I fully support Ian Ayre

Posted by

So Ian Ayre ruffled some feathers when he suggested that Liverpool should break away from the rest of the E.P.L. and negotiate T.V. rights on our own, I am with Ian 100% on this and here is my reasoning.

The criticism of this plan has come from both sides, many Liverpool supporters oppose this plan based on principal that it makes us look ‘greedy’ while of course the L.F.C. haters simply got more ammunition to fire at us. From a Liverpool F.C. perspective I fully understand where the Liverpool fans who disagree with this are coming from, this violates the whole Shankly principals of Socialism and sharing. What would Bill Shankly think of such as plan? He would probably disagree with it however the age of Shankly was a different time. Players weren’t millionaires, owners weren’t billionaires and there was no such thing as league games on TV live via satellite.

This is 2011, unfortunately football has evolved (not for the better), we have no choice but to evolve and be more egoistic if we want to compete for trophies. The UEFA rules dictates that clubs live within their means so we don’t have a choice but to generate more revenue in order to spend more on quality players. In the last five years we have seen Chelsea and Manchester City sink millions into their clubs while we sat on the sidelines with Hicks and Gillett. City are pretty much cheating these new rules already by getting an exorbitant amount for their stadium sponsorship from a company pretty much owned by the same owner.

I am not surprised that the likes of Wigan will be against it, Chelsea too criticised the plan which again is not surprising as they know that they still haven’t built a global support like ours. Manchester United are just being themselves and trying to distance from it however they know that they will benefit too if they had to go on their own. Quite frankly United, Arsenal and of course Liverpool are the most supported E.P.L. teams worldwide, Chelsea have built up some while Manchester City would probably generate TV viewership due to their star players.

If this is a problem to them why not base the revenues on viewership? We know who people want to see play, the only time you will see Wigan live on many international TV stations is when they are playing a bigger club. These little clubs are no angels by any means, they jack up their prices when they play us or one of the other big clubs. Newcastle, Aston Villa, Stoke and Blackpool sure didn’t show any charity when they slapped huge price tags on the players we wanted to sign.

The charity from Liverpool F.C. will continue by loaning our young talents out to smaller clubs and offering friendlies to help boost their income. Why do you think we are playing a friendly against Glasgow Rangers next week? Unfortunately when we were on the verge of filing for administration last year no one showed us mercy.




  1. The likes of the Wigan and Stoke chairmen are hypocrites given the fact that they take a share of the TV money which only goes to the top 20 clubs not then entire league as it did pre-Premiership. Perhaps Whelan ought to spare a thought for the likes of Plymouth rather than just protect his own interests when claiming he is defending football as a whole…

  2. READ THIS!!!!

    When Dave Whelan was Chairman/0wner of JJB, at the end of the financial year, did he go out and give away his profits to smaller independent sports shops in his area?. The answer to this is clearly NO!!!. The man is a total HYPOCRITE as he wants Liverpool to do exactly that, by giving him part of our TV rights.

    He needs to ask himself why he can never fill his stadium and relies on TV money to exist in the Premier League?, he lives off the crumbs from the LFC table. Paul Kelso in The Telegraph today states that FSG and The Glazers do talk regularly about this and Peter Kenyon actually started this in 2003, before being out voted.

    Liverpool are far from a lone voice, we just had the balls to say it as it is!!!!!

  3. Storm in a teacup really. Ayre is pro-LFC and wants us to occupy our rightful perch. A club befitting our status needs to get most value out of being where it is (or should be). Nothing at all wrong with that. And let’s get serious, if this proposal had emanated from MUFC would it be met with similar vitriol?

    Shankly, often quoted to justify many similar debates, made a clear distinction between suits (who do the behind-the-scenes corporate stuff) and the players (plus fans). This is the infamous Shanklian trinity. Ayre is not a player (but is a fan), more of a suit. Isn’t what he is proposing not his core work?

