£12m already budgeted for according to Parry

[Athelstan]

So if we hadn't got through what would have happened- now, January, and next summer? Just a thought but the omey juggling makes me nervous.

 

should read money

[Falconhoof]

without seeing what he actually said its difficult to know.

 

Could he have been saying we've budgeted for not having the 12 million ?

[RafaTheGaffa]

Parry said:

 

"There's muchrelief all round. It'snot just about these two games, we earned it through the league last season.

 

 

"We seem to make a habit of doing it the hard way in the final qualifier. The last couple of seasons have been slightly nervy, but now we can look forward to the draw.

 

 

"We have to budget for getting through to the group stages, otherwise we wouldn't be able to afford to do what we do.

 

 

"If you budget for failure, you achieve it, so we budget for success.

[passater]

he said we budgeted for qualifying....

 

http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/drilldown/N...060823-1356.htm

[Gunga Din]

Sack Parry etc.

[IgPig]

few seasons ago (prolly when we didn't make it) I am sure I remember him saying the opposite - we never budget for qualifying.

Edited August 23, 2006 by hamstrung

[anny road]

he doeasnt say the 12m has been spent

 

he says we have budgeted for qualifying.....he could mean that we have bought players to compete in the group stages of the champions league that we wouldnt have done if we hadnt have gone through.....

 

he isnt necessarily saying the money earned has been spent

[Guest redmilky]

They'll budget for both and make sure worst case scenario is survivable.

So, as usual Parry is ambiguous.

[Gomez]

he's making sure everyone knows we are skint, and don't have £12m burning a hole in our pocket so peospective selling clubs aren't doubling their fee's.

 

If there is any truth in the Neill rumours, it could be the difference between us paying £1m or £3m

[Leo No.8]

If we wouldn't have qualified, as long as we kept the receipt we could have taken Kuyt back to Feyenoord, seen the manager and got our money back.

 

Parry: 'Hi, yes I'd like to bring this striker back please'.

 

Feyenoord Official: 'Certainly sir, what seems to be the problem?'

 

Parry: 'Well, I ordered it over the phone, and I really didn't expect it to look like this, it just doesn't look as good on...'

 

Feyenoord Official: 'I'm afraid we can't return on that basis sir'

 

Parry: 'But look, it's injured (kicks Kuyt in the leg behind the desk)...'

Edited August 23, 2006 by Leo No.8

[G Richards]

It was a calculated risk, and that was fair enough for me. If the unthinkable had happened and Haifa knocked us out, we'd have managed.

 

I agree with budgeting for success. It's a great incentive. We're in good hands with Rafa too.

[Internationinteroperability]

Dortmund anyone?

 

They budgeted with CL qualifying but were beaten by Club Brugge in the 3rd Q round. Since then they've had some financial problems

 

I think it's a huge risk but if Parry knows what he's doing then fine...

[Skillz]

Parry's comments are perfectly in line with previous comments that we are not broke but close to it.

 

Many LFC supporters believe it and hopefully many of our competitors. Especially the one's we are buying players off.

 

Dortmund anyone?

 

They budgeted with CL qualifying but were beaten by Club Brugge in the 3rd Q round. Since then they've had some financial problems

 

I think it's a huge risk but if Parry knows what he's doing then fine...

 

It was a huge risk, but supporters are asking for the board to back Rafa now. Personally I think they have with Kuyt. The deal was done at a strange time.

 

I still hope we will buy L Neill and after 1/9/06 we get taken over by a very philanthropic Bill Gates.

[growler]

Funnily enough, not being in Europe for one season would increase our chances of a title win I reckon.

[Tim]

It was a risk but a minimal risk. Do not forget that from next season there is the small matter of the new premiership tv deal. Estimates put the potential rise in revenues for lfc at £10m to £15m per year for the 3 years of the deal. If we had not have qualified the reduced revenue would have been adequately covered by that increase next season.

 

There is also the next shirt sponsorship deal that is due to start next season. If we get a deal that is atleast the size that spurs signed then revenues will increase by atleast £4.5m per season over the life of the deal. Get something similar to the mancs and we are looking at upto £10m per year increase.

[st.johns]

One good thing about Parrys announcement, it saves a 50 page thread on the Alves transfer rumour

[Rimbeux]

Funnily enough, not being in Europe for one season would increase our chances of a title win I reckon.

 

Depends on the psycological impact

[wacko]

Dortmund anyone?

 

They budgeted with CL qualifying but were beaten by Club Brugge in the 3rd Q round. Since then they've had some financial problems

 

I think it's a huge risk but if Parry knows what he's doing then fine...

Hardly a fair comparison. Dortmund budgeted for permanent CL qualification and permanent success in said competition. They sold everything, even the rights to the club's name. They pawned everything they had on the expectation/gamble of becoming a permanent member of Europe's elite on the back of Hitzfeld "doing a Rafa" (or did Rafa do a Hitzfeld?) and winning the CL with a team that had no reasonable expectation of getting that far in '97 (Dortmund might have the highest attendances in Europe, but the tickets cost peanuts relative to the PL and their stadium is owned by the town, not the club). Dortmund did exactly the same as Leeds, expecting to reach the late stages of the CL every season and the top end of the league. Their financial forecasts were based on tens of millions of expected earnings, not the 10 or so million extra group qualification means. 12m quid is a tiny wager in comparison, assuming Parry isn't trying to make us look poor. This could never bring the clubs to its knees--the sale of Gerrard alone would put us back in the black--and anyone who's been paying attention knows our management would never take such a risk.

