This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- The Arsenal Thread XXVI
- The Arsenal Thread XXV
- What team do you support and why?
- Premier League Run In
- Premier League Predictions 2023-24
- Spanish books
- elsie wellbeing update at the end of 2023 :)
- Im bored as hell
- The Liverpool FC Thread XVII
- Tottenham Hotspur Society II
- ✨All Things Royal✨ Spam!
- Is Bukayo Saka the face of the Premier League?
- TSR emojis are so silly
- Does carbohydrates cause acne?
- Best football match you saw as a child?
- How to understand football as a girl - help
- What will the false prophet of revelation use at his disposal to deceive people ?
- Can a Premier League team win all these in one season or is it impossible?
- Chelsea transfer strategy
- Chelsea F.C. Thread IX
The Arsenal Thread XIX
Scroll to see replies
Original post by jam278
I get what you're saying and agree with it.
One thing I wonder and Bound2 probably wonders, when will Wenger dip into the cash reserves properly? We're talking spending half or 3/4 of that budget. I don't see that happening under Wenger.
One thing I wonder and Bound2 probably wonders, when will Wenger dip into the cash reserves properly? We're talking spending half or 3/4 of that budget. I don't see that happening under Wenger.
Never. Arsene Wenger is a fraud and some people out there are blinkered enough to believe everything he says. Arsene has no intention of going out there and start Ballin' Out like Waka Flacka Flame.
We need 5 players and that doesn't even include the possibility of Santi or/and Vermaelen leaving. Do you honestly see AW buying 5-7 players?
This summer will flop, I can sense it! Best course of action would be to expect nothing so you aren't disappointed!!
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Zürich
Santi has been quoted at £13m-£16m depending on the source. And to be clear, Nasri left for £25m according to the BBC making it £49m total.
You've got a point but Wenger's pragmatic attitude has seen us build up a silly amount of reserves, that money has not left the club and that officers an awful amount of security to the club. If Wenger decided tomorrow that he fancied a £100m player then we wouldnt even have to call the bank manager, it's just done. And only a very small number of clubs are in that position.
Understand the point about football not being about having a big bank balance, but Wenger wont be here forever either. The next manager will probably spent more typically and he's going to think all his Christmases have arrived at once really. So the club does will inevitably benefit, unless we do a Spurs of course.
wrt BVB; what does 'sending a message' even mean? To whom exactly? They're £25m light now and that's the bottom line. They've signed Immobile as a replacement, are you telling me that BVB are now in a better position to compete with Bayern? It was madness mate. People certainly pity their situation, but nobody is queuing up to join them. Moreover, because of the Lewandowski shambles, they couldnt afford a top player anyway. Also think it's clear that Arsenal can attract top level players, see Suarez, Ozil and Higuain last summer for instance and I dont see how being logical in our transfer dealings has affected that. Moreover, because of our sensibility, we can afford them too.
You've got a point but Wenger's pragmatic attitude has seen us build up a silly amount of reserves, that money has not left the club and that officers an awful amount of security to the club. If Wenger decided tomorrow that he fancied a £100m player then we wouldnt even have to call the bank manager, it's just done. And only a very small number of clubs are in that position.
Understand the point about football not being about having a big bank balance, but Wenger wont be here forever either. The next manager will probably spent more typically and he's going to think all his Christmases have arrived at once really. So the club does will inevitably benefit, unless we do a Spurs of course.
wrt BVB; what does 'sending a message' even mean? To whom exactly? They're £25m light now and that's the bottom line. They've signed Immobile as a replacement, are you telling me that BVB are now in a better position to compete with Bayern? It was madness mate. People certainly pity their situation, but nobody is queuing up to join them. Moreover, because of the Lewandowski shambles, they couldnt afford a top player anyway. Also think it's clear that Arsenal can attract top level players, see Suarez, Ozil and Higuain last summer for instance and I dont see how being logical in our transfer dealings has affected that. Moreover, because of our sensibility, we can afford them too.
Okay, my bad, fair enough. Really surprised at the Nasri figures, maybe you can put that down as an 'incredible' deal instead of just a good one. Nasri's price seems to always be misquoted as 20m on TSR
The 100m player point isn't valid at all - in building up these reserves, selling his best players and ensuring there's no success on the pitch, no 100m player would want to join the club anyway (it may apply to smaller blocks of 30-40m players but other clubs can afford them too). Obviously the money gives the club a lot of security but nearly every other club in the world is operating without 160m of security and surviving, it's hardly necessary and is not a plus point.
