UEFA Champions League/Europa League ** Spoilers ** [29/30 September - 1 October 2015]

Another drab performance. With the run of games we've got it's only going to be a matter of time before Rodgers goes and if we lose at Everton, the international break might be the ideal time.
 
Higuain's goal was an absolute beauty.

Liverpool, still unable to win consistently against weaker teams let alone better ones, how long before FSG make a change. Hmm, next 7 games looks like a tough run for a team playing poorly.

Everton, Spurs, Southampton, Chelsea, Palace, City, Swansea. Following that it's Newcastle, WEst Brom, Watford, Leicester, Sunderland before another mini tough spell of West ham , Arsenal, Utd.

Rodgers could well find himself out of a job before the Newcastle game comes around.
 
the spurs v liverpool game will put a magnifying glass on both managers.

not sure who has spent the most but recently liverpool have had the upper hand against spurs in our games against one another.

be interesting to see if liverpool can find form against us as we're looking improved recently.
 
the motd facebook page has a title of 2 games 2 draws for liverpool in europa league

it also has a header above the photo of the game saying 'But still five times....''
 
Mark1989 said:
I do wonder at what point FSG will say enough is enough, we all thought it reached that point last season and it never happened
Click to expand...

When the stadium doesn't fill up, not before. Took an attendance of 35,000ish to get rid of Hodgpodge, not the **** results. Will be similar for Rodgers.
 
Seeing as match day revenue is becoming less and less important, and the way in which we sell our tickets (most non Cup games are already sold out (give or take) months in advance) I don't see how that will effect anything.
 
Match day income hasn't been relevant for years, an empty stadium is bad for the brand though. Less bums on seat, let ability to pull sponsors. Given that apparently clubs in PL will pull down nigh on 100million each next season why care about any manager, just keep the current idiot in charge. Its not like we need CL to be successful (in monetary terms anyway)
 
Newbie007 said:
Match day income hasn't been relevant for years, an empty stadium is bad for the brand though. Less bums on seat, let ability to pull sponsors. Given that apparently clubs in PL will pull down nigh on 100million each next season why care about any manager, just keep the current idiot in charge. Its not like we need CL to be successful (in monetary terms anyway)
Click to expand...

There won't be an empty stadium though because like it or not, even in the terrible end to last season we were still seeing packed houses. The tickets have more or less been sold for every home game this side of Christmas (I believe they keep some back to be sold in the run up to the game).

And for FSG to maximise their returns, the club absolutely have to be successful. TV money alone isn't enough - commercial income is equally if not more important and that largely depends (directly and indirectly) on success.

This idea (not specifically from you) that FSG aren't interested in the club being successful is ignorant bs, just like the bs about not spending etc. For years under H&G Liverpool fans talked about just wanting to be able to spend what we generate - FSG haven't just done that but also given the club more money to spend over and above what we've made.

They have little or no love for Liverpool but they want us to be successful because that's how they're going to make their money. No doubt they've made mistakes due to their lack of understanding of everything football related but there's no questions about their intentions.
 
Anfield has always sold out seats, it did when Hodge was here. Its whether the people go to the match or not and by all accounts there are a hell of a lot of spares for home games going these days. As i said when the ground stops being full is when they will act, we can hope they have made the decision to replace him and are just dotting the i's and crossing the t's with whomever is his replacement but i doubt it.

I dont think anyone can say 100% what FSG's strategy/long term goal is as they have been exceptionally quiet of late. There is even rumors they want to sell up as ffp is a non starter (not sure if that has just come from Tony Evans and his anti American bs though).

I do think they were dammed regardless of what they did in the summer and sacking/not sacking Rodgers, get rid & they would have been accused of knee jerking, keep him like they did and we have the current issues.
 
We weren't selling out in Hodgson's last few games actually (although many ticket holders didn't show too) but that wasn't and won't be the reason why FSG act.

We're an asset to FSG, if somebody offered them enough tomorrow they'd sell but until such offer arrives they'll continue to run the club in the best way they believe will maximise any potential return. And as I said, that will be by trying to make us successful on the pitch. They've loaned the club £m's since they took over (all at no cost to the club) and have already promised even more to fund the ground work. Again like I said, they've made mistakes but their intentions are good. The decision on if or when to sack Rodgers will not be based on a few empty seats, it will be based on whether they think he's the right person to bring success and or is the right person for the job available.
 
We'll have to disagree as usual, empty seats will be the deciding factor - if it was results driven would have gone already as his performance is already worse than the previous manger.
 
There weren't masses of empty seats when Dalglish got the bullet.

edit: and I didn't say it would be results that dictate but whether they believe he's the right man going forward and if not, the availability of whoever the right man is. As you say, if it was purely on results he'd have been gone in the summer.
 
Last edited:
Match day income isn't relevant in the same way that rich people don't care about profit, that is to say it's a daft thing to say and completely incorrect. You're expanding the stadium precisely because it will bring in more money. Arsenal have a what 330mil or so revenue, of which 100mil is match day income. To suggest it doesn't matter is utterly absurd. Yes, Arsenal have one of the strongest match day incomes and other teams like lower end of the table with 15-25k seats may only bring in 10-15mil a year, it's still 15mil they otherwise wouldn't have.

Arsenal couldn't have a 170+ mil wage budget(actually not sure where it's at the past year) without the extra money from tickets and Liverpool couldn't afford the wages they do without money from tickets.
 
I'm not sure if that was aimed at me or Newbie so...

We're expanding the stadium to, primarily, increase corporate seating which is sold on a seasonal basis. A few thousand empty regular seats (possibly most of which have still been paid for) for a handful of games is peanuts.
 
Last edited:
So because people buy those seats and that brings in income.... match day income becomes irrelevant? It doesn't matter that it's corporate seating, it's still right there, the word seating. People pay for those seats and it brings in money.

Arsenals 2013/14 numbers break down as 302mil income, 100mil for matchday revenue, 121mil from broadcasting 59mil commercial, 2mil property development.

You'll find that as normal fans interesting in going to games wanes, so does the pull of the corporate box as a wine and dine tool for companies as their customers also lose interest in going to the matches.

I'm also not sure exactly what Liverpool's plan is but it's more the executive seating that is such a boon for Arsenal. If you have 60k normal fans who basically just want to watch the game and want to pay as little as possible to do it, take 5k of those seats, section them off, give them some nicer stuff, nicer bar/food and make them feel special and you can charge 3 times as much for the ticket 5 times as much for the food. So those 5k seats bring in the same as maybe 20k normal seats.

Either way Newbie said match day income wasn't relevant any more, no distinction about normal seats.

Arsenal could have made the same amount without corporate seating if we built a 80 or 100k seater stadium and we could have filled it pretty easily as well, however a 60k seater stadium with 5k of those seats for executive level is much cheaper to build(particularly in London) than a 80k seater stadium.
 
As I said, I wasn't sure if your comment was aimed at what I said or Newbie.

My comment was specifically about a few thousand seats being empty for a handful of games and why that scenario won't be a major factor in FSG's decision on Rodgers.
 
BaZ87 said:
There weren't masses of empty seats when Dalglish got the bullet.

edit: and I didn't say it would be results that dictate but whether they believe he's the right man going forward and if not, the availability of whoever the right man is. As you say, if it was purely on results he'd have been gone in the summer.
Click to expand...

Kenny didn't qualify for the CL, thats why he got he bullet (the goalposts have since then mysteriously moved) - 8,000 ish empty seats last night, get that in a league game and thats when they will act.

DM - you cant compare Liverpools matchday revenue to Arsenal, we pull in more than 50% less.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom