Would missing out on 4th be a good thing??

[Kenneth]

If we finish lower than 4th, Rafa will resign, he's made that clear with his 'guarantee' statement. End. Whether his resignation is accepted or not is an entirely different matter.

If he manages to finish 4th then 'stuck with him' is surely not such a bad thing as it'll mean he's salvaged a CL spot from a dreadful season. I can't see any way that that could ever be perceived as a bad thing

I am not so convinced.

[Tatterdemalion]

Serious question, I don't know enough about the financial situation but if we finished outside the top 4 obviously our revenue would drop but so in theory would the value of the club which I presume makes it easier for interested parties to offer what they see as value for money bids.

If we are losing revenue and not see as such an 'asset' would that make it more or less likely that H&G would sell up??

Would they take another look and think hey Liverpool aren't the cash generating machine I thought they would be lets cut our losses and get out??

I understand the argument about attracting top players etc... but I can't see a mass exodus if we finish outside the top 4 once, yeah maybe if next season we're poor as well then players will reconsider and leave.

And ultimately H&G could theoraticly accept a 80m bid from Man City for Torres but they can't force him to leave, he is well within his rights to turn them down, no player under contract can be sold against his will.


Edit: Good thing in the short term of getting H&G out obviously

In revenue terms we'd lose, I reckon about £25-30m which is based on Champs league revenues and foregone sponsorship bonuses. The effect on the club depends on the extent to which these revenues are budgeted for. I believe that they are, which means a real loss of £25m which will have to come from somewhere else. The first place it would come from would be the transfer budget, assuming we have one. If we don't we might be able to get by without selling players but I wouldn't bet on it.

It may increase pressure on the owners via the banks, as they could rightly say that our business plan no longer stacks up. However, this doesn't make it more likely that they'll sell up necessarily. IMO it makes it more likely they will sell players. To sell, they have to sell to some one and they believe that LFC is being undervalued, making the club difficult to sell. Whereas it's quite hard to argue that an asset acquired for £20m a few seasons ago, which can now be sold for £70m is being undervalued, if you know what I mean.

[Exiled_red]

In revenue terms we'd lose, I reckon about £25-30m which is based on Champs league revenues and foregone sponsorship bonuses. The effect on the club depends on the extent to which these revenues are budgeted for. I believe that they are, which means a real loss of £25m which will have to come from somewhere else. The first place it would come from would be the transfer budget, assuming we have one. If we don't we might be able to get by without selling players but I wouldn't bet on it.

It may increase pressure on the owners via the banks, as they could rightly say that our business plan no longer stacks up. However, this doesn't make it more likely that they'll sell up necessarily. IMO it makes it more likely they will sell players. To sell, they have to sell to some one and they believe that LFC is being undervalued, making the club difficult to sell. Whereas it's quite hard to argue that an asset acquired for £20m a few seasons ago, which can now be sold for £70m is being undervalued, if you know what I mean.

I read somewhere a while back that the way clubs value players is in terms of initial cost and contract length, and the value of that player depreciates as the contract runs on. For example if you sign a player for £10m on a 5 year contract, at the start of the contract he is worth £10m and his value depreciates as the contract runs down i.e. after 1yr he has 4/5 of his contract remaining so is worth 4/5 of his initial value (£8m), after 2yrs he's worth 3/5 (£6m) etc. I'm not sure how contract renewals and age factor into this.

Therefore if a players value increases in his time at the club it wouldn't be reflected in his value as an asset to financial institutions, therefore I don't think they would accept us claiming Torres has a value of £70m, therefore in these terms I think a number of players could be 'undervalued'. It could also be the reason why we are looking to renew players contracts.

*Like I said I read this somewhere a while back but don't have a link, I don't know how accurate it is though.

[Redshadow]

I don't think it would be a bad thing; Lets face it - Thanks in part to our terrible form (and also the awakening ever so slowly of our fans ire along with the constrictions in the world money market that have REALLY hit them) H & G are now facing a constant barrage of pressure like a man about to be hanged with the rope constricting tighter, ever tighter around the neck that is their regime at Anfield - The loss for definite of CL revenue COULD be the foot that kicks away the stool propping their sorry ownership and Finally hangs them (i.e. forces them out of the door with not a penny left).