'Unless the club does a Spurs' - like I said, a 20m player on the pitch is far better than 25m in the bank. Doing a Spurs is a real possibility for anyone spends large amounts of money in short spaces of time, regardless of who the man spending the money is. The cash reserves put a new manager in a good position - but cash is no longer the limiting factor for Arsenal. It's players willing to come to a club and a manager that has had little to no success for the last 10 years and has seen its best players jump ship to rivals. So Arsenal's bank balance means that a) cash is no longer the limiting factor, but b) they've foregone success on the pitch and now the issue is attracting players. The cash isn't a limiting factor for Arsenal's rivals either - they've got unlimited oil money and they've got more trophies and better players to attract new players with. And what's the point in saying this 'it's all our own hard earned money'; it's 'morally superior' (if that's even relevant, which it isn't) but it gives you no advantage on the pitch.
Undoubtedly the cash in the bank is a major positive but it could have been accumulated without the sales of Nasri and van Persie too. Which is why their sales are not a success for Arsene, despite the great transfer fees.
And who knows, van Persie is made to play on, Arsenal sign a great CM at the same time, Arsenal win trophies in van Persie's last season, he stays on, and you have one of the best strikers in the world still playing for you. Alternatively, van Persie still leaves but the trophy is still there, a Higuain or a Benzema or a Falcao or a Hazard feels more like a move to Arsenal.
Don't want to respond to the Dortmund points right now because I feel it will distract from the discussion above.
edit: it essentially boils down to a) yes, Wenger sold them for good transfer fees
b) Arsenal have great cash reserves but they're not necessary in this day and age
c) Arsenal have these cash reserves but they've accumulated at the cost of success on the pitch
d) if Arsenal had more success on the pitch then they'd be more attractive to the best players in the world. For all these cash reserves they can't go out and buy a 100m player because he wouldn't want to join Arsenal
e) van Persie and Nasri were sold for 49m - does a cash reserve of 111m really differ to that of 160m? Neither are going to be spent in a day. Is a cash reserve necessary at all?
f) if they were both kept on for a season, then the chances of winning trophies would increase, leading to the chances of them staying, or Arsenal becoming more attractive for other players
g) but they left, Arsenal were set back a year, and despite being able to afford any player in the world, they still can't attract them because they don't have the pulling power
h) the pulling power is not there because Arsenal win nothing, at the expense of building up these unnecessary cash reserves
i) Arsenal's rivals have both the cash and the pulling power
j) Arsenal stay as also rans perpetually
(edited 9 years ago)
I've been saying cavani isn't a big game player all along and isn't worth his asking price but people just went for the name I guess. That being said I don't understand why people wouldn't want balotelli.
We haven't really replaced RVP in the sense that he could just pull out with a goal when needed or has it in him something which giroud can't do and someone like mandz can't do. In this sense doesn't the fact that balotelli actually performs in big games and can pull out with a goal from nothing warrant a move ?
Posted from TSR Mobile
We haven't really replaced RVP in the sense that he could just pull out with a goal when needed or has it in him something which giroud can't do and someone like mandz can't do. In this sense doesn't the fact that balotelli actually performs in big games and can pull out with a goal from nothing warrant a move ?
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by jam278
I get what you're saying and agree with it.
One thing I wonder and Bound2 probably wonders, when will Wenger dip into the cash reserves properly? We're talking spending half or 3/4 of that budget. I don't see that happening under Wenger.
One thing I wonder and Bound2 probably wonders, when will Wenger dip into the cash reserves properly? We're talking spending half or 3/4 of that budget. I don't see that happening under Wenger.
That's not really his point though, one of his arguments was that if Wenger wants to use the reserves, he can, and if Wenger doesn't, it's still available and ready for a new manager.
My issue isn't with the fact that Wenger is not using the reserves (although that too is an issue, but not the one at hand), it's with Wenger building up these reserves unnecessarily. In more detail in my reply to Zurich
Original post by Bound 2
That's not really his point though, one of his arguments was that if Wenger wants to use the reserves, he can, and if Wenger doesn't, it's still available and ready for a new manager.
My issue isn't with the fact that Wenger is not using the reserves (although that too is an issue, but not the one at hand), it's with Wenger building up these reserves unnecessarily. In more detail in my reply to Zurich
My issue isn't with the fact that Wenger is not using the reserves (although that too is an issue, but not the one at hand), it's with Wenger building up these reserves unnecessarily. In more detail in my reply to Zurich
I know that's not his point. I'm just wondering about it so asked him that question.
