Is Moshiri investing in the team?

[Elong]

The facts are we we spent a lot of money. More than we recouped.

And we lobbed £45m at Swansea after squaring the Rom money off.

But ok.

We didn't get any sky money this year or last year then?

I'm not convinced he's invested in the team. However he's invested in getting us a new stadium. That's a big deal. Yes he will try and recoup that money, but he's not a philanthropist.

 

[Tubey]

We didn't get any sky money this year or last year then?

I'm not convinced he's invested in the team. However he's invested in getting us a new stadium. That's a big deal. Yes he will try and recoup that money, but he's not a philanthropist.

He hasn't even done that yet. The land isn't bought, it's just reserved. Even the £300m isn't him. Indeed, nothing has happened yet beyond words on that front.

The word "facilitator" rather than "investor" is probably more apt for him - he's happy to try and get things going, as long as it doesn't cost him anything to do so.

 

[roydo]

He hasn't even done that yet. The land isn't bought, it's just reserved. Even the £300m isn't him. Indeed, nothing has happened yet beyond words on that front.

The word "facilitator" rather than "investor" is probably more apt for him - he's happy to try and get things going, as long as it doesn't cost him anything to do so.

Lasagna not quite ready.

At risk of straying into Stadium stuff, I am utterly convinced that the whole ball game is all about kick starting Liverpool Waters with his mates making an absolute bucket.

But, to make that work, the team has to be successful/competetive/Known(Rooney). That is the end game imo. Said it from the early days when the BMD took root. Nowt has changed to make me think otherwise.

He aint a fraud, and he is investing in the squad, all be it from clever ways that his background gives him access to.

Happy? Meh.

 

[mezzrow]

Happy? Meh.

I want this on a t-shirt.

 

[bring the ghost on]

The word "facilitator" rather than "investor" is probably more apt for him.

Fair, to a point.

He's put the £80m interest free loan in and acquired the shares for £80m plus, so his personal exposure is upwards of £160m.

Yes, the loan is not a gift, but that's how every investor would clear debt for tax purposes, so it's as good as making a gift in reality.

However, I don't think we can expect a man estimated to be worth 2 billion to be pumping in hundreds of millions into player transfers.

The state of the market would literally see his net worth whittle away in a few years and most of his assets will not be liquid assets.

If he wanted to do so, then brilliant, but he isn't in the same league as the likes of Abromovic and needs to find other means to ensure we are financially competitive.

 

[bring the ghost on]

Is he an improvement on Kenwright? Yep.

Will he turn us into one of the very best clubs in the country? Not sure. He has a plan, but the competition is very fierce and the resources of our opponents very vast.

 

[Tubey]

Fair, to a point.

He's put the £80m interest free loan in and acquired the shares for £80m plus, so his personal exposure is upwards of £160m.

Yes, the loan is not a gift, but that's how every investor would clear debt for tax purposes, so it's as good as making a gift in reality.

However, I don't think we can expect a man estimated to be worth 2 billion to be pumping in hundreds of millions into player transfers.

The state of the market would literally see his net worth whittle away in a few years and most of his assets will not be liquid assets.

If he wanted to do so, then brilliant, but he isn't in the same league as the likes of Abromovic and needs to find other means to ensure we are financially competitive.

I'm not expecting, and never expected, hundreds of millions. But I expected that if we needed a striker in a transfer window and had obviously needed one for at least seven weeks, that we'd be able to get that striker.

That's not a big ask. Again, I don't see investment - all I see is, at best, the 60% increase in TV revenue being used and nothing else whatsoever. Which is what Bill Kenwright could have done. I just wanted an improvement; I see none.

 

[TraffordBlue]

Well, didn't he? He meant to recoup that money at the last minute - both deals fell through. He'll certainly make up for that in January by selling assets then. It's an overdraft he's used.

That's not "investment". The TV money saw a 60% uplift - we've seen next to none of that in squad investment, let alone actual investment from Moshiri.

So your answer to that is to laugh it off. Fair enough I guess!

