think that Liverpool played the take over deal very well and used DIC to their best advantage.Both of the American's have been involved in sport for a very long time and their future road map looks impressive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont think many Evertonians would turn their nose at a billionaire take over, but this is a thread disscussing Liverpoos take over, which is fair comment, and open for debate.

 

I think moores got the best deal possible, but all they mega money take overs look good dont they in the short term. The Anfield 39rs are now just a private buisness to two investors (as mac said this could lead to trouble) who dont give a feck about anything but making money, theirs no love or passion in them, despite what they may say. As long as the team do the business, the supporters wont care. I suppose we'll have to wait and see, you wont see the fall out for another 10 years

 

 

I hope they do intend to make money from us. The only way they'll do that is if we win things regularly, which is all us supporters want at the end of the day.

 

Its a real shame that football went down this path, but it did. Maybe once we're all owned by rich businessmen and the playing field is level(er) again, then we can go back to worrying about the football on the pitch again, and leave the moneymen to worry about the money. That would be nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what has changed? Lot's of faceless wonders investing money in sport to try and make a few quid. Do Chelsea supporters think to themselves, "well if it hadn't been for Roman we would still be winning nothing! Do they fck - they are loving every minute of their success and so they should. If it all falls to pieces in 10 years what do you think they would have preferred? If Liverpool add to their trophy cabinet are they going to be bothered - I don't think so! Let's face it we could all be dead tomorrow and I would rather take success with me than failure. Personally I think that Liverpool played the take over deal very well and used DIC to their best advantage.Both of the American's have been involved in sport for a very long time and their future road map looks impressive.

 

 

I think the Chelsea fans will care if it falls apart in 10 years because they will have no club to support if Roman fucks off, they'll be up shit creek without a paddle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John... I heard a rumour about 'new anfield' apparently it can not be UEFA 5 star stadium because there isn't 1000 hotel rooms in Liverpool of a 5 star standard which means the biggest footballing competition final it could host is the UEFA Cup as it 'only' requires 500 rooms of 5 star or above.

 

Have you heard that of that before ? If that is s the case it makes moving from a 4 star stadium to a 4 stadium a bit farcical and very expensive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John... I heard a rumour about 'new anfield' apparently it can not be UEFA 5 star stadium because there isn't 1000 hotel rooms in Liverpool of a 5 star standard which means the biggest footballing competition final it could host is the UEFA Cup as it 'only' requires 500 rooms of 5 star or above.

 

Have you heard that of that before ? If that is s the case it makes moving from a 4 star stadium to a 4 stadium a bit farcical and very expensive.

 

 

I did hear something like that a while ago, when the original plans were announced. I have to say I disagree that it is 'farcical' to move to our new ground. The reason we're moving is for money, not for the chance to stage the Champions League final. We're miles behind United, Arsenal and Newcastle when it comes to gate receipts and corporate entertainment money, and with United seemingly able to add more seats at will, we're only going to fall further behind.

 

Presumably, if and when Liverpool has 1000 5* hotel rooms, the the new ground will be upgraded to a 5* stadium anyway? The current Anfield however will not, as it cannot be expanded.

 

As to the expense, yes I agree it is expensive. We could have gone down the route Bolton did, and built it on some waste ground a few miles away for a lot less money, but I doubt whether the board gave that too much serious consideration, it would've been a very unpopular decision. It's a wrench to leave Anfield, but the fact that we're only moving 200yds or so is one hell of a sweetener in the deal.

The fact that our new chairmen are paying for the stadium themselves, and not with debt like Arsenal did, makes the money matter pretty irrelevant anyway. Once it's up, it's up, and it's ours lock, stock, and barrel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did hear something like that a while ago, when the original plans were announced. I have to say I disagree that it is 'farcical' to move to our new ground. The reason we're moving is for money, not for the chance to stage the Champions League final. We're miles behind United, Arsenal and Newcastle when it comes to gate receipts and corporate entertainment money, and with United seemingly able to add more seats at will, we're only going to fall further behind.

 

Presumably, if and when Liverpool has 1000 5* hotel rooms, the the new ground will be upgraded to a 5* stadium anyway? The current Anfield however will not, as it cannot be expanded.

 

As to the expense, yes I agree it is expensive. We could have gone down the route Bolton did, and built it on some waste ground a few miles away for a lot less money, but I doubt whether the board gave that too much serious consideration, it would've been a very unpopular decision. It's a wrench to leave Anfield, but the fact that we're only moving 200yds or so is one hell of a sweetener in the deal.

The fact that our new chairmen are paying for the stadium themselves, and not with debt like Arsenal did, makes the money matter pretty irrelevant anyway. Once it's up, it's up, and it's ours lock, stock, and barrel.

 

No its not It's the owned by the new owners and as business men surly if they did sell up that would leave Liverpool in a lease situation!

 

Yes Arsenal's stadium is purchased with debt but its a club debt rather than a chairman debt so even if their chairman was to sell up the situation wouldnt change. In theory Liverpool could be owned by someone new in 10 years while the stadium is still owned by the Yanks meaning revenue from ticket sales, food & drink & stadium events could be pouring into their pockets rather than Liverpool FC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you think that DIC group would have been good for Liverpool?

Yes i think they would have been, they are very passionate people over here in Dubai and if DIC had taken over then it would have been all about the success for the football team and not just about how much money they can make out of them, they have enough money as it is. When you read articles about the emirate royal family all they want to be is the best and they would have done anything to make Liverpool the best, which makes it a good thing that they pulled out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's good. Are there many other Evertonians out there with you - I've never heard of a Dubia Blues Supporters Club and I think there is a chance that there is more than of you ;)

Yes there is its called Dubai Toffees, we have about 30 members so far and we meet every game as they show all the premiership games over here. Unfortunately we meet in a hotel called The Chelsea Hotel which i am trying to get changed. Most of the english and scottish clubs have supporter clubs over here which meet in their respective hotels, it's quite a good atmosphere on match day but obviously not the same as being at Goodison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On a side note: you know, honest to God, as an American I have to laugh at Englishmen's unwillingness to have your stadiums carry corporate names on them, but you think nothing of pimping out your players as shills for corporations. ;) I mean, shouldn't the CLUB name be the most prominent name on the front of the jersey, not some over-eager corporate whoremongers? Who really cares about the name on the stadium? When Americans think of their team, they think of the city represented, the players and management. Stadiums are further down the list.

 

Please, someone help me explain this reluctance to have any stadium sponsored. The "naming rights" would bring additional revenue to the club, so it can't be that. Tradition, perhaps? Well, not all traditions are good ones, are they? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion I think it is tradition, you associate that stadium to your club. As Goodison, its steeped in history. I don't think it would have the same credentials if it was called Pizza Hut Park (FC Dallas home ground).

 

Also I think sponsors come and go, but the building will always be there, will always represent some history of the respective club. Personally I'd like the stadium to be called something that is synonymous with the club as corporate companies get bought and what happens then? Does the stadium change name to the new company?

 

Stadiums represent the club I feel and if the stadium is named by someone not connected with the club I think it doesn't represent the club to its full. Hmm not sure that makes sense but sod it :P

 

Its hard to explain but will end with...

 

Every Englishman's home is his Castle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On a side note: you know, honest to God, as an American I have to laugh at Englishmen's unwillingness to have your stadiums carry corporate names on them, but you think nothing of pimping out your players as shills for corporations. ;) I mean, shouldn't the CLUB name be the most prominent name on the front of the jersey, not some over-eager corporate whoremongers? Who really cares about the name on the stadium? When Americans think of their team, they think of the city represented, the players and management. Stadiums are further down the list.

 

Please, someone help me explain this reluctance to have any stadium sponsored. The "naming rights" would bring additional revenue to the club, so it can't be that. Tradition, perhaps? Well, not all traditions are good ones, are they? ;)

 

Pizza Hut Park - No thank you!

 

The point you make is a bad one too we have chang on our shirt but the shirt is not called the chang shirt whereas if we "pimped out" our stadium it would be "The Chang Arena" or something similar. The shirt sponsor is comparable to carrying avertising boards etc within the stadium. You also would not understand the mentality of an english sports fan being American for the simple fact that your whole nation has been whoring out every aspect of its sports for decades now.

 

Our team name is OUR team name, our staduim is OUR castle & our badge is OUR badge. It isnt changed on the whim of any new owner or sponsor our heritage is important and our clubs are seen as belonging to the fans rather than being money generators for already rich owners.

 

Sport is about competition not making money!

Edited by GoldfishMemory
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Kit Kat Stadium is located in Kit Kat Crescent, even worse.

 

In the good ole US of A, corporate naming of a stadium is par for the course, over here it is a relatively new concept.

 

With the revelation of Viagra becoming available over the counter, I would like to offer the following......

 

The Big Hard Blue Stadium.

 

I love you all.

 

ATB

 

Mac

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found this article quite interesting, it's written by the guy who arranged Arsenals sponsorship with o2 Paul Samuels.

 

When I was at O2, people said we were mad to stop sponsoring Arsenal. Then Vodafone did the same with Manchester United.

 

We started looking at sponsorship as something more than just branding. The idea of leveraging a sponsorship deal to give our customers something tangible that our rivals' customers couldn't get seemed a very powerful tool.

 

The potential for this type of branding was behind the renaming of the Millennium Dome to 'The O2'. The first time I saw the potential of The O2 was on a visit to the Staples Centre in Los Angeles. It was built in a completely derelict part of the city and is now one of the greatest music and sports venues in the world. Now, as The O2 is set to become the biggest music venue in Europe, we are looking at potential benefits to O2 customers – fast-track entry and exclusive content are just the beginning.