I don't think it's unnecessary cash building. Surely if you're not building up the reserves, then you are spending it or just breaking even(which is still spending the reserves)? I don't think there's a problem with building the reserves but it shouldn't be to the detriment of the team anyway.
Problem with Wenger is that he's an idealist and not a pragmatist.
Wenger is the type of guy that hoards spam and baked beans in his garage for a rainy day.
Original post by jam278
I know that's not his point. I'm just wondering about it so asked him that question.
I don't think it's unnecessary cash building. Surely if you're not building up the reserves, then you are spending it or just breaking even(which is still spending the reserves)? I don't think there's a problem with building the reserves but it shouldn't be to the detriment of the team anyway.
Problem with Wenger is that he's an idealist and not a pragmatist.
I don't think it's unnecessary cash building. Surely if you're not building up the reserves, then you are spending it or just breaking even(which is still spending the reserves)? I don't think there's a problem with building the reserves but it shouldn't be to the detriment of the team anyway.
Problem with Wenger is that he's an idealist and not a pragmatist.
What's the point of building 160m of reserves as opposed to 111m? Is that not the stage where it becomes unnecessary? Arsenal are not short of money but they are short of good players; did they really need the extra 50m off van Persie and Nasri? For any normal club, great business, but for Arsenal? No. What's the point in 24m for van Persie if it means that your rival wins the title, and you only spend 9.6m on mediocrity? Especially given that the profit they are making year in year out means that their reserves will only get bigger and bigger even with reasonable spending.
I tend to come across as an Arsenal hater on these boards, and I am one sort of, but there is also a lot more discussion to be had/people to have it with on this thread compared to others.
Original post by Numan786
I've been saying cavani isn't a big game player all along and isn't worth his asking price but people just went for the name I guess. That being said I don't understand why people wouldn't want balotelli.
We haven't really replaced RVP in the sense that he could just pull out with a goal when needed or has it in him something which giroud can't do and someone like mandz can't do. In this sense doesn't the fact that balotelli actually performs in big games and can pull out with a goal from nothing warrant a move ?
Posted from TSR Mobile
We haven't really replaced RVP in the sense that he could just pull out with a goal when needed or has it in him something which giroud can't do and someone like mandz can't do. In this sense doesn't the fact that balotelli actually performs in big games and can pull out with a goal from nothing warrant a move ?
Posted from TSR Mobile
Balo is an interesting case. Milan fans would gladly sell him if they had a chance at Iturbe/ Lukaku / Mandzu. Why? Because Balo is luxury Milan don't need right now. He's not a system player at all, Balo needs a to be coached into someone who works for the greater good of the team.
Seedorf was doing good work with him. He wasn't afraid to bench his ass if he played crap. Would Wenger do the same? I do feel Balo is starting to mature and get and better understanding of the game tho.
If we do sign him, like any other player, there are risks but If he did come I fully expect our midfield and wingers to carry Balo.
Original post by jam278
I get what you're saying and agree with it.
One thing I wonder and Bound2 probably wonders, when will Wenger dip into the cash reserves properly? We're talking spending half or 3/4 of that budget. I don't see that happening under Wenger.
One thing I wonder and Bound2 probably wonders, when will Wenger dip into the cash reserves properly? We're talking spending half or 3/4 of that budget. I don't see that happening under Wenger.
True. I can see Wenger spending perhaps £80m net in one summer, and then not spending over £30m again for 2 years as he waited to see how the team developed.
But as I say, I dont think Wenger even needs to spend £150m to get us up to scratch, just two £35m players and a new right back really. It is usually terrible business to spend over £100m at once, as Spurs showed, and also Man City over the years. And as I say, that money is still in the club bank account, to be used one day.
I've noticed as well Balo has calmed down a lot, he isn't as unpredictable as he used to be.
Original post by Kruz
I've noticed as well Balo has calmed down a lot, he isn't as unpredictable as he used to be.
Guys had a kid, that is why probably.
Original post by C.Almasy
Guys had a kid, that is why probably.
The rise of Immobile this season played a part aswell.
I've got no issue with how the club operated frugally pre last summer. We were in a load of **** with the emirates- something the club and the fans as a whole decided was necessary. When you consider that we basically stopped receiving kit money from Nike since 2006, were getting next no money from other commercial deals and didn't have a sugar daddy pumping money into the club- it was impossible to be competitive financially and consequently on the pitch. Also, debts has come down from as high as 400m to around 200m in next to no time. You don't achieve those sort of result without suffering elsewhere. Would people have preferred we went the other way round and let the debt grow and get out of control in return of short term glory?
You think building a stadium is easy? Look at Spurs, forever struggled to find a way to fund their project to the extent that they tried to hold the government to ransom- I'd even say that current Spurs are richer than us when we started the emirates project. Even Liverpool decided to abandoned that idea- if only this option was available for highbury.
Yeah it was annoying to sell the like of Nasri, RVP and Cesc (the only players whose exist was frustrating) but, the club didn't actively try to sell them, those players forced a move out and it would've been simply quaint to keep hold onto them. Contract was on the table for Nasri (whom many would say only had 6 months of good standard and was probably on the infamous 'deadwood') but he decided to change his mind and force a move away. RVP situation is known to all. Cesc wanted his cinderella story and did everything in his power to make it come true.
If the club really did want to cash in on them, why didn't they they sell them when they had more years on their contract and their values would be higher by default?
People keep quoting the cash reserve to be excessive but NOT ALL of it is available for spending on players. What is known is the actually number than we have and the real number that's actually available for players is much more lower- around 70m to come from what I've read rather than; of which around 40m needs to be there to cover the Ozil deal over the years or however much that amounts to.
That been said, there's was no reason to not have got one of suarez or higuain last summer and there's no reason to not spend this summer. Also, we should stop paying corporation tax like everyone else.
You think building a stadium is easy? Look at Spurs, forever struggled to find a way to fund their project to the extent that they tried to hold the government to ransom- I'd even say that current Spurs are richer than us when we started the emirates project. Even Liverpool decided to abandoned that idea- if only this option was available for highbury.
Yeah it was annoying to sell the like of Nasri, RVP and Cesc (the only players whose exist was frustrating) but, the club didn't actively try to sell them, those players forced a move out and it would've been simply quaint to keep hold onto them. Contract was on the table for Nasri (whom many would say only had 6 months of good standard and was probably on the infamous 'deadwood') but he decided to change his mind and force a move away. RVP situation is known to all. Cesc wanted his cinderella story and did everything in his power to make it come true.
If the club really did want to cash in on them, why didn't they they sell them when they had more years on their contract and their values would be higher by default?
People keep quoting the cash reserve to be excessive but NOT ALL of it is available for spending on players. What is known is the actually number than we have and the real number that's actually available for players is much more lower- around 70m to come from what I've read rather than; of which around 40m needs to be there to cover the Ozil deal over the years or however much that amounts to.
That been said, there's was no reason to not have got one of suarez or higuain last summer and there's no reason to not spend this summer. Also, we should stop paying corporation tax like everyone else.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by 419
I've got no issue with how the club operated frugally pre last summer. We were in a load of **** with the emirates- something the club and the fans as a whole decided was necessary. When you consider that we basically stopped receiving kit money from Nike since 2006, were getting next no money from other commercial deals and didn't have a sugar daddy pumping money into the club- it was impossible to be competitive financially and consequently on the pitch. Also, debts has come down from as high as 400m to around 200m in next to no time. You don't achieve those sort of result without suffering elsewhere. Would people have preferred we went the other way round and let the debt grow and get out of control in return of short term glory?
You think building a stadium is easy? Look at Spurs, forever struggled to find a way to fund their project to the extent that they tried to hold the government to ransom- I'd even say that current Spurs are richer than us when we started the emirates project. Even Liverpool decided to abandoned that idea- if only this option was available for highbury.
Yeah it was annoying to sell the like of Nasri, RVP and Cesc (the only players whose exist was frustrating) but, the club didn't actively try to sell them, those players forced a move out and it would've been simply quaint to keep hold onto them. Contract was on the table for Nasri (whom many would say only had 6 months of good standard and was probably on the infamous 'deadwood') but he decided to change his mind and force a move away. RVP situation is known to all. Cesc wanted his cinderella story and did everything in his power to make it come true.
If the club really did want to cash in on them, why didn't they they sell them when they had more years on their contract and their values would be higher by default?
People keep quoting the cash reserve to be excessive but NOT ALL of it is available for spending on players. What is known is the actually number than we have and the real number that's actually available for players is much more lower- around 70m to come from what I've read rather than; of which around 40m needs to be there to cover the Ozil deal over the years or however much that amounts to.
