01 Jun 2016 20:03:23
Macca is usually spot on with his posts, the one regarding 2 buyers for the club doesn't stack up because when they tried to increase the season ticket prices and LOST, they did a climb down and said there would be a 2 year price freeze so that surely indicates they will still be here in two years, it also doesn't look good when your trying to sell a club if you say to prospective buyers there is a price freeze for two years.

1.) 01 Jun 2016
01 Jun 2016 20:46:53
Macca said negotiations, these processes are often long and drawn out, but it probably stacks up with ed002 saying clubs could be sold in 2017.

2.) 01 Jun 2016
01 Jun 2016 20:53:20
Macca also said it might never happen with these two parties.

3.) 01 Jun 2016
01 Jun 2016 21:22:24
Another big reason for present owners not to sell is tv money which wiil cover price freeze.

4.) 01 Jun 2016
01 Jun 2016 22:17:14
The owners were making lots of tickets cheaper as well. The average ticket price was barely changing. So the freeze hasn't cost them anything or any new owners anything more than an average of about £3 a seat. The freeze just appeased a few thousand people who were set to see hikes in the price they were paying.

It will have absolutely no bearing on a prospective sale. Match day revenue is set to increase massively with the new stand anyway, and besides the match day revenue is peanuts nowadays in the financial side of football. Almost all the money is in TV, advertising and sponsorship deals.

5.) 01 Jun 2016
01 Jun 2016 20:15:40
That argument doesn't stack up at all! For one, the new stand will increase revenue so your argument on ticket prices will be of little concern to perspective buyers I'm sure. Secondly, do you really think that is the only source of revenue within the club and the only decision point for spending £500M plus? Hmmm.

6.) 02 Jun 2016
02 Jun 2016 00:12:52
All the things you are talking about (ticket prices, new stand, tv money, etc) dictate the fair valuation of the club and the price for a bid. None of them imply that the club will or will not be sold.

7.) 02 Jun 2016
02 Jun 2016 02:48:55
007, y harp on ticket prices which sell say 40k fans per week when you can sell 400k shirts a week globally?

8.) 02 Jun 2016
02 Jun 2016 04:47:16
Leek I don't think Liverpool sell 20 million shirts a year and even if they did they don't get any revenue from sales other that the original deal with warrior and club shop sales.

9.) 02 Jun 2016
02 Jun 2016 04:49:46
Lol so a buyer willing to sink several hundred million into the club is going to back off because of a ticket price freeze? The revenue isn't significant enough to to make a difference and would have zero bearing on a sale.

10.) 02 Jun 2016
02 Jun 2016 09:40:22
Liverpool sold just over 800k shirts last season. 8th in the world, Coutinho was the most common name (he was 10th most common in the world) . Pretty sure this analysis is looking at club only.

{Ed002's Note - The shirt money doesn't go to the club.}

11.) 02 Jun 2016
02 Jun 2016 10:49:57
That's what I thought Ed002, why is it that "football finance expert" Rob Wilson says that shirt sales from Utd signing Ibrahimovic would cover the cost of them missing out on champions league?

{Ed002's Note - I cannot be expected to answer why someone says something.}

12.) 02 Jun 2016
02 Jun 2016 12:58:20
I know (although I assume number of shirts sold factors into the value of the contract for shirts? ), was just giving Lee a more realistic view of shirt sales if he thinks that we're selling 20m shirts a year.