12 Jan 2018 14:38:39
What's happened to the transfer prices for players it is getting out of hand . I blame the Spanish league, they buy a player for let's say £15 million and then put a fee for buy out clause for something stupid like £200 million this has been going on for a long time now inflating transfers UEFA need to step in and put a end to this system it is against all that football stands for and must be addressed now.

I can see in the very near future that professional football will implode in the same way as the banks went and will struggle to survive as the Italy league nearly went a few years ago. How can LFC justify £30 million for Studge he has a very long history of injuries Walcott to Everton is the same. I know we have just pocketed a large sum from Barcelona and though we have the money does not help either us or Barcelona .

To replace Coutinio it will cost most of what we received from and Barcelona will have sell players and merchandise to pay for transfer it is total madness and will ring the death knoll for football for ever if we don't address it soon.

1.) 12 Jan 2018
12 Jan 2018 16:06:11
It’s not getting out of hand it’s already completely out of hand! When Barcelona put a €198 clause on Neymar and PSG called their bluff and matched it, it was only going to go one way.

2.) 12 Jan 2018
12 Jan 2018 16:07:28
The more TV money the more available cash the higher the price for players. Don't think the Spanish system is specifically to blame particularly but interesting post to avoid the other usual ones asking eds the same names every 5 minutes.

3.) 12 Jan 2018
12 Jan 2018 16:11:04
The Spanish league isn't to blame. To even suggest that is ridiculous.

The reason player prices have gone up is that clubs have more money to spend due to increased revenues from sponsorship, TV money etc.

There might well be clubs that implode because they overspend in the expectation that the revenues keep increasing.

4.) 12 Jan 2018
12 Jan 2018 16:33:56
To be fair to PSG, if he says more then 4/ 5years that was one hell of a bargain, gunna be the worlds best for a long time soon and he’s still young a massive asset with resale value same with what they paid for mbappe. Great Buisness.

5.) 12 Jan 2018
12 Jan 2018 17:28:28
Spending is on the same percentage of clubs revenue that is has always been. I may be corrected here but somewhere around 20% of revenue has been a regular figure to spend on record (or high at the time) transfer fees since football was a business.

I did see an article sometime last year listing all British record fees as a percentage of turnover and they were all pretty consistent but i can't find it now. But as an example,

When we bought Stan Collymore in '95 for 8.5 million, it was deemed a massive fee. Our turnover was somewhere in the region of 50 million.

In March 2017, our turnover was announced as being around 300 million and our record signing that summer was Naby Keita for 55 million.

A huge jump in price but not in comparison to percentage of turnover. Clubs are spending within their means, because there is so much more money in the game now. The fees may be astronomical, but clubs are not spending, in general, what they can't afford.

6.) 12 Jan 2018
12 Jan 2018 18:14:13
In their title winning season Blackburn Rovers spent 73% of their turnover on transfers, that's the equivalent of United spending £970 million last summer.

7.) 12 Jan 2018
12 Jan 2018 18:18:53
In my opinion there are three teams to blame for the inflated prices and that PSG and the two Manchester clubs. Even Chelsea with the Russians wads of cash didn't go this stupid.

8.) 12 Jan 2018
12 Jan 2018 18:42:16
The only issue i have with all this is why do we the fans have to pay upwards of £50 a ticket.

9.) 12 Jan 2018
12 Jan 2018 18:57:27
Its quite clearly because of the rising revenues from TV and sponsorship. It needs some kind of regulation. Giving teams more money does NOT improve the game in any way. It just means the transfer market levels out after its been inflated. £80 million player today is £200 million tomorrow, but the spending power of teams does not change, only the prices. If the increased revenues was being used to reduce ticket prices id be all for that, but it isnt.

10.) 12 Jan 2018
12 Jan 2018 18:58:40
Not us paying £75 mil on a centre back then?! I agree we’re perhaps late to the party, but we’re involved now!

11.) 12 Jan 2018
12 Jan 2018 19:02:47
I seem to recall a few clubs sniffing around Wright philips and offering 11 million. Chelsea went in and bought him for 22. So I don't agree with that part of your statement.

12.) 12 Jan 2018
12 Jan 2018 19:12:36
Decimus-Because that’s the going rate, FSG could chuck £20/ 30 on top of the prices and I think Anfield would still be a sell out, so you could argue they are under priced.

13.) 12 Jan 2018
12 Jan 2018 19:49:39
I think if you have a market with as few major players as football then suddenly introduce an oil rich country with effectively unlimited money it's always going to send the prices wacky. People have been saying money is ruining the game since Forest dropped £1m on Trevor Francis nearly 40 years ago and still seems pretty good to me!

14.) 12 Jan 2018
12 Jan 2018 20:10:43
Under priced? Give it a rest.

15.) 12 Jan 2018
12 Jan 2018 21:05:22
Looking at it from a business sense why would they drop ticket prices when they sell Anfield out for every game? I’d rather pay less for a ticket but I would rather pay less for everything if possible.

16.) 12 Jan 2018
12 Jan 2018 21:27:34
Because it would attract younger fans, families, maybe people who have never been to a game. plus it would draw the attention of sponsors if we were one of the first clubs to do it. Get people talking about the club. And the money made on gate reciepts doesn't mean as much as it used to. The fans are the life of any club.

17.) 12 Jan 2018
12 Jan 2018 21:43:26
We are far from struggling for fans or sponsors. The fact we sell out every home game proves this.

18.) 12 Jan 2018
12 Jan 2018 22:33:26
I used to view it from the perspective of supply and demand, and from that point of view, you are right. We fill out anfield every game. We could charge more and it would still fill out. Football is a business etc.