If the net spend is over £68m since he's been here, how is that not investing though? You can use ifs and buts all you want (and my earlier post did reference the 'if Barkley had gone'), but similarly if/when Barkley goes in January, we may also spend more money on players then too. The facts as it stand are £68m overall and £69m since January.

Investing in the team is also being interpreted solely on transfer fees as well when there are more aspects to it like wages and i'd also include Koeman/Martinez as an extension of the team to an extent as we have had to pay fees and wages for both.

 

[Khalekan]

I originally voted YES but have changed it to NO after this window.

And the proof for me is the haste with which Lukaku was gift wrapped and presented to Manchester United.

The more you think of it, how mad was that?

Lukaku and the Mancs should have been told he was going nowhere until his replacement was signed up.

But I have reluctantly concluded the money was needed early to buy other players.

He seems to be investing in the club all right....but I am seeing no great outlay in player purchases.

 

[Tubey]

If the net spend is over £68m since he's been here, how is that not investing though? You can use ifs and buts all you want (and my earlier post did reference the 'if Barkley had gone'), but similarly if/when Barkley goes in January, we may also spend more money on players then too. The facts as it stand are £68m overall and £69m since January.

Investing in the team is also being interpreted solely on transfer fees as well when there are more aspects to it like wages and i'd also include Koeman/Martinez as an extension of the team to an extent as we have had to pay fees and wages for both.

Because we've had a 60% markup on TV money since he arrived and he's saddled a £60m overdraft debt on us. So we're using money that would have been available with or without him, alongside debt.

None of it is investment.

 

[Tubey]

Also, @EFC78 - take a look at the two seasons before Moshiri arrived and look at the net spend under Kenwright.

Can you then see what I mean about there being effectively no difference whatsoever?

 

[Bluerover]

Here's a question for all of you wise GOTers.

You are worth £2 bn having invested wisely in various markets over something like 25 years.

Would you "invest"/ "gamble" £ 50/60m on a footballer - say 24 years old; great potential but what if injured/finds women etc

Just think about it.

 

[The binman chronicles]

I'm not expecting, and never expected, hundreds of millions. But I expected that if we needed a striker in a transfer window and had obviously needed one for at least seven weeks, that we'd be able to get that striker.

That's not a big ask. Again, I don't see investment - all I see is, at best, the 60% increase in TV revenue being used and nothing else whatsoever. Which is what Bill Kenwright could have done. I just wanted an improvement; I see none.

With respect you can't know for sure what has gone down in regard to getting another player in. It could have been they couldn't agree which player. The player(s) didn't want to come here. The selling club wanted way too much money even for this market. They could have been promised that a player they want will be available in a following window, so what's the point in spending extra for another.

We simply do not know what cash was available and I remember people saying the exact same thing last summer, but then we spent 15 and then 20 something million for morgs and lookman in Jan. The fact we spent 14 million on deadline day on a couple of prospects shows the money was still there. Some things aren't black and white, all we can look to is the patterns in previous windows and so far it shows there is money being spent. If that changes and every window from now on we only spend what comes in then the facts will swing to your side of the argument.

 

[Tubey]

With respect you can't know for sure what has gone down in regard to getting another player in. It could have been they couldn't agree which player. The selling club wanted way too much money even for this market. They could have been promised that a player they want will be available in a following window, so what's the point in spending extra for another.

We simply do not know what cash was available and I remember people saying the exact same thing last summer, but then we spent 15 and then 20 something million for morgs and lookman in Jan. The fact we spent 14 million on deadline day on a couple of prospects shows the money was still there. Some things aren't black and white, all we can look to is the patterns in previous windows and so far it shows there is money being spent. If that changes and every window from now on we only spend what comes in then the facts will swing to your side of the argument.

I know for sure Koeman wanted a first team striker and a left sided defender in, with weeks and even months notice.

Neither happened. That tells me one of two things - the team is incompetent, or we're sell to buy. The evidence clearly leans to the latter more than the former.

 

[GwladysBlue]

We were mislead to believe that this fella was going to be bankrolling us to the top.

He is basically just a more connected Kenwright and is benefitting from the huge influx of cash in the Premier League.

He's not paying for the stadium, we are, long after he will be gone.