Is it true you can only collect liquidated damages if there "actually" are financial effects and not just contract language?

Provided the liquidated damages (LDs) are a genuine pre-estimate of the losses incurred through late delivery the courts will generally apply the terms of the contract. There is no needs for a direct financial loss to actually be demonstrated, only there was a genuine process to determine the amount of LDs. 

This is presumed in most situations because both parties signed the contract! Demonstrating the LDs are an unreasonable penalty (and therefore unenforceable) is a high bar to cross. This is why LDs can be successfully applied on projects that cost their owners money to operate (eg, free libraries and churches).  see: https://mosaicprojects.com.au/PDF-Casewatch/1148_Liquidated_damages_in_construction_contracts.pdf 

For more on claims see: https://mosaicprojects.com.au/PMKI-ITC-020.php

Provided the liquidated damages (LDs) are a genuine pre-estimate of the losses incurred through late delivery the courts will generally apply the terms of the contract. There is no needs for a direct financial loss to actually be demonstrated, only there was a genuine process to determine the amount of LDs. 

This is presumed in most situations because both parties signed the contract! Demonstrating the LDs are an unreasonable penalty (and therefore unenforceable) is a high bar to cross. This is why LDs can be successfully applied on projects that cost their owners money to operate (eg, free libraries and churches).  see: https://mosaicprojects.com.au/PDF-Casewatch/1148_Liquidated_damages_in_construction_contracts.pdf 

For more on claims see: https://mosaicprojects.com.au/PMKI-ITC-020.php