…and the village idiot stumbles in for a look.
How many seasons had Liverpool recorded losses under their Wall Street Owners?
Again, what are the accumulated profit/loss since both Chelsea’s and Liverpool’s owners arrived.
Why don’t you tell me?
You’re the guy who is making statements he can’t clarify and then going on record stating you don’t know what you are talking about. Liverpool are in debt, Chelsea are not.
You’re a financial illiterate. I can explain it to you but I can’t understand it for you.
All you have done is outline a complete ignorance of what you are talking about. I’m happy to point out Liverpool are in debt and Chelsea are debt free.
I’m happy to point out that your allegations of financial doping are completely clueless and have no basis at all.
The only thing you have proved is that you are a financial illiterate.
The only think I have shown is baseless, unsubstantiated comments are all you have when a little bit of probing is applied to your claims.
Thank you for providing me with an audit trail.
2017 Chelsea loss 14m. 2018 profit 15m. Accumulated = 1.
2017 Liverpool profit 40m, 2018 (reported) profit 100. Accumulated = 140m
Liverpool truly are the greatest club to ever grace the planet.
It keeps getting better and better.
1 Like
Your figures are blatant lies.
Klopps first two seasons in charge have resulted in accumulated profits of 140m compared to Chelsea’s meagre 1m. Chelsea’s figures would have been hit because they sacked Mourinho and Costa. Bizarrely you think Liverpool should do the same and sack Klopp. Advocating the sacking of Klopp are the ramblings of a financial illiterate.
No wonder @mikehunt can’t even negotiate a pay rise when he can’t tell the difference between profit and loss.
FYI
Chelsea recorded a £15m profit in 2017 and a £62m profit in 2018.
Figures seem to confuse you. Chelsea have returned a £77m profit in Conte’s two seasons as well as capturing an EPL title and an FA Cup.
Liverpool’s profit in those two seasons amount to £127m so you are vastly deflating one figure while inflating another.
One thing you can’t inflate is Klopp’s trophy count at Liverpool. It is 0.
1 Like
Checkmate.
1 Like
Chelsea spend 40m on sacking managers and @Cicero_Dandi advocates Liverpool do the same. This is up there with his belief that half the Premier League could have afforded Ronaldinho 15 years ago.
From 2012…
The Russian billionaire has bankrolled the English Premier League club since buying it for a nominal fee in 2003, posting big losses every year since then as he has sanctioned spending sprees to sign some of the sport’s biggest players.
Last year ended in a loss of £67.7 million ($108 million) but the figures up to June 30, 2012 reveal a profit of £1.4 million ($2.2 million).
You have posted lies after lies this afternoon. You added £13m onto Liverpool’s profit figure and took £76m off Chelsea’s in order to skew an argument.
One figure you can’t skew is the 0 beside the no of trophies Klopp has won with Liverpool.
Massive losses accumulated under Abromovich. It is staggering that you don’t accept this. You advocate the sacking of Klopp who has helped oversee the club turn a profit of 140m over the last 2 years. Liverpool can’t afford to spend billions to win an odd FA Cup. Abromovich is now bored and Chelsea have returned to being a nothing club already.
You don’t have the first idea what you’re on about. You are attempting to change the topic because you fabricated figures to skew your argument.
FFP has brought the need for clubs not to post losses, every club was at it in the mid 00s. Indeed Liverpool were £350m in debt in 2010, a sizable portion on that debt was written off by their new billionaire Wall Street owners. That is financial doping by your logic.
It’s best you stop commenting on something you clearly know nothing about.
You obviously haven’t a breeze. Debt is not necessarily bad if you can cover the cost of finance. Accumulating losses is not ok. This is basic stuff.