01 September 2011

Amazing! How Kenny Dalglish bought Luis Suarez for only £750k

Since returning to Liverpool, Kenny Dalglish has brought 9 players to the club for transfer fees of approximately £111m, and recouped £75m by offloading 14 players. After crunching the numbers, this means that Dalglish has only actually spent £36m, which consequently means we got Andy Carroll, Jordan Henderson and Stewart Downing for a mere £4m each. How amazing is that?!

I'm so relieved Carroll only cost £4m and not £35m, which was arguably overpriced. Carroll has been playing like a £4m striker anyway so the club is actually getting superb value for money.

And everyone saying that Jordan Henderson cost too much - how can that be when he only cost £4m?

In reality, Luis Suarez and Carroll were actually even *cheaper* than £4m. In January 2011, Fernando Torres and Ryan Babel were sold for approximately £56m. Liverpool paid a combined £57.5m for his replacements, which means that Carroll and Suarez cost only £1.5m combined, or a staggering £750k each in reality.

That surely has to be the greatest piece of transfer business in the history of football? Liverpool FC clearly has some genius transfer fee negotiators on its staff, adept at utilising the Jedi mind trick to fool sellers into lowering their prices.

One thing is for sure - with this kind of budget transfer spending, Liverpool will not be affected by UEFA's imminent financial fair play rules.

All this time I've been thinking that players cost the actual amount of money paid for them, but clearly I was totally wrong.

I've now seen the error of my ways.

Net-Spend Cult? Sign me up!

Jaimie Kanwar

115 comments:

  1. 750k jaimie,get it together.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good spot, thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  3. your comments continue to become increasingly more bizare

    ReplyDelete
  4. Actually, the reality is that we have spent 35 million since January. No one else sells a car for 3k and buys one for 8k and then says they spent 8k. The car cost 8k but the amount spent is still 5k.

    Wish Carroll had cost 4 million, though. Even if someone offered us silly money for Torres, we did not need to pass that kindness onto Newcastle and do the same with Carroll. He may turn out to be good, but 35 million was always silly money. 3 million less than Aguero? 8 million more than Dzeko? Dzeko took time to get going, but looked the real deal in Germany and I doubt Carroll will turn out to be the superior player. How good does he need to be to justify that price tag? As good as Shearer? Lineker or even Kenny himself?

    ReplyDelete
  5. you need to do your maths again mate,111 spent minus 71 gained does not add up to 36 million, stupid article

    ReplyDelete
  6. dude, u are dilussional... get off the drugs...

    ReplyDelete
  7. have u thought about the fee's for torres and babel we paid in the first place

    ReplyDelete
  8. you just dont get it if during the existence of the club say we spent 1 billion and collected say 600 million the net spend is 400 million. you can only judge each manager as they are in charge otherwise you could say rafa bought him or hodgson bought this player. fans always look at the business the current manager has done just as the new owners are doing.Do you think that they have spent a total of 111 million and not asked where the money from the sales are.

    ReplyDelete
  9. gab, what is the deal with the cost of carroll, newcastle dictated the tores price, when torres wanted to leave, kenny said he wanted carroll as the replacement striker so the americans said to abramovich theywanted within a million or so of what newcastle wanted for carroll so after the  babel an buying of suarez we hadn't spent much more than what we had recouped, which would leave us extramoney in the summer transfer window and still fall in towards ffp rules i wish people would open their blinkers and research the actual sales rather than just thinkof the figure, last year we had torres and babel, neither playing particularly well,this year we have carroll who hasn't found his feet yet but having played about 10 games for us thats not surprising and suarez who we all know about, so i think we did well out of these deals

    ReplyDelete
  10. who goes on about net spend apart from you?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Yes it would be good, if it were true. Truth is we paid £35 million not 4 or 750k or what ever, yes £35 MILLION. 35 Million, that, if we had kept until the end of the season, as Carrol contributed Zero during the 5 months from Jan-Jun, then we could of spent it more wisely on a few extra players and who knows we might of ACTUALY paid 4 million for Carrol?!

    You would be more suited reading articles rather than writing them.

    ReplyDelete
  12. sarcasm ay? hilarious article.. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  13. Please, boys - don't speed to write of Andy Carroll after just a few games.
    The boy has a lot of qualities and we will see it soon.
    Believe to Sir Kenny!
    Some time you have to pay more for a player you really want - Carroll, Henderson, Downing, some time less - Suares, Adam, Enrique, Coates, Bellamy.
    Overall - a great transfer year for Liverpool - congratulations for Henry, Dalglish, Comoli and all of the staf included!
    YNWA!!!
    :)

    ReplyDelete
  14. Is this a reference to to that Guardian article where they report the Cole loan cost the club 3m?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Really enjoyed the article, you sound like an economist, proving you can make the figures say anything. I agree in the net approach but also think that the "Market" for football players can only b judged on results on the pitch, am looking4ward2finding out.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Jamie,

    I am glad you are now seeing the other side of the coin. Will you now do a piece on the Rafa regarding his net spend considering all the articles and arguments you have put forward previously?