Yes, we may be behind after that for a while - we May even lose a few good players - But (and it's a bloody big BUT) Don't forget - We've come back from Far worse than not finishing in the top 4 of England's Top Divison before and IF City can come from nowhere with Their history of failure, fcukups, foot-shooting and disasters but Still apparently be good enough for a mega-rich owner to buy and fund; Oh, and in doing so suddenly start a 'charge' on the CL places that if they get them, will in the view of all and sundry see them Stay there for the foreseeable (they won't BTW) then Why can't Liverpool FC with Their history, grandeur, titles and prestige turn the tables on City, Chelsea and the rest by doing exactly that? Let's face it - sooner or later we Will have new owners (In fact, given our history and how capitalist the game has become in the UK since 2003 - I'm surprised someone Abramovich like didn't even consider buying US before Chelsea back in '03 or hasn't since) Anyway, once we have new owners, they'll hopefully A) Know what they're doing and B) Be able to finance it properly.

Once these new owners are in place with us under their wing; Then just WHY can't We heal, regroup and stage a charge like City have done this season to claim our place back? I actually think we Will reclaim our position next season anyway - new owners or not as we'll be SO hellbent on revenge that City will crumple to us (and City are the only serious ones out of them, Spurs and Villa; The latter two of whom will Not repeat this season's consistency for another 5 years or so as is their wont). City just WON'T be able to handle our intensity in pursuing Our place back relentlessly across a season, not And compete in the FA and League Cups, Premier League AND Champions League AND do as well as they have this season in the Premier League to come near to qualifying again - money or not. City's strength this season has been their focus ON the Premier League - that won't be the case next season. What then for City with us Hell-bent on getting ourselves back up there? They'll try and resist us yes, might even be able to for a time but I think we'll have to much experience of qualifying for them over TWO seasons for them to do more than temporarily remove us from our favourite tournament for more than a year. Also, the last time we fell out of the top 4, we finished behind Everton and won the CL - Do you know how many points we finished Ahead of Everton the next season? 15, that's how many - so yes, there IS a precedent for storming back after a terrible league season (more than one precedent actually if you look at our past 30 odd years) And next season? That precedent is one I Fully expect us to follow as well...........................

[Redshadow]

Tatterdemalion - you said earlier re the owners; ''they believe that LFC is being undervalued''. I think along with Gillette's eye for a bargain (i.e. us) and Hicks teak tough exterior (I.e. a typical Texan unmoved by all bar a direct tactical Nuclear strike on him), I think that along with those two things - THAT is our main problem; Because If they lowered the price - even once, those two would be so deluged with offers - they'd HAVE to go and would no doubt disappear in a flash after accepting whichever one filled their pockets the most (hmm, now where have I heard THAT before re offers for Liverpool FC being accepted?).

I think the owners know all this - I think they've got themselves in such a bind that they're now (especially in Hicks case) ready to make losses to some extent on Liverpool FC (and For us in players etc) rather than get off the bed of nails they've lain on voluntarily - I think they Know that they'll be deluged with offers eventually as the 100 million repayment date draws close, they know they'll be bargained down So far, they'll likely get nothing as they HAVE to pay the banks back this time, and they just can't Face the fact that this will happen in public, will probably negate their ownership of us and hand us to the banks to be sold on; Oh, and it will also totally humiliate them after their grandiose promises of 3 years ago.

I think basically they can't take being shown up as the losers they are with their 'buy out' methods, they can't take being forced out by angry groups of fans and banks they normally run rings around and are hanging on, calling all bluffs on the banks will to challenge LFC fans in the vain hope of some mega offer that would enrich them enormously, but deep down KNOWING they won't get it whilst at the same time totally unwilling to let go just in case said offer Does materialise but mainly? It's ALL down to the one basic fact that I think they don't want to admit defeat and we all know which one of them THAT is the fault of don't we?............................................... ....

NB Just WHAT will it take to get those b*stards to lower their damn asking price, drop the scales from their useless, pathetic eyes of us being 'undervalued' and disappear with immediate effect? Anyone up for hiring a hitman or two?........ Only Joking.

