if yes y??
if no y??
2007-02-06 05:14:13 · 9 answers · asked by portivo 1 in Sports ➔ Football ➔ English Football
By asking if Liverpool should be owned by US people, it almost seems as if you are implying that Liverpool deserves much better than the "unworthy" American businessmen. That shouldn't matter whatsoever. What it should depend on is the business move itself, and making sure that it benefits the club in the best ways that are affordable.
So, with that being said, yes, I don't see how it hurts. If the club finds an opportunity in its best interests, then they should take it.
2007-02-06 05:56:22 · answer #1 · answered by sweetpanther08 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Are you asking "should the club be owned by the people" if so then emphatically no. Top football clubs have to have the resources to compete at the highest level.. Its naive to think that a club run on a shoestring (by implication) will have any sort of success, it won’t.
I'm delighted with the takeover and look forward to now regaining our rightful place at the top of English football.
2007-02-06 05:39:35 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Worked well for United in the end.
Hate Liverpool though.
2007-02-06 05:17:18 · answer #3 · answered by Robb the B.D.C. 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I don't see why not, and there is no way Moores would have sold to someone he didn't think could take them forward.
2007-02-06 05:17:23 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes
2007-02-06 05:16:34 · answer #5 · answered by chav69 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
y but i have some concerns,time will tell to see how this develops
2007-02-06 06:52:00 · answer #6 · answered by hellraisersteve 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No...its doing good in UK....no need to spoil it. Moreover US has no Soccer base.
2007-02-06 05:17:43 · answer #7 · answered by amarjot s 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
yes they have good intentions
2007-02-06 08:15:07 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
owned by who exactly????
2007-02-06 05:20:42 · answer #9 · answered by honey 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