    I am not really part of the net spend cult as you put it but the numbers dont lie. I think Rafa worked in a rather complex environment to what Kenny finds himself in now. Rafa's found it rather difficult to get players that he wanted simply because when he needed the money, the money was not readily available, however, he did have money. In Kenny case, he says he needs this player or that player and the players get bought. At this point in time, LFC are not operating under a sell to buy policy unlike Rafa. Even at that, the numbers still look impressive.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Hi Alan
              Don't get me wrong, I think Carroll will have periods for us when he is unplayable, in a good way. It just makes me laugh the way that football works. English players are overpriced. Not sure that there is another business, outside sport, where assets have such an arbitrary value. Chelsea want Torres, they offer 50 million, we have money burning a hole in our pocket, so a 20 million pound player then becomes worth 35 million. Look at the way that Bolton have been trying to mug all and sundry with the Cahill fee. Now watch them whine and try to blackmail him in signing a new deal.

    I reckon that it is high time, within certain age limits, that contracts dictated the prices of players. Does anyone really think that Bolton will offer Cahill the wages of 17 million pound player when they try to get him to re-sign?

    The cost of players, and their contracts, does make a difference and appears to not only affect the player concerned but also other players in the squad. Chelsea have not been the same since they signed Torres and we have lost Meireles, probably due to contract wrangling.

    Anyway, whether we had money to spend or not, I think that if we could get Suarez for 22 million, we could find better value than we have received for all our signings other than Adam and Enrique. This guy, Coates, looks like the real deal and he went for 7 million. These guys get paid a lot of money to find value, anyone can wave 35 million at Newcastle and get them to sell Carroll.

    ReplyDelete
  18. We need to get away from this type of disagreement ...

    In business its about balancing the books, and thats the ONLY system in place to debate the ins and outs at LFC.

    The books will show sales and purchases, all other outgings and all other incomings, this determines the profit/lose for that year.

    If we are going to make a judgement call about ins and outs since Kenny took over, then the outs and ins leave us with approx £36ish million paid out.

    The writer is being funny and in a silly way he is right but so many fans get lost in there view of business, and have clearly taken this blog way to serious, if you want to inflate your ego and brag about the value of players, go for it .. but remember its just bulltalk. If you want to look at the cost to LFC since Kenny took over we are looking at about £36m plus it seems he has also off loaded players to bring the wage bill down, we have also signed some good marketing deals which will increase the incomings, so over all we may be in a more balanced and health financial position then we were last year, with better more commited players, coaches, staff owners etc...

    If you were judging this as a business (which it is) LFC have performed very professionally and with a clear degree of wisdom, if you want to get lost in individual values then some of you will be debating the prices of players for years to come ... good luck, but I'm going to focus on the team as a whole ... :)

    ReplyDelete
  19. Totaly agree.  When a player goes for £35 million they should be established, critically acclaimed, world class players.  Andy Carroll is none of the above.  Carroll is an almighty gamble who desperately relies on the form others for his goals.  It is going to be very intersesting to see how Carroll will get chances never mind take them.

    Jamie why did it take until the return of Dalglish to realise the net spend 'myth' was actually true. To some I will sound like a cry baby but when Benitez needed your support in this particluar area you let him him down quite badly.  The facts of Rafas net spend all of a sudden became absolete.  Im not calling for the return of Rafa or his methods just maybe a little non biased analysis.  This article gives the impression that your problem with Rafa was personal as you contiually overlooked the same strenghts Rafa demonstrated but praise those exact same skills when another manager you have given your stamp of approval to (by default as no one messes with king) does axactly the same thing.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Actually, I'm not sure I agree with your car analogy. If someone asked me how much I spent on my current car I'd say £2100, despite the fact I'd shipped our my old car for £1300 the week before. I'd never consider saying I'd spent £800 on it!

    ReplyDelete
  21. haha that story had very little meaning, they cost how much they cost, we lost strengh in the players we sold,

    For example we could sell suarez for 30 million then buy someone like beckford for 32 and say beckford only cost 2 million, absoutly rubbish he still would have set us back 32million

    ReplyDelete
  22. Are u serious about this article or are u being sarcastic , let us know Jamie

    ReplyDelete
  23. Your buys are your debits and sells are your credits and the nett spend is the difference. We sold Torres and Babel for GBP 56 and bought Suarez and Carroll for GBP 57.5. There is also saving on Torres and Babel to be taken into account. Suarez and Carroll were bougt for long term not one year. They will be a hit. With the other additions of Charlie, Jordan, Stewart, Jose, Coates and Bellamy there is now depth and quality in the team.When SG is back from injury he will be like our new signing. Don't worry about MANU & MAN CITY, the title is ours. We don't have Champions League. When Champions League start, MANU, MAN City & Chelsea will start droping points.

    ReplyDelete
  24. When Torres wanted to go to Chelsea, I had this sick gut wrenchng feeling for a few days.  Then I found out that we'd bid for Carroll, and for a staggering £35M.  Like most, I think this is an inflated price.  But then that horrible feeling went away, replaced by a positive optimism that we had finally turned a corner and indeed got a decent American owners unlike H&G.  I know it may sound sentimental, but Carroll was a marque signing - not one like a Tevez/Ronaldo based on established talent in it's prime - but a statement of intent of repairing the lost Kop pride and wanting to break back into the league of big spenders, of the days like when we bought Barnes/Aldridge/Beardsley in one go.

    On net spend - it is a fact of life which people ignored for their personal detest of Rafa.  Now that he's gone, it's OK to once more accept this science.  We should all (including Jamie!!) be grateful for the good and bad times we endured under Rafa, and for him understanding the Kop and getting KK involved, which ultimately allowed for his return.

    ReplyDelete
  25. i think we have done good business so we paid over the odds on a few players sometimes its better to spend that little bit more to get the players you want and i think the squad has improved incredibly carroll will come true hes young and i beleive the price has influenced his confidence i think he just requires time to get that out his head at his age its an incredible burden but that was the price it took to get him from newcastle i still beleive if we didnt buy him then he wouldnt have been snapped up by our rivals in this window end of the day we got a good bit of business done in the past 12 months and am looking forward to the future when we break back into the top four we already have an incredible base of players to add the marquee signings to surely we can only get stronger in our current situation and have players with many years ahead of them i say we should embrace what is a very good young and talented side 

    ReplyDelete
  26. Someone is clearly bored. :)

    ReplyDelete
  27. <p><span><span>Funny you should bring the UEFA fair play regulations into the equation. Of course they will only look at what was spent by Dalglish. If he spent over £100m then that will be the calculation that they use, at no point whatsoever will they include money earned by transfers as this will clearly distort the evaluation process. Gross spend vs turnover (receipts not included within turnover either). After all, it was spent it doesn't matter that it was potentially funded by receipts. To stretch the analogy further, it doesn't matter if we sell Suarez for £1billion, if we spend £500m on his replacement we will be kicked out of European competition as there is no way our turnover can support that. Clearly anyone who believes net spend is an accurate indicator and gauge of ACTUAL COST TO THE CLUB is stupid. That's right isn't it. Hmm.</span></span></p>

    ReplyDelete
  28. mr kanwar-parry continuing to take the p**s out of LFC fans on his pseudo site....

    ReplyDelete
  29. I really dont understand how you can't place any importance on the tens of millions recouped..
    I've never seen any of the 'net spend cult', as you so gracfully denote them, implement this notion of net spend on individual players as demonstrated here; it is always in a more general sense; for example to help explain how the club raises money to fund transfers, along with other sources of revenue.  This 'net spend cult' was often distraught that the club seemed to rely more heavily on this source of revenue than others..
    Whether or not thats true is debatable as i'm unsure of the financial details, but its certainly a valid point to raise.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Jaimie, you have hit the freaking NAIL ON THE HEAD. :-D

    I am sure you were trying to be sarcastic with this article? :-D

    Now I for one love this article that you have written and would you like to know why?

    The whole NET SPEND argument while Rafa was here is and always was one of the biggest excuses for Rafa not being backed and all the ongoing pissing and moaning that Rafa had to sell to buy YET this article is proof of Dalglish "having to sell to buy" isn't it?

    Please can all the NET SPEND activists please EXPLAIN how Rafa was not backed in the market when Kenny Dalglish has a NET SPEND figure lower than that of Rafa's =-O

    <span>Amazing! How Kenny Dalglish bought Luis Suarez for only £750k</span>... He, he, He... So now we can go out in the January transfer market and we can go and ask Barcelona if we can have Messi for 1 million.  :-P Jaimie, you are a legend mate!!!

    ReplyDelete
  31. You didnt spend £800, you spent £2,100.  But because you recieved £1,300 on your old car, it means.....

    Net spend on car = £800

    ReplyDelete
  32. Dirk Kuyt Works Hard6:15 p.m., September 01, 2011

    If there is such thing as a budget there is such thing as income and spend. If there is such thing as income and spend then there is something such as net income and net spend. It's a fact not a cult. Are you arguing with us or John Henry? Because he cleary stated that the Carroll fee was squarely dependant on the Torres fee. I'm guessing this is yet another slight at those who still remember and appreciate Rafa but it's way off the mark. The question is whether you HAVE to sell to spend. If, like Rafa, you do, then net spend has to be taken into account. If you don't have to, like Mancini, then maybe it doesn't matter so much. But to blindly dismiss it or refer to it without taking the context into account you're just as silly as the people you claim to be silly. Which in my mind makes you even sillier.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Dirk Kuyt Works Hard6:17 p.m., September 01, 2011

    Please see below.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I'll bite, Red4life, only because it is so easy. Kenny has net spend lower than Rafa? Yes he does, however he was here 6 seasons and Kenny for half a season. In Kenny's half a season, he has spent over £100m gross. £100m gross for 2 windows vs £250m gross in 11/12 windows. I don't particularly care as am more than happy about Kenny being in charge (at the expense of NOBODY else) but, as per usual, you are making yourself look stupid. Kenny has been backed more than Rafa by both net and gross spend indicators. Backed, with the assistance of money generated by sales. If we didn't sell Torres, we wouldn't have bought Carrol. Simple.

    ReplyDelete
  35. See, the excuses just do not stop. If it is not NET SPEND thent it is the time perioud of when the money was spent and then it is the this and that and shite knows what other excuses.

    Do you really think Dalglish is going to be given anothe 100mil+ in the January window or even in the transfer window at the start of next season. The answer is a plain and simple NO. wheteher Dalglish has spent the money in 1, 2 or even windows does not make a difference, FACT is that he has gotten rid of all the crap overpaid junk and has been given money to spend and he has spent it wisely. If Rafa was still here he would have spent all the money on defensive midfielder LOL. Rafa had in the region of 250mil over six seasons which is a shite load of money, it is 50mil short of what FSG paid for LFC.