 

We splashed the guaranteed CL money on Alonso 2 years ago; I suspect we might do the same this year (though, obviously not on Alonso).

[Kvarme Ate My Food]

Hardly a fair comparison. Dortmund budgeted for permanent CL qualification and permanent success in said competition. They sold everything, even the rights to the club's name. They pawned everything they had on the expectation/gamble of becoming a permanent member of Europe's elite on the back of Hitzfeld "doing a Rafa" (or did Rafa do a Hitzfeld?) and winning the CL with a team that had no reasonable expectation of getting that far in '97 (Dortmund might have the highest attendances in Europe, but the tickets cost peanuts relative to the PL and their stadium is owned by the town, not the club). Dortmund did exactly the same as Leeds, expecting to reach the late stages of the CL every season and the top end of the league. Their financial forecasts were based on tens of millions of expected earnings, not the 10 or so million extra group qualification means. 12m quid is a tiny wager in comparison, assuming Parry isn't trying to make us look poor. This could never bring the clubs to its knees--the sale of Gerrard alone would put us back in the black--and anyone who's been paying attention knows our management would never take such a risk.

 

We splashed the guaranteed CL money on Alonso 2 years ago; I suspect we might do the same this year (though, obviously not on Alonso).

 

not disagreeing with the bulk of your argument, but if we were even in a position where we had to sell our captain and best player due to financial miscalculations, the repercussions would be traumatic to say the least

[Guest FrankH]

Whats the big shock. Of course we budgeted for getting through to the group stages.

[Tim]

not disagreeing with the bulk of your argument, but if we were even in a position where we had to sell our captain and best player due to financial miscalculations, the repercussions would be traumatic to say the least

 

The sale of gerrard was only given as an example. I have already listed how the risk of the gamble was minimal due to the way revenues are likely to go next season onwards.

[Rimbeux]

The sale of gerrard was only given as an example. I have already listed how the risk of the gamble was minimal due to the way revenues are likely to go next season onwards.

 

 

But there is also the need to raise finance for the new stadium, for which the books need to be in a healthy state, and the club shown to be run as a very tight ship. I think any reference to squeaky bums could be more to do with that.

[The walters step over]

not disagreeing with the bulk of your argument, but if we were even in a position where we had to sell our captain and best player due to financial miscalculations, the repercussions would be traumatic to say the least

 

 

There are some that would say we were in that position in the summer of 2004. There are some that say that if Owen hadn't scored against Newcastle on the last day of that season then we would really be up s*** creek due to the fact that it took roughly £10m to pay off Houllier and his staff off and had we not qualified for the Cl ( "a magnificent achievement" according to Houllier) then the board could in no way afford to sack him and Thompson.

 

There are some that think that the board were quite willing to sell Gerrard anyway, to get Rafa on board they would have had to promise him a decent transfer kitty. If they were to sell gerrard for £30m and Rafa could find a cheaper replacement , say for example, Xabi Alonso then Rafa could use the the rest to strengthen other areas. The fact that after selling Murphy and Heskey and sending various players out on loan Rafa only had the money to buy Josemi and put the first down payment for Garcia probably tells you all you need to know about our finances at the time. This was confirmed by Parry in an interview on 5 Live (he was talking about Owen), he also went on to say that Owen to Madrid paid the balance on the Garcia transfer and enabled the club to pay the first instalment for Alonso.

 

It was a calculated gamble by the club this year. Had it not come off...

[Rushian]

Normal clubs make calculated gambles every summer. This was no different. It's the level of the gamble that was important. And this one would have meant no spending in January and maybe 5-6m less next summer.

 

One of the criticisms I've seen levied at Parry and Moores recently is why they don't take more of a gamble given that we're "so close" under Rafa. The argument runs that if we weren't able to back him to the financial hilt this would be his last season here, and world class managers don't grow on trees in Stanley Park.

[Leo No.8]

Normal clubs make calculated gambles every summer. This was no different. It's the level of the gamble that was important. And this one would have meant no spending in January and maybe 5-6m less next summer.

 

One of the criticisms I've seen levied at Parry and Moores recently is why they don't take more of a gamble given that we're "so close" under Rafa. The argument runs that if we weren't able to back him to the financial hilt this would be his last season here, and world class managers don't grow on trees in Stanley Park.

 

I'd say thats exactly right.

 

I know which I think would be the biggest gamble out of:

 

i) spending CL money in advance or

 

ii) risk losing Rafa by not giving him the money he wanted.

 

They did exactly the right thing by putting up the money for the boss to get pretty much all his targets this summer. If we wouldn't have made the CL we'd have coped I'm sure...

Edited August 24, 2006 by Leo No.8