[BG1973]

Serious question, I don't know enough about the financial situation but if we finished outside the top 4 obviously our revenue would drop but so in theory would the value of the club which I presume makes it easier for interested parties to offer what they see as value for money bids.

If we are losing revenue and not see as such an 'asset' would that make it more or less likely that H&G would sell up??

Would they take another look and think hey Liverpool aren't the cash generating machine I thought they would be lets cut our losses and get out??

I understand the argument about attracting top players etc... but I can't see a mass exodus if we finish outside the top 4 once, yeah maybe if next season we're poor as well then players will reconsider and leave.

And ultimately H&G could theoraticly accept a 80m bid from Man City for Torres but they can't force him to leave, he is well within his rights to turn them down, no player under contract can be sold against his will.


Edit: Good thing in the short term of getting H&G out obviously

Have always said things are going to have to get a whole lot worse before they get better on the ownership front.

If it meant them going then yes it would be a good thing. But then who is going to buy us? Unless its a sugar Daddy, it's going to be tough to recover from missing out on CL money now that city are on the scene. They'll finally get a decent manager soon, keep spending and keep creeping up the table. While we will go the other way..

[carheex]

IMO, missing 4th place this year would be a fatal blow to LFC as a "big" club.

we need the cash injection brought around from the CL. we need the draw of the CL to attract big name players. we need the draw of the most prestigious cup comp ( outside world cup of course ) in sport to attract outside investment.

city will spend large this summer for sure. if they have 4th place CL football next year, big wages too, then they'll become a much much much more appealing club to footballers than us.

spurs and villa are right on our tails in this respect too. they have a sound financial footing and are pushing for 4th also. we would then be competing with these clubs for new players.

to miss out of the CL would as said before, make us a less attractive option for outside investment. G&H are business men and as such would no doubt lower the investment they put in already to a bare minimum ( worse than already ) but i doubt they'd just accept any old bid for the club..............they're arrogant cunts and would still ( due mainly to the land owned by the club ) be looking for a massive amount of money to sell the club. we'd be stuick with them for the long term i reckon.

add to all this the fact our best players would leave us by january next year ( summer at latest ) and we would be in the ****.............a mid table team fighting with fulham / everton / brum for a top 10 finish. hell, we could end up going the way of leeds.

that is the darkest side to the situation but a possiblility none-the-less. we NEED top 4 football IMO.

It's hard to still see us as a "big" club to be honest. We've NEVER won the premier league, we've not won a trophy for 5 years, we're wrapped up in serious debt and we have a stadium that is overshadowed by many in our division.
We WERE "big", no one can deny that, but these days we're just also-rans struggling to balance the books. A fairer assessment of our size would be a sleeping giant?

[Craig_H]

Sleeping or awake, a giant is still pretty ****ing big

[carheex]

I don't think it would be a bad thing; Lets face it - Thanks in part to our terrible form (and also the awakening ever so slowly of our fans ire along with the constrictions in the world money market that have REALLY hit them) H & G are now facing a constant barrage of pressure like a man about to be hanged with the rope constricting tighter, ever tighter around the neck that is their regime at Anfield - The loss for definite of CL revenue COULD be the foot that kicks away the stool propping their sorry ownership and Finally hangs them (i.e. forces them out of the door with not a penny left).

Yes, we may be behind after that for a while - we May even lose a few good players - But (and it's a bloody big BUT) Don't forget - We've come back from Far worse than not finishing in the top 4 of England's Top Divison before and IF City can come from nowhere with Their history of failure, fcukups, foot-shooting and disasters but Still apparently be good enough for a mega-rich owner to buy and fund; Oh, and in doing so suddenly start a 'charge' on the CL places that if they get them, will in the view of all and sundry see them Stay there for the foreseeable (they won't BTW) then Why can't Liverpool FC with Their history, grandeur, titles and prestige turn the tables on City, Chelsea and the rest by doing exactly that? Let's face it - sooner or later we Will have new owners (In fact, given our history and how capitalist the game has become in the UK since 2003 - I'm surprised someone Abramovich like didn't even consider buying US before Chelsea back in '03 or hasn't since) Anyway, once we have new owners, they'll hopefully A) Know what they're doing and B) Be able to finance it properly.

