Another recent story, this one with some quotes from Nicol: http://soccernet.espn.go.com/headlinenews?id=318259&cc=5901
I agree Evan. I wasn't suggesting that there was a high probibility that we would see anything major in the short term but you never know. Once we have something like what is happening with Chivas introduced into the mix in MLS I wouldn't be shocked at anything our deep pocket owners come up with. Up to now the MLS owner group have kept budgets low as well as their risks. Smart money would suggest that they will continue their cautious growth pattern---but---there comes a time when for an individual owner opportunity knocks or the group may think that it's time to take the league to the next level.
So did Bob Kraft attend the DC/Revs game? Is he much of a soccer fan? Has any team in the MLS seen an attendance decline equivalent to the Revs? Has Kraft shown that he cares? Perhaps I'm misreading the guy, but I suspect any interest he has in Liverpool is solely financial, unlike his love for the NFL. Nothing wrong with making a buck, but I don't see any reason Liverpool's fans would want Kraft any more than ManU's wanted Glazer.
So what if it is, and as you say, there's "nothing wrong with making a buck," but here's the difference: Kraft would likely be the one to have more respect for the club, its supporters, and its traditions. The only sense I, and many others get from Glazer is greed, pure and simple greed; he's Terry Smith with more money, more ego, and more questionable motives.
Well, whichever is his motivation, I think you have to respect his professionalism of building the team organization. Everyone agrees that the Pats are a very well run organization, and being motivated by love of a team definitely doesn't guarantee that. Love for the team doesn't guearantee this, and if anything, if you love a team too much it can be a problem, as it sometimes causes people to just spend money on silly things or make knee jerk reactions, like pushing for big name players who don't really fit. I don't think Kraft is guilty of that. But whether by luck or design, he seems to have found the right people to run the team, and you can't complain about the results.
The question was why Joe Q. Scouser would be warmer to this bid than the MU fans who've been whining about Glazer throwing money around. Given that Liverpool are in rough enough shape for a new ground that people are seriously throwing around the concept of groundsharing with their bitter rivals to make the construction economically feasible, I'd wager someone calling up and saying "hay guys I can build a 65k+ seater with my pocket change" would get a warmer reception than "hay guys I feel like owning TWO kinds of football teams," which is all Glazer is about.
Could it be that Liverpool supporters 'n such may just have more respect for a potential investor who's got an ex-Anfield legend on the payroll already?
That can't hurt, but its all about the P and L. Glazer would have had to go into so much debt to buy Man U (whose upside potential as a cash machine may not be so great) that the true fans were worried that Glazer's bottom line of paying off the debt and making a buck would take a front seat to facilities, coaches, players, etc. Liverpool is a order of magnitude cheaper than Man U, therefore less debt service. At the same time, the club is not in the stratosphere of internationally followed clubs with the associated huge TV and merchandising deals. However, with the right marketing and success on the field, they could be. Therfore Liverpool has, potentially, a bigger upside as a cash machine. Looking realistically at how the two owners have done with their American football teams, Kraft's group clearly is superior. I hope this happens - it may be a great fit for both sides.
I can respect your suggestion that Kraft's enthusiasm for the Revolution might not seem especially strong, and that perhaps he might not "love" the team as much as he should (or supporters would like him to), but it's a dangerous and not entirely valid position to suggest that his interests in the Revolution would be similar to any supposed interests in Liverpool. If anything, they're somewhat mutually exclusive. From a financial standpoint, investment in the Revolution and Major League soccer represents a good long-term investment. Not only do they provide the Krafts with added revenue from filling out more dates in the stadium, but it grants them access to any number of other soccer-related events including international friendlies, World Cup qualifiers, etc. Without the Revs, Kraft isn't going to get those. Now, it would be nice for Kraft to throw gobs of cash at the Revolution in some effort to make them more successful, but from everything I've read, this is completely counter to the business strategy Kraft most readily employs. In terms of the Revs, he could dump cash into marketing and other areas he has direct control over, but the proportion of what he spends compared to what he'll probably get in return doesn't represent a good investment. I.e., if he can find a point of fiscal sustainability through relatively low expenditures where he can maintain competitiveness (relatively-speaking) with other clubs in the league -- this allowing him access to those other games and other dates, then he doesn't need to compell himself to spend more money than that which is required to keep the Revs operating in the black (or close to it), be competitive, while satsifying his overall financial goals. Now, in terms of Liverpool, pretty much all Kraft would need to do is this: get the right people in the front office, and give them the resources to be competitive. He doesn't