 

We have already started leveraging our existing sponsorship deals. At the rugby last month, any O2 customers attending the match were given the opportunity of a free pie and a pint. At the O2 Wireless festival last year, we had a special VIP area and faster queues for O2 customers.

 

The value from sticking your name on a football shirt doesn't really justify the outlay for the big mobile brands any more. Basic brand recognition is for a certain stage in a company's growth. Look at the big sponsorship deals in the summer – AIG, an insurance group for Manchester United, and Spurs' deal with the online gambling company, Mansion. They are companies who want people to know who they are.

 

Established companies in general need to be far more creative with spending their marketing budget. 'Brand ownership' is the biggest change I've seen in the six years I've been at O2.

 

Virgin's V festival, Orange owning cinema visits on a Wednesday or O2 taking control of the former Millennium Dome are the best examples so far. Red Bull's extreme sports events and the Innocent smoothie festival are other examples. Both completely own an event, they dictate the branding and, rather than just pour money into an event, they are gradually building properties that become assets in themselves. They can get to a point where they sell sponsorship to others and use it as an additional source of revenue – although that's not the primary motive.

 

You know you have succeeded in taking total ownership when you hear Arsene Wenger talk about the 'Emirates Stadium' on Match of the Day. Emirates are leveraging that sponsorship well by

offering tickets to games for people who fly with them on certain routes.

 

It is light years from the first naming rights contracts, where our previous brand, BT Cellnet, had a naming rights proposal from Middlesbrough. This was before discussions on how to retain customers and encourage them to use more services. It went along the lines of: 'Okay, for a certain amount of extra cash, we'll bung in the stadium as well.'

 

For people who say naming rights discredit the football club or the music festival, I would say: ask the punter if they prefer a sponsor that can enhance the experience or a more expensive ticket price?

 

With the herd mentality in the industry, every mobile operator is now investing in similar properties to prove its music credentials. The pressure is on to find the next big thing. At O2 we moved away from Big Brother when we thought it wasn't fresh anymore. The company that can get hold of the next big thing will be at a considerable advantage - the only problem is that it requires risk to get ahead of the pack. But the potential rewards from owning that 'next big thing' are limitless.

 

I would not object to seeing o2 emblazoned on our shirt and it would make sense because most kopite fans have an Orange phone because of the Liverpool deal with Orange. Im not one for corporate stadium naming but what Paul Samuels says in this article makes sense and with the club planning to move to a 'derelict part of the city' it could be a very good move for all involved.. Welcome to the o2 Arena.

 

Someone write to Amanda Jennings (brand manager at o2) and ask her thoughts! ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Australia ahs falllen in love with the naming rights $$$.

 

Many corp named stadiums if not all From insurance to telecom's.

 

Our local is callled Suncorp Stadium. However it ahd been Lang Park for 80 yrs prior to re fit & everyone still calls it Lang Park.

 

example list of some of the major oz stadium (re) names.

 

AAMI ( Insurance ) Stadium

 

ACER ( infotech) Arena

 

Aussie Stadium ( Aussie are home loans)

 

Bob Jane (tyres) Stadium

 

Blue Tongue (Beer Brand) Stadium

 

Telstra Stadium ( Telecom)

 

Telstra Dome ( Telecom)

 

Toyota Park

 

Vodafone Arena

 

Win ( Tv Group) Stadium

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The name of a new stadium, and by that I mean what it ends up being called by everyone, really depends on whether the sponsorship is for the full name or not. For example the BT Cellnet Riverside Stadium, is and has always been known amongst the media and fans as the Riverside, similarly the Friends Provident St Marys Stadium is only ever called St Mary's, whereas with stadiums called simply the Reebok stadium or the Emirates stadium, you have no choice.

 

From a Liverpool point of view, I would be happy to see a big sponsor pour money into us so long as they don't get the entire name. For example the Adidas Stanley Park Stadium would only ever get called Stanley Park, which is a great name for a footy ground IMO, and who cares if it has a few logos on the outside it will be full of corporate logos and advertising inside the ground anyway, all grounds are.

 

Speaking of stadiums, I was looking around this forum and noticed a lot of you drooling over the AOL arean in Germany, indeed the club themselves are looking at Germany for inspiration, so I read. My personal favourite in Germany is Dortmunds Westfalen Stadium, I'll attempt to post some pics of it below, thats almost exactly what I would like our new stadium to look like (on the inside at least). The only alterations I would like is the roof replaced with a more asthetic one. And red seats obviously. The steep single tier behind the goals are great, and the whole place looks intimidating as hell, the atmosphere must be immense.

 

Dortmund-01.jpg

Dortmund-02.jpg

Dortmund-03.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...