    250mil over six seasons = +-41mil per season over six seasons. Now the excuse will be that the money was not spent all at once and another excuse will be that 41mil is nowhere near enough per season to build a squad capable of winning the EPL. Excuse after excuse after excuse...

    Let us hear the next excuse please.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Dirk Kuyt Works Hard6:32 p.m., September 01, 2011

    I think that the car analogy is appropriate. If I had a two car garage and needed to get rid of one car to fit in a new car then how much I sell the for may be inconsequential. I just need the space.

    However if in order to be able to afford a new car I have to sell my old one and get a decent price then how much I spend against how much I sold the car for is an issue. It all depends on my finances in the first place. 

    However I will say this, no matter how much I sell my car for, if what I buy isn't worth the price then it is an issue.

    Having said all that, this is football and there are a myriad of reasons why some players work and some don't. The bottom line is that the net amount of respect I give Rafa considering the environment he was expected to manage in is enormous.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Wow an article that didnt mention rafa...

    ReplyDelete
  38. See excuses, oh deary me...

    ReplyDelete
  39. I love King Kenny and he is one of the reasons that I have renewed my season tcket as last year due some fnanacial dffculties and getting tired of Roy, I was thinking ot give my season ticket away for a year to a friend however  dont thnk the credit for any succes n the transfer arket should go to Kenny alone.
    As a matter of fact I think Comolli and FSN should take most of credit. few months before last season finished Henry gave his bleuprint on transfers and what sort of team he wanted to press and fans and Comolli with King Kenny supervision implied that to perfection.  it has been the first time to see a transfer strategy in many years and I am over the moon.
    finally in regard to Carroll, lets stop blaming for his value, whatever that is. players dont raise the players values but club do. I am hoping Carroll s strong enough to shine again.  

    ReplyDelete
  40. There is any number of ways to look at this problem.  Not just one.  And to force people to see things in one way is just stupid and close minded.

    You're a wind up merchant Jaime.  That is all your site is.  Despite whatever "higher" ideas you claim to espouse, you're basically posting things just to wind somebody up.  

    ReplyDelete
  41. I am not trying to bark up the wrong tree Gab and I am not trying to have an argument here but how can you say that the car cost 8k but you only spent 5k?

    If you only paid 5k how on earth do you drive a car away from the dealer that cost 8k?

    Oh I get it now, the dealer said to you that the car costs 8k which you paid but he felt sorry for you and gave you 3k back. That is obviosly how you only spent 5k? Question is where is the 3K as you only spent 5k. Ok wait, I think I might just make things to complicated about the fact that you spent 8k on the car that had a price tag of 8k.

    ReplyDelete
  42. What excuses? Who is making excuses? You are amateurly trying to shoehorn an obvious bias against Benitez into most of your post. Facts remain, not excuses. How can you measure 1 man's spending over 8 months vs another's over 6 seasons? Only a fool could. Dalglish couldn't spend £100m if he hadn't received substantial money for Torres. LFC couldn't afford it. As much as you try to rinse any evidence of receipts from your tiny brain, it is a fact of business. Bottom line profit is receipts minus expenditure.

    ReplyDelete
  43. It's not an excuse. Try to read and understand. Sometimes you have to sell to buy. Net spend = cost to the club. Net spend = how much money the club have put in. John Henry clearly believed in it. After all, he stated that the money we received from Chelsea drove the asking price for Carroll.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/feb/04/john-w-henry-interview-liverpool

    "
    That commitment to sound financial management was followed, not breached, Henry asserted, in the £35m Liverpool paid Newcastle United for Andy Carroll, a fee that astonished English football. Henry said the £35m made financial sense because Liverpool were only paying to Newcastle what they were to receive from Chelsea by selling Torres, whom they allowed to leave because he had become too evidently unhappy at Anfield."

    ReplyDelete
  44. Dirk Kuyt Works Hard7:41 p.m., September 01, 2011

    Excuses or context? It may be better to look at the list of players Rafa wanted to buy but couldn't afford to gauge a better view on his constraints. All I'm saying is that a blanket for or against argument is blinkered. I can say however that those who use the net spend argument have given more context than Janie or any of his wind up cronies ever have. But the truth is that you guys thrive off division and hence why Benitez is constantly recycled on this site. Liverpool FC is just a medium for your internet noteriety. Most of us are united and past this stage of Liverpool's history. Only people like Jamie and yourself cling on to it in the same way you clung onto Hicks & Gillett and Hodgson just to set yourselves up against fellow fans. The question that you and Jamie have to ask is why do you keep revelling in this old issue? There's little relevance anymore. This blog has fast become a study into the psychology of internet sociopaths.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Clearly the season so far including transfer deadline day has become totally boring. Nothing to see here folks,move along, or better still,lets give our captive audience something more meaningful to munch on. I was really starting to believe you were falling in love once more (with the game you profess to hate). Then this... HOW SAD :(

    ReplyDelete
  46. True. But then we wouldn't have been able to buy Beckford had we not sold Suarez. You can't discount receipts. We wouldn't have bought Carroll had Torres stayed (whether we got a good or bad deal out of that is a debate for another day). It is like a shop with stock. They buy some, sell some, which enables them to buy more.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Wow, never did I know that TURNOVER minus COST will give you the amount of PROFIT you have made??? Only the most intellegent people are able to figure that out. You are so special, more special than any other person on planet earth.