    There is a separate newspaper report (Telegraph) I’ve seen regarding this idea: http://j.mp/pLCeDI

    While there’s a socialistic aspect to the EPL sharing out its revenues with the clubs who help generate this, what has stopped clubs from negotiating separate contracts to boost their finances? What is really strange about what Ayre has been widely quoted as having said?

    I’m with Ayre here. A strong Liverpool will have long-term benefits to the fans, more than we think, including in the very significant area of ticketing, to mention but a few.

  4. And just who will Liverpool play against?
    An endless round of international friendlies like the one against the other Euro-flop Rangers?

    Certainly no other Premier League club would allow Liverpool to prostitute THEIR international TV rights to the highest bidder!

    My guess is that the traditional LFC supporters would remember the power of collective bargaining, whilst the “johnny-come-latelys” will be supporting some crazy bid to sell the “power” of the LFC ” brand.

    But just remember that the brand of LFC ranks way below that of the collective EPL and if Liverpool want to break away then they will face exorbitant fees from the teams that they wish to play against, namely the other EPL clubs. Maybe even outright refusals to play against Liverpool under these terms with the outcome that no Liverpool games would be televised.

    I suggest LFC forget their grandiose plans for world domination, based on former glories and concentrate on trying to qualify for Europe. That would certainly provide an immediate boost for TV income that they don’t have at the moment.

  5. Do we want a break away league?
    That is where it will head and how many teams will be prepared to break away?
    The top lets say 8 teams not much of a league?
    The one thing about the premier league at the moment it is a stable lets say product in sport when nearly all the other major leagues in sport are having money problems for example Spainish,Italian,NBA and NFL.
    We should be pushing for more TV money from the premier league.

  6. The Wigan Chairman is a total hypocrite! Its like asking an engineer with the BBC to get the same wage as a reporter… While the engineer was studing Calculus and Trigonometry the reporter was studing English language etc… Liverpool fc worked for its popularity so clubs like Wigan shouldn’t rip where they did not sow!
    Ps, A European super league will happen – its only a question of time!

  7. I don’t get this plan. Who does Liverpool play against? Themselves?

    When Liverpool plays Chelsea, who gets the TV rights? Both? So the game will be shown on two stations in say, Malaysia? So if Wigan doesn’t want their games shown in Hong Kong because of a contractual issue they have with their right holders there, is LFC still allowed to show it in Hong Kong?

    Also, there could be 12 different TV stations in China with rights to 18 different clubs? If Stoke sells their rights for £50,000 when LFC wants to charge £2,000,000, won’t that bring the overall prices down? If I am a TV station in India, I buy the rights for Blackburn, Newcastle, Stoke, Wigan, etc for peanuts and just telecast their games against the top 4 clubs.

    Liverpool isn’t a product. They might be a brand but the product is the match. You can’t sell a brand. You market the brand to inflate the value of the product.

  8. I can’t help but feel that its a violation of shank’s legacy. Money has caused a malignant change to football. I don’t want is to buy trophies. I want us to win them.We all want success but I feel like top clubs have become commercial phlebotomists bleeding us fans dry.

  9. Well, sitting in India watching an LFC game, if I paid a dollar a month for the subscription, I don’t really like the fact that my club is only getting 5 cents from it. But that’s something unavoidable.

    While there’s a talk of clubs negotiating separate deals, it’s only going to create a top-4, top-5 league which we do not want. I love EPL and wouldn’t want the smaller teams to become uncompetitive.

    The idea of TV revenues is that if all clubs’ individual TV rights would have been worth say £1B, the combined revenue negotiated together would be £1.2B. It is also a fact that LFC’s appeal goes on to subsidize Wigan’s lack of it.

    A middle path would be for PL to have a rated distribution of money depending on position or whatever else like they do with the domestic rights’ money.

  10. What is good for the club is certainly good for the supporters.and what is good for the club is certainly bad for others.there is only liverpool fc in my opinion.

  11. Well. I think this could become a dangerous ploy. Its ok to think that we should negotiate independently for TV rights, but then that could mean that the source of Liverpool matches could only be liverpoolfc.tv. NOT GOOD for building on a fan base is that ?

Comments are closed