But football is nothing without fans. Clubs have a level of social responsibility. With the amount of money in the game today, no fan, regardless of age or background, should be alienated from the game on price. The game may be more business orientated but Liverpool Football Club, is first and foremost, a football club. A community built by the fans, for the fans, not an institution to exploit the fans. The demographic of fans who go to the matches should not be narrowed to a slim shred of society by price. Anfield will continue to fill up because there are always richer fans who will come, but it doesn't mean that those who are poorer should not be able to. If it was me id be overhauling everything with loyalty schemes, deals for children and young people, ways to encourage noise at anfield, safe standing areas, the lot.

{Ed025's Note - i like that AW mate..

19.) 12 Jan 2018
12 Jan 2018 23:14:59
Well said woolback.

20.) 13 Jan 2018
13 Jan 2018 00:12:40
I agree with the sentiment 100% AW but, the Premier League clubs and in particular, clubs like ours are internationally renowned sports teams. I live near Oxford (that does not make me rich, far from it) and I feel as connected to the club as a local may do. But because I don't have a season ticket, pretty much passed down through generations, I can barely get to Anfield and I end up having to watch the matches via other means (If you know what I mean, I've not missed a game in the last few seasons) . It's not the fault of local fans, but because of the size of the club, everybody wants tickets and it drives prices up. If I had my way, there would be no season tickets and it would be a lottery style selection process per match. That way, I may get to see the team I spend so much of life devoted to. If Metallica were run like like a football club, I'd never get to see them and in my mind, in the modern game, there's barely any difference.

Basically 50 odd quid to the average fan, of which there are millions compared to the 50 odd thousand in attendance, means nothing.

21.) 13 Jan 2018
13 Jan 2018 05:50:57
AW-There is loyalty schemes and sales for locals.
WKD- Liverpool have (or at least did have) the lowest percentage of season ticket holders to seats so what your saying is rubbish, I don’t live in Liverpool or have an inherited season ticket but I still manage to get to 10-15 games per season so your obviously not trying hard enough, it can be frustrating at times the ticket process but if you get yourself a membership you will get tickets if you try hard enough.

22.) 13 Jan 2018
13 Jan 2018 06:33:40
Back in the day when football was a contact sport and footballers lived in the real world clubs main income was from attendances. We sold out every week then. Did we over price it so fans couldn’t afford it? No we didn’t.
Then sponsorship came in and at one point came close to matching income from attendances, but before it got there SkyTV changed the game. They threw millions at clubs and now it’s billions.
Premier league clubs don’t really need the revenue from fans anymore, it’s just greed that stops them lowering prices. That and FFP.

{Ed025's Note - i agree with all that ron..

23.) 13 Jan 2018
13 Jan 2018 08:55:49
Best debate I've seen on here for years - thanks.
Like WRKD I have been a massive reds fan since the day the King signed but living in Birmingham am squeezed out.
Conga - the membership scheme might as well be a season ticket. The ticket sale is fixed to who went to lots of games last season. It's chicken and egg - nothing to do with "trying harder". Because you went to 15 games last season you get first dibs on buying another 15 - making it self perpetuating. I enter the sale 3 days later and there are only tickets left for 2 games - which keeps low down the queue for next time. For me it's a vicious circle.
Thanks to the cup scheme, I get to all cup matches - and bring my kids. But that leaves me with almost entirely midweek games - which is not easy from brum - nor cost efficient. So think again about the "try harder" comment.

24.) 13 Jan 2018
13 Jan 2018 09:41:51
Brummie- I don’t have 15 premiership games from last season on my record so the only advantage I have over you is that I’m elegible for the big games (Everton, Utd, City, Arsenal, Chelsea, spurs) I will have exactly the same chance as you in the rest of the games.
Being from Birmingham is irrelevant and other than the newly introduced local sale (heard it’s a fairly low number) ticket sales don’t discriminate against location.
I agree it must be a nightmare getting back to Birmingham after a midweek game but you’ve made a rod for your own back by not supporting a team local to yourself, there is nothing the club can do about that.
I have supported the club all my life and have been fairly regular at Anfield for most of it, however it’s only been 3 years since I moved back to the north west after being in the army and in that time I have got a membership and managed to get a good amount of tickets and built up some loyalty where I’m guaranteed European and all Cup games and I can get to a upto 10 league games a season so it’s not a closed shop.
With regards to the group members sale, I have had little lucky with that the last few years, I find have much more joy on the individual members resale.

25.) 13 Jan 2018
13 Jan 2018 11:27:00
You're right, I gave up trying hard because I was getting nowhere and so I only get to a game once in a blue moon. It is difficult to get to matches and you saying you only get the big games for loyalty proves it - that's near enough half you're stated attendance. Yes I can get to some cup games, but they aren't exactly high profile ones, and more often than not, the team you're watching doesn't contain half the players you hoped to see. To get in the position where I could see a Merseyside derby, for example, would take several years of preparation and then, if I missed one, through say illness, I would have to go right back down the ladder again. Etc etc. All I'm saying is people that complain about the price they pay to see games forget how fortunate they are to see the games at all. To go any gig of an act just as high profile and you'll pay more. It's an entertainment business, not a social gathering nowadays.

26.) 13 Jan 2018
13 Jan 2018 12:46:01
WRKD- Why would being ill knock you back for future games? its fairly clear you don’t know the process of getting tickets for Liverpool and are one of many fans who blames non attendance on the system saying it’s impossible. That just isn’t true.
If you try hard you will get to 4 league games in a season and therefore be eligible for the big games the following season, so it would take a year not several.