    Rafa's Total Spend/COST TO CLUB (The amount each and every player cost the club the day they signed in his six year reign) minus his Total Sold/TURNOVER (Total amount of money received from other clubs for the players Rafa sold over six seasons) did not make us a profit. His Total Spend is more than his TOTAL Sold so your "Bottom line profit is receipts minus expenditure" is not going to work in Rafa's favour either...

    If you run a business and your cost is more than your turnover than you have made a LOSS but wait a minute YOU KNEW THAT DIDN'T YOU?

    ReplyDelete
  48. Yes but you mis beachero's point, he is trying to explain to NET SPEND ACTIVISTS WHO CAN ONLY MAKE EXCUSES FOR RAFA that Beckford would not have cost 2mil otherwise we could have kept Suarez and used the 2mil to buy Beckford. I challenge you to go try and work out what I have TRIED to explain to you.  

    ReplyDelete
  49. The list of players Rafa wanted to buy...

    Keane was signed by Parry.
    Alonso did not leave because of Rafa.
    Rafa could do no wrong.
    Rafa was the only one that was right.
    LFC died the day Rafa left. (No jokes, Rafa's preachers were really saying this)

    Any more excuses?

    ReplyDelete
  50. I never said he made a profit. Full marks in understanding the initial dynamic though, have another read and see if you can grasp the rest. I am out, have no time to interact with people with so little grasp of fundamental English. You never change, make wild, stupid accusations and then deflect like crazy when proven wrong. Still waiting for Roy to turn it around like you categorically stated he would. Get a life lad.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Jaimie, I seriously could not stop pissing myself when I read...
    "All this time I've been thinking that players cost the actual amount of money paid for them, but clearly I was totally wrong. "


    We want more!!! I am still pissing myself...

    ReplyDelete
  52. Jamie, I used to have some respect for your articles, but you are so twisting and missing the point that it really is embarasing. This article is stupid, and I'm slowly starting to think you might be as well.

    ReplyDelete
  53. That will be the lobotomy rather than the article, re your incontinence.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Deflect away from what?

    You obviously have run out of excuses.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Deflect away from what?

    You obviously have run out of excuses.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Challenge not accepted, doubt Jesus himself could make sense of your gibberish. How does it feel to be universally laughed at on this site. Even the writer, who arse is permanently penetrated by your Tongue, doesn't reply to your inane shite. Forget Rafa, he is gone. Regrettably for you, your stupidity remains.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Have you ever thought of joining a show called

    ReplyDelete
  58. I give you detailed examples, you say 'but Rafa'. Deflection. Now do you see? You continually fail to grasp the point of all correspondence and reply 'but Rafa' because you are obsessed. I get it, you hang your hat on Hodgson and your climb down must have been humiliating. It's ok, Kenny is here. Regrettably for you, also still here is your stupidity. Hugs.x

    ReplyDelete
  59. Sore loser is more like it.

    ReplyDelete
  60. well perhaps if I drove there in my own older car and the dealer said - ill tell you what, this car would cost you 8k, but if you give me that car you drove here in i'll give it to you for 5k!
    Therefore im driving home in a car worth 8k that i only spent 5k on!!

    ReplyDelete
  61. precisely! the money the club spends has to come from somewhere!! Transfer fees received are as relevant a source of revenue as gate receipts, commercial activities, sponsorship etc!

    ReplyDelete
  62. Your older car had a VALUE which was 3k added to the 5k which you paid to the dealer. How much would you have had to pay for the car that was 8k if you did not have the older car? 

    ReplyDelete
  63. Dirk Kuyt Works Hard10:12 p.m., September 01, 2011

    You don't ever put forward a coherent balanced opinion so debating with you is senseless. However to all other rational readers I think the whole net spend debate is a bit of a red herring. The figures are almost inconsequential to the context. The fact is that one of Rafa's biggest gripes was the quality of the squad. Now, for example, if Rafa didn't have to sell Bellamy to fund the Torres transfer then maybe we could have afforded to give Torres a rest and prevent his over exertion and frequent injuries. But when the sub striker is a 20 year old £1.5M kid you can't always do that. The Barry / Alonso saga is a key example. Although I didn't agree with the way Benitez dealt with that situation it is arguable that he should never have had to barter with a popular talented midfielder to fund the bid. As we all know the knock on effects were horrific. Fortunately Kenny has the financial support so he doesn't have to sell players to fund signings and effectively weakened the squad. Rafa was gambling every window in those last few years and he did lose some. Some big ones. But the real question is, how many other top 6 sides were in that kind of financial pressure? The net spend issue is somewhat irrelevant unless you take into account that while (until the last year) our first team improved, our squad was as middling and random as ever. Having said that the likes of Sterling, Shelvey, Robinson, Coady, Suso and Flanagan may be the greatest lasting legacy of Rafa's work at the club not his budget managing skills.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Dirk Kuyt Works Hard10:19 p.m., September 01, 2011

    Comment policy

    ReplyDelete
  65.  "(until the last year)"

    Which one?