Once these new owners are in place with us under their wing; Then just WHY can't We heal, regroup and stage a charge like City have done this season to claim our place back? I actually think we Will reclaim our position next season anyway - new owners or not as we'll be SO hellbent on revenge that City will crumple to us (and City are the only serious ones out of them, Spurs and Villa; The latter two of whom will Not repeat this season's consistency for another 5 years or so as is their wont). City just WON'T be able to handle our intensity in pursuing Our place back relentlessly across a season, not And compete in the FA and League Cups, Premier League AND Champions League AND do as well as they have this season in the Premier League to come near to qualifying again - money or not. City's strength this season has been their focus ON the Premier League - that won't be the case next season. What then for City with us Hell-bent on getting ourselves back up there? They'll try and resist us yes, might even be able to for a time but I think we'll have to much experience of qualifying for them over TWO seasons for them to do more than temporarily remove us from our favourite tournament for more than a year. Also, the last time we fell out of the top 4, we finished behind Everton and won the CL - Do you know how many points we finished Ahead of Everton the next season? 15, that's how many - so yes, there IS a precedent for storming back after a terrible league season (more than one precedent actually if you look at our past 30 odd years) And next season? That precedent is one I Fully expect us to follow as well...........................

You're deluded, and seem to think we have a right to a top 4 finish (as if THAT"S any kind of achievement!). Still, gotta admire your blind optimism.

[carheex]

Sleeping or awake, a giant is still pretty ****ing big

I'll re-assess. With our debt, our wage bill, our overheads, our owners and our manager, one step in the wrong direction could be a major disaster which we wouldn't recover from. A year or 2 without CL money and we wouldn't be able to afford to keep our important players. If they go (and we still have the same owners who would use transfer fees to repay interest) who could we attract? Our youth setup has been an abysmal failure since Michael Owen came through so we can't count on that producing anything. A generation has moved on since we could attract players using the strength of the club's name. We could very easily find ourselves competing with the Birmingham's and Everton's of this world, maybe even worse. If we don't get major investment into the 1st team we could be on a slippery slope before we even realise it. In fact, I'd say we've already got one foot on that slope.

[badpiggy]

I'll re-assess. With our debt, our wage bill, our overheads, our owners and our manager, one step in the wrong direction could be a major disaster which we wouldn't recover from. A year or 2 without CL money and we wouldn't be able to afford to keep our important players. If they go (and we still have the same owners who would use transfer fees to repay interest) who could we attract? Our youth setup has been an abysmal failure since Michael Owen came through so we can't count on that producing anything. A generation has moved on since we could attract players using the strength of the club's name. We could very easily find ourselves competing with the Birmingham's and Everton's of this world, maybe even worse. If we don't get major investment into the 1st team we could be on a slippery slope before we even realise it. In fact, I'd say we've already got one foot on that slope.

bad financially
bad for morale
bad for signing good players
bad for keeping good players

[gentingfrmhell]

I'll re-assess. With our debt, our wage bill, our overheads, our owners and our manager, one step in the wrong direction could be a major disaster which we wouldn't recover from. A year or 2 without CL money and we wouldn't be able to afford to keep our important players. If they go (and we still have the same owners who would use transfer fees to repay interest) who could we attract? Our youth setup has been an abysmal failure since Michael Owen came through so we can't count on that producing anything. A generation has moved on since we could attract players using the strength of the club's name. We could very easily find ourselves competing with the Birmingham's and Everton's of this world, maybe even worse. If we don't get major investment into the 1st team we could be on a slippery slope before we even realise it. In fact, I'd say we've already got one foot on that slope.

no joke. pray to god we dont become another newcastle.

[Tatterdemalion]

I read somewhere a while back that the way clubs value players is in terms of initial cost and contract length, and the value of that player depreciates as the contract runs on. For example if you sign a player for £10m on a 5 year contract, at the start of the contract he is worth £10m and his value depreciates as the contract runs down i.e. after 1yr he has 4/5 of his contract remaining so is worth 4/5 of his initial value (£8m), after 2yrs he's worth 3/5 (£6m) etc. I'm not sure how contract renewals and age factor into this.

