Liverpool in financial trouble

[Harry Carry]

Alonso could be on his way

Gerrard could be going

oh dear.

[Row Z Royal]

I can't see Gerrard wanting to leave the Prem.

Maybe he'll go and be the top midfielder at Chelsea.

[soggy biscuit]

Maybe he'll go and be the top midfielder at Chelsea.

Can't see him taking a step down at this stage of his career

[Barry the bird boggler]

Hope Abramovich never gets bored with Chelsea...

[cmonurz]

Link to the story that Gerrard might be going?

[Harry Carry]

Link to the story that Gerrard might be going?

He's not happy. Liverpool will be signing the likes of Darren Bent instead of David Villa.

[Harry Carry]

Link to the story that Gerrard might be going?

He's not happy. Liverpool will be signing the likes of Darren Bent instead of David Villa.

[Dirk Gently]

Gerrard won't leave Liverpool.

[handbags_harris]

Be interesting to see what would happen to the likes of Chelsea if Abramovich ever pulls the plug. They do, after all, owe him something in the region of £700 million. Chelsea FC/Chelsea Village doesn't make enough money to be self sufficient, so for Chelsea's sake I hope it's not an acrimonious split. Although it would be hilarious from my point of view if it was

[Dirk Gently]

According to the latest accounts of Chelsea Limited, the company which owns the football club, Chelsea owed £736m to all its creditors. Covering the year to June 30 2007, Chelsea's accounts show that the club's largest creditor was the owner himself, Roman Abramovich, who had poured £578m into the club, not as a donation but as an interest-free loan. As stated by the chief executive, Peter Kenyon, in February, Chelsea did not owe "external debt" to any bank.

However, with Abramovich's £578m loan, introduced to sign players and pay wages since he bought the club in 2003, plus general amounts owed, taxes and some categories listed among creditors for formal accounting purposes, Chelsea's creditors stood at £736m in total.

Chelsea's director of communications, Simon Greenberg, confirmed that the £578m, described in the accounts as "Other loan", is indeed the loan from Abramovich. Greenberg reiterated that Chelsea has no "external debt" and pointed out that the creditors included season-ticket holders for 2007-08, whose money has technically to be treated as owed until the season is over, "and other normal operating creditors". The figure also included £36.3m still owed on a Eurobond taken out by Chelsea's previous owner, Ken Bates, in 1997. That, the last of Chelsea's "external debt", was then repaid last December.

Kenyon released headline figures from these accounts in February, highlighting that the club made a record turnover, £190.5m, and that its losses were down from £80.2m in 2005-06 to £75.8m last year. Kenyon said then that the club was in a healthy financial position, still aiming to break even by 2009-10, partly because it did not owe money to outside creditors and retained Abramovich's support. "With the company being external debt free and our ownership clearly demonstrating continuing commitment to the long term," Kenyon said, "I am very confident about the future."

.... the loan to Chelsea by Abramovich is interest-free. Abramovich has funded Chelsea's extraordinary acquisition of stars and, although transfers showed a profit last year, he continued to allow Chelsea to be run at a substantial loss.

Kenyon's role is to transform Chelsea into a club which can survive on its own earnings. In February he acknowledged it was an "ambitious" target to aim to be self-financing by 2009-10 but the accounts bear out commercial progress in all areas. Having finished runners-up in the Premier League, won the FA Cup and League Cup and reached the Champions League semi-final, the club's sponsorship, match-day and media income all increased to push total turnover 25% up.

However, there is no doubt that the club remains wholly reliant on Abramovich's continued funding. Chelsea's chairman, Bruce Buck, has stressed that Abramovich "loves football" and will not "walk away" from Chelsea.

If the owner's enthusiasm were ever to wane, and Abramovich decided he did want his loan back, the accounts show that Chelsea would have 18 months to find the money.

[rabidbee]

Having read the article in the paper, it's not Liverpool that are in trouble, but Kop Football, the Gillette-Hicks company that owns the club. The auditors have warned the company that their ownership of the club might be in danger, not that the club is in danger. Indeed, the club has just increased it's turnover from £133.9m to a record £159.1m, with a profit of £10.2m. What this means is that, if they can't renogotiate their loans with RBS, they'll be forced to sell one of the most marketable clubs in the world.

Not quite the same as the club being in danger.

[Deathy]

Alonso could be on his way

Gerrard could be going

oh dear.

Look at you with your little stump on. You wont see many if any changes for a while. They'll realign a lot of that debt before drastic action like that is taken.

Does mean cheerio to a new stadium for a while though.

Having read the article in the paper, it's not Liverpool that are in trouble, but Kop Football, the Gillette-Hicks company that owns the club. The auditors have warned the company that their ownership of the club might be in danger

Isn't that the same with Southampton though?

[cmonurz]

The difference being that finding a buyer for Liverpool is unlikely to cause too much trouble in the long-run, should it reach breaking point, even if the price has to tumble a bit first.

[leon]

The difference being that finding a buyer for Liverpool is unlikely to cause too much trouble in the long-run, should it reach breaking point, even if the price has to tumble a bit first.

hasnt worked so far, they've been trying to flog the club for over a year with little success. anyway not that it should worry you too much being such a Loyal Royal eh?

[cmonurz]

The difference being that finding a buyer for Liverpool is unlikely to cause too much trouble in the long-run, should it reach breaking point, even if the price has to tumble a bit first.

hasnt worked so far, they've been trying to flog the club for over a year with little success. anyway not that it should worry you too much being such a Loyal Royal eh?

Oh-that's-got-me-right-in-the-heart-that-one.

[leon]

The difference being that finding a buyer for Liverpool is unlikely to cause too much trouble in the long-run, should it reach breaking point, even if the price has to tumble a bit first.

hasnt worked so far, they've been trying to flog the club for over a year with little success. anyway not that it should worry you too much being such a Loyal Royal eh?

Oh-that's-got-me-right-in-the-heart-that-one.

but-you-are-a-liverpool-fan ?

anyway it's not a good thing when are bought on the never never , hasnt anyone learnt anything fron the credit crunch?

[Smoking Kills Dancing Doe]

The fact someone was prepared to buy Pompey, shows that there will always be someone somewhere willing to pump millions and millions into English clubs.

Liverpool will be fine, as will Chelsea, as will Man U. Still won't stop all these stories, because they sell newspapers and that what newspapers do....

[PlasticRoyale]

Liverpool will always be in trouble until they get more moustaches on the playing staff. Expect them to dominate again with the reintroduction of perms and facial hair

[Harry Carry]

Liverpool linked to re-sign Crouch.

[Schards#2]

Man Utd's debt >> Chelsea's debt >> Liverpool's debt