    ReplyDelete
  66. You are either a retarded monkey or a child, I'm not sure which...

    ReplyDelete
  67. Hang my hat on Hodgson? Did I miss something?

    ReplyDelete
  68. Additionally if your spending budget is determined on your sales then you aren't in control of the timing and reactiveness of your signings. For example, if we could have rustled up the £12M it would have cost us to buy Dani Alves from Sevilla then maybe a few years down the line we wouldn't have deemed it necessary to sign Janie's favourite player Glen Johnson for £18M. Who knows? A top 4 team shouldn't be wheeling and dealing to fund signings. If a squad needs to be built then it needs to be built from new money. Signings need to be prioritised and then waste can be sold. Just how we have done in this transfer window. Don't get me wrong, we spent a lot of money, but most of it was spent in the mid table, under £10M market. But Rafa decided that he had to gamble a lot to effectively improve the squad. I didn't agree with this policy and would rather him save up the money on key signings and utilise the youth system for the full back and defensive midfield slots. Understandably he wanted two good players for every slot as both he and Mourinho believed that that was how league titles were won. Fair enough, but he should have realised that £7M gambles weren't worth it but a £18M striker gamble could well be. In Torres and Mascherano it was. In Keane and Aquilani it wasn't. In Rooney and Nani it is. In Berbatov and Anderson it isn't. Managers make mistake but it is important to appreciate the context of those successes and mistakes. Budgets and net spends don't always do that so using them as sticks to beat or defend the man is somewhat illogical.

    ReplyDelete
  69. This article is the most retarded thing I've ever read. You can't say "Oh we bought a player for £10m but sold one for £5m so that player must've cost us £5m." No that is completely wrong. The only way that would work is if you say you've essentially traded the £5m player as well as £5m. Even then it's stupid. Player's are bought and sold for what you pay. End of. We did overpay for Henderson and Carroll. It was a waste. Had we offered realistic values, we would've had more money in the bank no matter which way you try and write it. Seriously, don't let this author write anything again, people like me who don't breathe football know more about it than this chump.

    ReplyDelete
  70. If you want to be technical, at least 60 mill of the money recouped were Rafa buys of which appx half of the sale amount was profit on purchase price

    ReplyDelete
  71. The last year of Rafa's tenure?

    ReplyDelete
  72. Not to mention their wages as well. You also have to take into account imaging rights, how much the team will gained through jersey sales, and also through that player's impact on expanding the team's global appeal. A lot goes into how much a player is "worth" and how much they actually bring into a club. At times, you can't even calculate how much money a player has brought into a club; some things are just intangible. When it comes down to it, the quality of Liverpool's squad has vastly increased in comparison to the capital invested.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Out
    Arbeloa - sold for peanuts and he was a very good player
    Alosno - We all know why he left
    Hyypia

    In
    Johnson
    Aquilani
    Kyrgiakos

    Clearly our first team improved and finishing 7th confirmed our improvement...

    ReplyDelete
  74. Your such a tool. When has any of this net spend crew said we have only spent 4 mill on carroll. It just means the club havent shelled 111 million of their own cash, theyve spent 36 and reinvested the rest to bring what they believe to be better quality players. I did think you were abit daft Jaimie but i now believe your really stupid. You sound like a kid. Grow up

    ReplyDelete
  75. Rossi - I've deleted your last post.  If you can't post your views without hurling insults then don't bother posting at all.

    ReplyDelete
  76. He had a point though.

    ReplyDelete
  77. ps: are you going to post the same response to Red4Life who labelled a poster a loser? Or is it only the guys who disagree with you that get public warnings?

    ReplyDelete
  78. And still another dig at those who remember his work at the club with revearance. My hopes are that Jamie will one day move on, and use his journalistic talents for something worthy.

    ReplyDelete
  79. What LFC did was to ship out garbage and brought in quality instead for the difference of the buying price and selling price. How the writer of this piece figures out 75m is way beyond me to understand, especially when some of the transfers are undisclosed, therefore no price given.

    So, overall, LFC spent the 35m PLUS the estimated 75m on the players they have brought in. The car example above was a little mistake but I understand what he meant eventhough it was wrong. Great business this summer!

    ReplyDelete
  80. I agree reds4life.

    People get caught up on the net spend thing. The fact is, if you have to cash in an asset in order to purchase something of a higher value, that's the equivalent of spending the full amount in the first place. Therefore you spent 8K on the car, irrespective of whether you used another car worth 3K to pay for some of it!

    ReplyDelete
  81. I hate to know who does the finance in your house. It is NET spend he is refering to. Not what it cost? We are talkin about what you start with and how much is left in your pocket when you finished spending. How much would you spend if I went to the dealers with you and bopught the car for you?? Would you say the car cost 8g and I spent 8g??? No you would say the car cost 8g but it cost me nothing. There is a diference between what something costs and how much you pay for it. or come to my shop and i will charge you ten pound for a packet of cigs that only cost five pounds. 

    ReplyDelete
  82. Paul., If Carrol contributed zero then who scored against Man City???

    ReplyDelete
  83. rafa has gone, for god's sake! Let it go people, let it go.

