Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The State of Liverpool FC – An Idiots Guide

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    The State of Liverpool FC – An Idiots Guide

    courtesy of a poster on Reds All Over The Land

    While "senior sources" at the club (Christan Purslow) try to facilitate a smear campaign against the manager, pretend everything is rosy at the club and briefs the press to headline the Rick Parry pay off on the day the club's financials are tactically released on election results day; here's what's really going on at Liverpool Football Club:


    The figures released on Friday 8th May 2010 indicate that Liverpool FC is in net debt to the tune of £351m; an increase of £52m from last year’s figure.

    A total of £233.996m is owed to RBS, in addition to an inter-company loan of £144.441m owed to “Kop Cayman”; a company owned by Gillett and Hicks based in the Cayman Island for tax reasons; a company that have loaned Liverpool FC £144.441m at an interest rate of 10%. This is the “own money” that Gillett and Hicks claim to have put into the club. In reality, they’re just charging the club 10% interest for lending that money through an offshore limited liability company that they aren’t even personally liable for – Liverpool FC are.

    Liverpool FC are not paying the interest off on that £144.4m however. It is being charged as a “compound interest”, meaning the interest isn’t paid, but is instead “rolled up” to the grand total. For example, this year (if I’ve got this right):

    £144.4m @ 10% interest = £14.44m payable this year.

    Instead of paying that £14.44m, it is rolled onto the total making the outstanding debt owed to Kop Cayman £158.88m. The following year this is then charged at a further 10% interest:

    £158.88m @ 10% interest = £15.88m payable next year.

    Instead of paying that £15.88m, it is rolled onto the total making the outstanding debt owed to Kop Cayman £174.76m. The following year this is then charged at a further 10% interest:

    £174.76m @ 10% interest = £17.76m payable next year.

    Instead of paying that £17.76m, it is rolled onto the total making the outstanding debt owed to Kop Cayman £192.52m etc etc etc...

    The debt soon spirals out of control, as you can see; and don’t forget, this only concerns the £144.4m owed to Gillett and Hick’s Cayman Islands company – it doesn’t concern the huge £234m owed to RBS.

    The financial figures released last week are for the 2008/09 season.

    Those figures declare the club made a loss of around £52m for that year, due to the interest repayments on the loans and another £22m spent on the new ground; on what that was spent on we have no idea. There’s nothing to show for it anyway – and the total spend on the new ground now exceeds £50m. To put that into perspective – Sunderland managed to build the 48,000 seat Stadium of Light for a lot less than that. We have a few fences up at the back of the Anfield Road End!

    Anyway – we made a loss of £52m that year despite finishing 2nd in the league and reaching the latter stages of the Champions League. The accounts also declared a profit made on player transfers (despite Purslow telling us we don’t need to sell players to balance the books and service debt, and Rafa being accused of wasting millions on players – the accounts prove otherwise).

    What are next year’s figures (which will reflect the financial state we’re in today) going to look like with a 7th place league finish and an early elimination from the Champions League? We will also have an increased debt to service as explained above.

    Then what about the figures for the next financial year when there’s no Champions League money at all coming in?

    While the current owners are in place, we are going to continue to fall further and further into debt. We cannot meet the repayments on the loan as it stands now, and with our revenue due to fall with the lack of Champions League football, we’re on the brink of going into administration.

    Anyone with hopes of making any signings in the summer or any future transfer windows needs a reality check. We are going to be very lucky to be hold onto the players we’ve got, never mind being able to bring anybody else in.

    Gerrard and Torres don’t want to leave because they don’t like the manager (Purslow is feeding this story to the media to whip up the “Rafa Out campaign”); they want to leave as they know there is zero chance of any new players of any quality arriving at the club in its current state. They also know there’s zero chance of any top class manager coming to the club if Benitez decides to walk or is pushed; no manager worth his salt would come to work at the club under these conditions. They know the club is only going one way.

    Until Gillett and Hicks are removed from the club, we’re only going to decline. It really is as simple as that. Nothing else matters.

    And remember – these debts haven’t been accumulated through overspending in trying to buy success and compete like was the case at Portsmouth, Leeds and various other clubs – they are entirely generated through debt loaded onto the club just so Gillett and Hicks can own us and bleed us dry with expense claims, management fees, arrangement fees for every refinance deal and wasting over £50m of the club’s money on a non-existent new stadium.

    This isn’t the result of bad individual club management as Richard Scudamore of The Premier League claims; it is the result of a leveraged buyout that has loaded the cost of buying the club onto the club to repay. Something The Premier League, The FA, UEFA and FIFA should be doing everything in their power to prevent ever happening again.


    2007: £44m debt (£3m per year to service)
    2008: £350m debt (£36.5m per year to service)
    2009: £378m debt (£40m per year to service)
    2010: ???

    Those are the levels of debt on the club, with it being only £44m before Gillett and Hicks bought the club. Therefore the club’s profits were able to be invested back into the squad, allowing us to compete on the pitch. We’re now crippled by debts we cannot service, when that £40m leaving the club each year in interest repayments should be being spent on new players.