need to dump money into marketing, he doesn't need to fight for advertising, he doesn't need to beg for press attention... and he doesn't need to go hat-in-hand to supporters to fill out their ground. Quite simply, he can look at Liverpool at present, and probably sees a club that's not much different from where the Patriots were when he purchased them, and the model in which he runs the Patriots can probably be applied to good effect at Liverpool. In short: Kraft's interests in Liverpool would probably much more similar to the Patriots, than they are the Revolution, and as such, I'd have great faith that he could get things on track in Merseyside. He doesn't have to love Liverpool, but he can love how much that other people love Liverpool. Kraft could appreciate how fans in the Kop feel about their team, much like Kraft felt about watching the Patriots for so many years. He can appreciate the potential there, the die-hard support, much as he appreciated the die-hard support for the Patriots and their potential. The Revolution, are just a different kettle of fish. On ther other hand, you have Malcom Glazer who seemingly has an insatiable appetite for power and his owen ego. Mutiny supporters would tell you this, and United fans will tell you this now. The difference between Glazer and Kraft is this: of the two, Kraft is more likely to respect the fans, respect the tradition... respect their perspective, where Glazer, to this point, has given every indication that he doesn't. That's pretty much it. The Revolution are the Revolution, and Liverpool is Liverpool, but Liverpool is much more like the Patriots than they're like the Revolution, and as such, it shouldn't be assumed that the interests, motivations, and business approach towards each should be the same. The Magpie
Right, even if this is good for Liverpudlians, I don't see how it's good for us in any way (aside from those of us who are Liverpudlians, of which there may well be some). 1. It's another hole for Kraft to sink his money into other than the Revs. 2. I don't want the Revs to become Liverpool USA. So that's my thoughts on the matter.
I simply don't understand how people can even compare owning the Revs to owning Liverpool, just because they play the same sport. Do you honestly see owning the 2 teams as being the same? Is owning the Sox the same as owning a Single A team? Do you see owning a team in what is essentially the oldest league in the world, where that sport is #1 in that country, the the same as owning a team in a 10 year old league, where professional soccer is like #7? If you are of the view that he only owns the Revs to give added events to his stadium, as in he cares not a whit whether the team wins or loses, then do you think he would buy Liverpool just to add an exhibition date or 2 in the summer? Do you think that he is the kind of businessman to purchase something this expensive without learning what he was getting in to, understanding both what would be expected of the owner and what was needed for the investment to be successful? I don't think that Kraft is the all high god of soccer or anything, and I understand and participate often in cynicism, but I'm also a big fan of logic. As has been said, isn't owning Liverpool in England closer to owning the Pats in New England, rather than the Revs? Do you not think that he might have learned from owning the Pats that you can make more money from a successful, well run team? For that matter, do you think that he bought the Pats only because he loved them, and that he didn't have any kind of business plan, and he didn't care if he lost tons of money because it was a labor of love?
Whoever said this deal was supposed to be good for us? It's not for us. Any potential investment decision on Kraft's part is most likely to be entirely for Kraft's and Liverpool's benefit, and anything that might come the Revs way is probably after the fact; any direct or indirect benefits to the Revs are secondary to this. The Revs aren't going to become Liverpool USA. The Revs aren't suddenly going to be wearing red uniforms, having multiple Liverpool players on our roster, "You'll Never Walk Alone" won't start blaring from stadium speakers, Kraft won't be errecting a statue of Shankly in front of the stadium gates. Maybe some manner of rteciprocal agreement might be worked out where some Rev players and Liverpool players train away during their respective offseasons, where they agree to play a series of friendlies, and maybe, maybe, take on a young player or two on loan to fill out some transitional international slot, but it wouldn't be anything more than that I'd guess. As for Liverpool being am money hole? I'd offer they're much less of a money pit than some other clubs. Kraft does not seem to be one to dump money on a problem in an effort to solve it, and quite frankly, Liverpool is not some club that's wallowing in a lower division, isn't close to administration, and it's wanting for support. Kraft can buy a controlling interest in Liverpool for a very good price, and with a bit of help from a third-party willing to sponsor club kits or the new stadium naming rights, can probably get Liverpool their new stadium without having to ground-share. Granted, it would require an initial money dump, but the potential return in the long-term is great. I'm not especially concerned with "what's in it for us," because it's not a deal for us; it's that simple. The Magpie
Considering the EPL lacks the salary cap and revenue sharing that has increased franchise value in the NFL, perhaps Kraft can team up with Jeremey Jacobs who has lots of experience as an absentee owner in a business model more similar to the EPL.