    ReplyDelete
  84. If you use something of worth (be that hard cash or another item of value, a car, house etc...) in order to purchase something else then that is still 'costing' you the full amount.

    No where in the original comment does Gab mention 'net spend', he's talking about amounts spent and cost.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Ive had this argument with you for a while and im not saying this article is directly in response to things ive said but why you take it a step further with this nonsense about Carroll cost 4million??????

    All i would say is that the club itself has not had to invest 111million, from your figures they have invested 36 million from their own kitty and reinvested the rest from assets sold?? Is that really difficult to understand, you try to ridicule us who talk about net spend by putting words in our mouths, such as this nonsense about player costs. They cost what they cost, in the past all i was highlighting was that when you made the point look at the squad benitez has left us with and state he spent 200 and odd million its not quite true. He may have spent that but the total amount is due to spending money that was brought in from players he had bought before, so the net spend figure of 13 million a season for Benitez which i think you reported is a more realistic figure when analysing the squad. I dont mean to have a go, i just want you to understand mine and others point of view. Does that not make sense?? example is alonso. 11 million of the 200 odd million was spent on alonso, he was sold for 30million and we signed aquilani n whoever for that 30 so for 40 million spent and 30 million brought back so an outlay of 10 million by the club??

    ReplyDelete
  86. I would really appreciate your thoughts on this?

    ReplyDelete
  87. STOP BEING AN IDIOT . EVEN IF U WANT TO TRY AND COVER UP FOR THE SUMMER SPENDING , DO IT MORE WISELY
    DO U NOT NEED TO PAY FOR THE OLD ONE U SOLD .
    IF U REALLY WANT TO SHOW THE REAL SOME SPENT ON CAROLL , DO IT THIS WAY .

    20m ( AMount of $ TOrres was bought from aletico ) + 7m ( Babel Price ) . 
    =27m .

    57.5 - 27 = 37.5 

    SO Andy Caroll & Luis suarez is BOUGHT FOR 37.5 MILLION EURO , DUMBASS.

    ReplyDelete
  88. is 57.5 - 27 really 37.5?

    when I was in school, that would have been 30.5

    Times they are a changin'...

    ReplyDelete
  89. You should probably get your math, diction and grammar in order too before you throw the 'dumbass' title around...

    ReplyDelete
  90. PEOPLE.. CALM DOWN.. HE DID MENTION 'NETT SPENT' .. WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT 'COSTS' HERE. BE NICE PEOPLE... CHEERS!

    EG : U BOUGHT A HOUSE FOR 1million 5 years ago, SOLD IT FOR 1.2Million today, NETT PROFIT / LOSS = 200K

    EG2 : U BOUGHT A HOUSE FOR 1Million, SOLD IT FOR 800k
    NETT PROFIT/LOSS = (200k)

    Simple Maths PEOPLE !

    ReplyDelete
  91. Given my history of attacking the net-spend cult, I think the answer is obvious :)

    ReplyDelete
  92. "To hang your hat on Hodgson" was a reference to the messiah like qualities you bestowed upon him. All you would say when we were going through the bad patch last year was that he would turn it around, get into the Top 4 and everyone who doubted him would be proved wrong. You hung your hat on him, he was your man. All the while you accused anyone would had the audacity to not hate the previous manager as being part of a cult, when, in actual fact, it was you. Everyone could see Hodgson wasn't the man for the job, it had been proven irrefutably since KD joined. But then, we were stupid and you were the clever one as had Roy on your side.

    ReplyDelete
  93. LOL at all comments.
    Just thank Chelsea for letting us buy our summer shopping.  They have given us £67m in over 18 months for three players (Yossi, Meirales and Torres) and in return we have bought Enrique, Downing, Henderson, Doni, Adam, Coates.  Plus new managers usually get around £50m to spend so that takes care of Suarez and Carroll.
    .
    Now, regardless of net or gross spend lets look at what the teams look like when fully fit
    18 months ago
    Reina, Aurelio, Johnson, Agger, Carragher
    Lucas Meirales
    Gerrard Yossi Kuyt
    Torres

    Against Stoke in 8 days (possibly if all players are match fit)
    Reina, Enrique, Agger, Carragher, Johnson
    Lucas Adam
    Kuyt Gerrard Downing
    Suarez / Carroll

    I prefer the look of our current team to the one 18 months ago.

    ReplyDelete
  94. lmao @ people actually pretending that they use the net spend argument in real life!

    If that's the case, most of us don't actually get paid by our jobs seeing as most of the money immediately goes out on the various bills that we've accumulated, thereby leaving us with net earnings of little to nothing.

    Now that I come to think about it, since I am just volunteering my time at this job, screw logging off after my lunch break I'm doing what I want for the rest of the day!

    ReplyDelete
  95. No one else sells a car for 3k and buys one for 8k and then says they spent 8k. The car cost 8k but the amount spent is still 5k.  

    Thank you tjmreds, not sure why people cannot see that!! The car cost 8k but if I only have 5k in the bank, how can I say that I SPENT 8k. It COST 8k. You cannot spend an amount that you did not have in the first place. Selling, in order to buy, is not spending. Otherwise all managers would be delighted when they are told they need to sell before they can buy. Tottenham would be so happy that selling Modric would give them 40 million to SPEND on players.