    £76.5m has left the club in interest repayments alone in the past 2 years – and in that time – the manager has not spent a single penny on new players. It’s been a sell to buy policy, with profits being made on transfers in the past few transfer windows as the books needed to be balanced; all while the clubs around us are spending to strengthen. How can we be expected to compete under those conditions?

    The debt is growing with every passing day. As a result of the lack of investment in the squad (as well as bad luck with injuries / poor decisions / players out of form etc), we’re paying the price on the field with declining performances which will therefore reduce the club’s revenue even further – giving us even less money to service increasing debts. A vicious circle. It’s unsustainable.

    Liverpool FC is paying £110,000 every single day in interest repayments to service a debt we should never have in the first place. That’s £110,000 a day of the club’s money that me and you generate, that we should be seeing spent on new players or developing the club; instead – we are standing back and watching the club being raped in front of our very eyes.

    YANKS OUT!

    #2
    I'm sorry if this is true - how is this legal???

    Comment


      #3
      **** me this **** is depressing. With Cameron as PM and these two cunts ruining the club I love, I feel like hibernating for 4 years and hoping this **** passes without too much fallout. I imagine I'd wake up to a post apocalyptic hell.... I think I've been playing fallout 3 too much recently.
      “Me having no education. I had to use my brains.”

      Sir Bill Shankly


      Quote:
      Matt Dickinson ‏@DickinsonTimes
      Terry painfully has to recount to court the song from Liverpool fans about his "mum loving Scouse cock"

      Comment


        #4
        If it was a buissnes like wheetabix I would say it was ok, for the obvious reasons that there is no emotional attachment eg. there are not millions and millions of wheetabix fans wanting wheetabix to win cereal of the year every year.
        The problem is that dumb and dumber do not see one iota of difference between a football club like LFC and "wheetabix", its all the same to them, they dont give a toss about the fans and do not understand the emotional attachment the fans have and never will imo.
        its all about making money and what i think is happening now is what they have planned for along, the debt on the club is starting to overtake the value on the club, therefore they have made millions and millions from skimming cash from the club and also charging interest on the money that the "club" loaned the club, which is ****ed up, so now they have to get out before the club value equals the debt, ie they have reached the "scam limit". CUNTS.

        Comment


          #5
          Feck me, we're fecked!
          Play Ball!!!!!!!

          Comment


            #6
            If this is true, which I have no reason to doubt, it MUST be splashed across the web and in the National newspapers.

            How the **** were they allowed to do this to us.
            Those that hid Anne Frank were breaking the law.
            Those that killed her, were following the law.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by kev776 View Post
              How the **** were they allowed to do this to us.
              Thatcher. Well, specifically, the boom in leveraged buyouts in the 1980s was led by deregulation and relaxation of antitrust laws in the US, a policy copied and extended by Reagan's British soulmate, Thatcher.

              In other words, you voted for it.
              .
              Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.



              May the Lord bless this post.

              Comment


                #8
                It really does sicken me to the pit of my stomach.

                Absolutely scandalous.
                'Religion is killing each other over who has the best imaginary friend'

                Comment


                  #9
                  We just have to pray Broughton comes up with something good and these two sell for a realistic price because if not I fear we are ****ed for potentially decades.

                  They are absolutely tearing this club apart. That debt is astonishing. Astonishingly bad.
                  Last edited by Chris; 11-05-10, 11:02 PM.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    How can it make sense for them to do this though? I mean, how does it benefit them if the club goes into administration? They only want to make money and dont care about the club, but how does the club effectively going bust do them any good?

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Thanks very much for being ‘This Mornings’ Farmer’

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by Craig_H View Post
                        How can it make sense for them to do this though? I mean, how does it benefit them if the club goes into administration? They only want to make money and dont care about the club, but how does the club effectively going bust do them any good?
                        We're not in administration. They are just peeling away every little scrap of money we have while staying just on the right side of the banks who know they have an asset worth more than their liability. Assuming any of this is true.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by Chrono View Post
                          We're not in administration. They are just peeling away every little scrap of money we have while staying just on the right side of the banks who know they have an asset worth more than their liability. Assuming any of this is true.
                          We're not yet, but if the debt just keeps growing, where does it all end?

                          It will eventually reach the point whereby the debt outweighs the value of the club. If it carries on like this (and i see no signs of things changing) then the club will go under.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by Craig_H View Post
                            How can it make sense for them to do this though? I mean, how does it benefit them if the club goes into administration? They only want to make money and dont care about the club, but how does the club effectively going bust do them any good?
                            No clue, but every year around 22-25 million is being on the "stadium" while we have absolutely nothing to show for it. I am assuming some of that money is making its way to G&H through back channels. So even if the club go bust, they still would have made money.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by Neil Young View Post
                              Thatcher. Well, specifically, the boom in leveraged buyouts in the 1980s was led by deregulation and relaxation of antitrust laws in the US, a policy copied and extended by Reagan's British soulmate, Thatcher.

                              In other words, you voted for it.
                              Thatcher's been a vegetable for the last 10 years, move on FFS!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X