Therefore if a players value increases in his time at the club it wouldn't be reflected in his value as an asset to financial institutions, therefore I don't think they would accept us claiming Torres has a value of £70m, therefore in these terms I think a number of players could be 'undervalued'. It could also be the reason why we are looking to renew players contracts.

*Like I said I read this somewhere a while back but don't have a link, I don't know how accurate it is though.

It's just the way players contracts are accounted for on the balance sheet of the accounts mate. The only thing it really effects is how much the club has to book as a profit when they sell a player (and potentially how much tax they pay on tht profit). I'm not talking about how much RBS or the accountants would value him (Torres) at, but rather how much Hicks would as a real asset which could be used to provide cash flow, and wouldn't be short of buying interest. The accounting treatment is a bit misleading and I would ignore it for the purposes of this discussion.

Torres is our most saleable asset right now.

[Tatterdemalion]

Tatterdemalion - you said earlier re the owners; ''they believe that LFC is being undervalued''. I think along with Gillette's eye for a bargain (i.e. us) and Hicks teak tough exterior (I.e. a typical Texan unmoved by all bar a direct tactical Nuclear strike on him), I think that along with those two things - THAT is our main problem; Because If they lowered the price - even once, those two would be so deluged with offers - they'd HAVE to go and would no doubt disappear in a flash after accepting whichever one filled their pockets the most (hmm, now where have I heard THAT before re offers for Liverpool FC being accepted?).

I think the owners know all this - I think they've got themselves in such a bind that they're now (especially in Hicks case) ready to make losses to some extent on Liverpool FC (and For us in players etc) rather than get off the bed of nails they've lain on voluntarily - I think they Know that they'll be deluged with offers eventually as the 100 million repayment date draws close, they know they'll be bargained down So far, they'll likely get nothing as they HAVE to pay the banks back this time, and they just can't Face the fact that this will happen in public, will probably negate their ownership of us and hand us to the banks to be sold on; Oh, and it will also totally humiliate them after their grandiose promises of 3 years ago.

I think basically they can't take being shown up as the losers they are with their 'buy out' methods, they can't take being forced out by angry groups of fans and banks they normally run rings around and are hanging on, calling all bluffs on the banks will to challenge LFC fans in the vain hope of some mega offer that would enrich them enormously, but deep down KNOWING they won't get it whilst at the same time totally unwilling to let go just in case said offer Does materialise but mainly? It's ALL down to the one basic fact that I think they don't want to admit defeat and we all know which one of them THAT is the fault of don't we?............................................... ....

NB Just WHAT will it take to get those b*stards to lower their damn asking price, drop the scales from their useless, pathetic eyes of us being 'undervalued' and disappear with immediate effect? Anyone up for hiring a hitman or two?........ Only Joking.

To be honest mate I think what it comes down to is that LFC is cash generative - we are paying the interest and some capital off and will likely continue to do so. As long as that happens, we will continue to pay for them to own the club. They won't sell because whatever else happens in the world, LFC IS making them richer.

I'm sorry to say that only two things will force them to sell - bankruptcy caused by external forces or LFC failing to make its interest payments AFTER a player clear out. That or a bloody good offer. That's three. Or a bullet in the post. That's not really an option though.

[Tatterdemalion]

I'll re-assess. With our debt, our wage bill, our overheads, our owners and our manager, one step in the wrong direction could be a major disaster which we wouldn't recover from. A year or 2 without CL money and we wouldn't be able to afford to keep our important players. If they go (and we still have the same owners who would use transfer fees to repay interest) who could we attract? Our youth setup has been an abysmal failure since Michael Owen came through so we can't count on that producing anything. A generation has moved on since we could attract players using the strength of the club's name. We could very easily find ourselves competing with the Birmingham's and Everton's of this world, maybe even worse. If we don't get major investment into the 1st team we could be on a slippery slope before we even realise it. In fact, I'd say we've already got one foot on that slope.

I think we'd need 2 or 3 years for that rather than 1 or 2, but why split hairs when you're in the ****?