    ReplyDelete
  96. Red For Life, and everyone else who cannot understand,

    Why do you think that Tottenham's manager did not want to have 40 million to SPEND this summer?

    Oh, that's right, because it would have meant selling their best player. Bad mistake, by the way, they should have. But according to some of you, the loss of Modric still meant that Redknapp would have spent 40 million, even if it meant him using up his best player to get the money. Even more strange, some of you think that he has spent the same if he keeps Modric and still spends 40 million. According to some mathematical genius' on here, both scenarios equate to Redknapp spending 40 million. Big difference, though, the scenario with Modric and the scenario without. So how do you differentiate between them if net spend is nonsense?

    ReplyDelete
  97. Why can't some of you tell the difference between spend and cost?

    Selling Suarez for 30 million and buying Beckford for 32 means we spent 2 million, badly, but Beckford cost 32 million. What is so confusing? I've already said that we were wrong to blow 60% of our windfall on Carroll just cos it was burning a hole in our pocket. But we still did not spend any money in January. But they still COST 57 million!

    Tell me, Red 4 Life, with the Modric example, what has Harry spent if he sells Modric for 40 million and buys Parker, Adebayor and Kaka for 40 million? Has he spent the same if he does not sell Modric and he still buys those players?

    ReplyDelete
  98. Well said, you get my vote!

    I'm not even a particularly staunch Benitez supporter, it just amazes me to see people have better things to say about Hodgson. But, to me, the idea of net spend, and income, is beyond doubt and not about who said it.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Hi Red 4 Life,
                       We've had this debate before. So, I will get straight to the point. Anyone else who has an opinion is free to join in, obviously.

    Who was better for Liverpool, Hodgson or Benitez?

    ReplyDelete
  100. Sorry Gab, I wasn't technically agreeing with you. It matters not how much money 'is in the bank' if you're realising the value of other assets to buy something. Money is no different to any other material object, it just has a more defined worth which everyone agrees on. If you sell a 3K car in order to buy an 8K car you are still spending 8k.

    Just as an aside and to make everyone think a bit(!!), apparently it now costs more in materials to produce a copper two pence piece than the coin is actually worth :-D

    ReplyDelete
  101. well said - don't right of Roy Hodgson after 6 months, but right Andy Carroll off much much sooner than that.

    Jk is an ambassador of pap.

    the butchers dog of 'blogging'

    ReplyDelete
  102. wow Red4Life - yeah that's just such a comic statement isn't it. im wondering whether there is a correlation between the lack of JK responses on this post, and the sickening frequency of your sychophantic responses? i mean its just such a funny, funny statement. i think ill read teh article again, as you clearly havel.

    ReplyDelete
  103. Gab, there is honestly no point in trying to explain something that you are unable to understand.

    If you only spent 5k on the car that cost 8k then (and I asked you this)
    where is the 3K as you only spent 5k?

    ReplyDelete
  104. I cant believe how many people on here believe this is a serious article. arguing for hours back and forth over something thats obviously tongue in cheek. i bet jaimie is sitting back laughing his ass of haha

    ReplyDelete
  105. Red4Life,
    Then you would have to pay 8k, just as I would have spent to the value of 8k originally.
    My point is that maybe I am only capable of mustering 5k together to fund this purchase, therefore i have to sell some of my assets (ie. my older car) to generate more revenue so I can make this purchase. 
    Obviously I'll have spent 8k regardless, that cost is clear, noone debates that.  However, getting back to football, the point I'm making, and have done in posts below, is that the means of generating revenue is a key issue, and selling your assets is a undisputable form of income; additionally, it is often a a less progresive way of raising revenue for a football team, than selling merchandise or match tickets.

    ReplyDelete
  106. He's clearly being sarcastic, trying to lampoon people who defended Rafa about Net Spend. so, although not directly having a go at Rafa, it's a subtle dig.

    ReplyDelete
  107. Seeing as the article is all about Dalglish transfers I think you may be slightly guilty of seeing what you want to see here...

    ReplyDelete
  108. Hi Jaimie,

    Appreciate if you could add a dis-like option on the comments posted as it seems certain people are short-minded and do not understand the real logic of the subject matter being discussed..

    ReplyDelete
  109. If I have a 3k car and I'm given 5k this year by my dad, I would upgrade my car to buy an 8k car. Gross spend camp argues I've spent 8k on buying a new car. Nett spend camp argues I've spent 5k .

    If I have a 3k car and I'm given 8k to spend by my dad and I choose to buy another car that cost 8k, so now I have 2 cars to enjoy: gross spend camp argues that I've spent 8k, nett spend camp argues I've spent 8k.

    How can gross spend camp be right

    Point is that Kenny shouldn't be judged for spending 110 million but instead 36, because the value of the total squad did not improve by 110. Similarly rafa had little net spend per yr. He wasn't given 300 to add to the squad

    ReplyDelete
  110. Kanwar, you are a deceitful moron of the highest order. I don't know which is worse: that many Reds seem to believe your lies or that there are still a lot of Reds who don't realize that you are a Manc.

    A lot of us are on to you, don't you worry. And when your tune starts to change and you begin to attack Kenny, as you inevitable will, then we will reveal you for the fraud that you are. 
    ps: For once, have some guts and try not to delete my comments, fatty

    ReplyDelete