Does anyone understand how revenue and costs are "shared" across the MLS teams? I know they want slow and steady growth, but I would like to understand what incentive there is for individual teams to invest money on an individual basis. Interested if there is any sharing of revenue from tickets, memorabilia, food & beverage. Likewise, the costs for stadium, players salary, scouting, and TV.
Well, this is the Revs message board, and this thread doesn't have an NRC tag in it's title, so by implication, this is about us. If it isn't going to be good for us, I'd prefer it at least be neutral to us, but I'm more likely to see this as bad for us because of the money considerations.
Yup. I once was a hockey fan, I like Liverpool, and I'm discouraged about the direction I see the Revs heading..........but then this isn't about what's good for the Revs, is it?
I hope that Bob Kraft succeeds in his pursuit of purchasing Liverpool FC. I for one hope that it will encourage him to be more involved in the Revolution, although I understand that we are looking at two separate teams on two completely different levels. As Evan has mentioned, Liverpool FC is on a level more with the Patriots than the Revolution, as there has been more tradition and passion for those teams over the years. The NFL and EPL are probably the two strongest leagues on planet Earth today. They have been in existence for a long time and have a worldwide following. The Revolution and MLS are a startup business and are trying to find their niche in the American Sports marketplace. It'll take some time, but if the Kraft Family decide that they want to get into the soccer business fulltime, then not only should they committ the necessary resources to Liverpool FC, but they should try to improve the Revolution both on and off the field. Appointing Craig Tornberg the GM was a good move and they should give him the flexibility to make the team better. They should also seriously consider going to the soccer-specific-stadium business model and allow for a better in-game atmosphere, while giving the Revs a true home. I think devoting time and energy to Liverpool is fine, but I just think that they shouldn't take their eyes off the Revolution either. This is their team and they should do what they can to emulate what they'er doing in Chicago and DC, which are terrific soccer organizations.
The rest of the Premier League would agree. An absentee owner, with no passionate interest in the sport, or ties to Liverpool and its history. A tonic to keep silverware out of the Liverpool trophy case. When you get a new toy, it is much easier to lose interest in your old toy. So how much time do you want to give them? Another nine years? They've owned the Revolution for a decade and have showed no signs that they want to comit the necessary resources to make them a top MLS club. Why is that? Because they rolled back season ticket prices? He has little, if anything to do with the team. It may not be a bad move, but there really is no evidence of it. Atendance and interest are way down. Maybe he can help pick it up. Maybe he can't. Maybe no one can in the present environment. He is a ticket seller who was made GM. Let's see if he can increase attendance and interest before deciding if it was a good move or not. Not going to happen as long as the Krafts own the Revolution and want spring and summer dates to filled at Gillette Stadium. It is tough to take your eye off of a ball that they've never really been watching. They have been very successful with the Patriots, but the Revolution have been an afterthought. If they wanted to make something more of the Revos, they are perfectly capable of doing it. It does not appear they have been willing to do it. Very very true. But also not very likely.
Big Frank, I understand where you are coming from. I for one will reserve judgement until I see what's going to happen to this franchise in the next four to five years. I know it seems as if the Revs are low on their radar screen, but its their team and its time for them to decide if they want to continue to invest in them and MLS. I hope that they will see the bigger picture here if they do indeed go after Liverpool. Owning Liverpool FC would be a big coup for the Krafts, I just hope that they devote similar time to the Revs. I don't agree with the premise though that once you get a new toy you forget about your old one. I see your point of view here, but just that I respectfully disagree with it. And just because the Krafts have no emotional ties to Liverpool, doesn't mean he doesn't want to win and create an organization like the Pats have here. The Revs are still their team and if they decide that they would rather committ all their resources and time into Liverpool, then they need to sell the Revs to someone else. But I tend to be one where there can be some positives to come out of this. By having Liverpool FC and the Revs, maybe down the road there can be some marketing possibilities and synergies created between the two teams. I don't throw out the idea that they may study the Chivas USA model and see how they go about operating two franchises. Maybe we could have a player or two from Liverpool join the Revs. I'm not talking about a premiere player, maybe a second tier defender or midfield player. Lets see if their is any type of crossovers between the two teams. Maybe as Evan says, you'll probably see very little. But Kraft is a brilliant guy and if one guy can come up with some unique ideas, its Bob Kraft. And no I'm not asking us to change our name to Liverpool USA. Going out here on a limb, but maybe you might see Liverpool merchandise sold at Gillette and Revs merchandise sold at Anfield. Promoting the Revs on an international scale. More Liverpool games might be shown here. (Kraft and the Sox go into a partnership to show games on NESN) I'm sure somebody will see a positive so that the Revs can benefit from this. If not for anything, at least it'll get Bob Kraft thinking about soccer.