That been said, there's was no reason to not have got one of suarez of higuain last summer and there's no reason to not spend this summer. Also, we should stop paying corporation tax like everyone else.
You think building a stadium is easy? Look at Spurs, forever struggled to find a way to fund their project to the extent that they tried to hold the government to ransom- I'd even say that current Spurs are richer than us when we started the emirates project. Even Liverpool decided to abandoned that idea- if only this option was available for highbury.
Yeah it was annoying to sell the like of Nasri, RVP and Cesc (the only players whose exist was frustrating) but, the club didn't actively try to sell them, those players forced a move out and it would've been simply quaint to keep hold onto them. Contract was on the table for Nasri (whom many would say only had 6 months of good standard and was probably on the infamous 'deadwood') but he decided to change his mind and force a move away. RVP situation is known to all. Cesc wanted his cinderella story and did everything in his power to make it come true.
If the club really did want to cash in on them, why didn't they they sell them when they had more years on their contract and their values would be higher by default?
People keep quoting the cash reserve to be excessive but NOT ALL of it is available for spending on players. What is known is the actually number than we have and the real number that's actually available for players is much more lower- around 70m to come from what I've read rather than; of which around 40m needs to be there to cover the Ozil deal over the years or however much that amounts to.
That been said, there's was no reason to not have got one of suarez of higuain last summer and there's no reason to not spend this summer. Also, we should stop paying corporation tax like everyone else.
How do teams even manage to dodge corporation tax?
Original post by SHOO
How do teams even manage to dodge corporation tax?
Because it's not illegal to not pay it, it's just frowned upon.
Original post by 419
I've got no issue with how the club operated frugally pre last summer. We were in a load of **** with the emirates- something the club and the fans as a whole decided was necessary. When you consider that we basically stopped receiving kit money from Nike since 2006, were getting next no money from other commercial deals and didn't have a sugar daddy pumping money into the club- it was impossible to be competitive financially and consequently on the pitch. Also, debts has come down from as high as 400m to around 200m in next to no time. You don't achieve those sort of result without suffering elsewhere. Would people have preferred we went the other way round and let the debt grow and get out of control in return of short term glory?
You think building a stadium is easy? Look at Spurs, forever struggled to find a way to fund their project to the extent that they tried to hold the government to ransom- I'd even say that current Spurs are richer than us when we started the emirates project. Even Liverpool decided to abandoned that idea- if only this option was available for highbury.
Yeah it was annoying to sell the like of Nasri, RVP and Cesc (the only players whose exist was frustrating) but, the club didn't actively try to sell them, those players forced a move out and it would've been simply quaint to keep hold onto them. Contract was on the table for Nasri (whom many would say only had 6 months of good standard and was probably on the infamous 'deadwood') but he decided to change his mind and force a move away. RVP situation is known to all. Cesc wanted his cinderella story and did everything in his power to make it come true.
If the club really did want to cash in on them, why didn't they they sell them when they had more years on their contract and their values would be higher by default?
People keep quoting the cash reserve to be excessive but NOT ALL of it is available for spending on players. What is known is the actually number than we have and the real number that's actually available for players is much more lower- around 70m to come from what I've read rather than; of which around 40m needs to be there to cover the Ozil deal over the years or however much that amounts to.
That been said, there's was no reason to not have got one of suarez of higuain last summer and there's no reason to not spend this summer. Also, we should stop paying corporation tax like everyone else.
You think building a stadium is easy? Look at Spurs, forever struggled to find a way to fund their project to the extent that they tried to hold the government to ransom- I'd even say that current Spurs are richer than us when we started the emirates project. Even Liverpool decided to abandoned that idea- if only this option was available for highbury.
Yeah it was annoying to sell the like of Nasri, RVP and Cesc (the only players whose exist was frustrating) but, the club didn't actively try to sell them, those players forced a move out and it would've been simply quaint to keep hold onto them. Contract was on the table for Nasri (whom many would say only had 6 months of good standard and was probably on the infamous 'deadwood') but he decided to change his mind and force a move away. RVP situation is known to all. Cesc wanted his cinderella story and did everything in his power to make it come true.
If the club really did want to cash in on them, why didn't they they sell them when they had more years on their contract and their values would be higher by default?
People keep quoting the cash reserve to be excessive but NOT ALL of it is available for spending on players. What is known is the actually number than we have and the real number that's actually available for players is much more lower- around 70m to come from what I've read rather than; of which around 40m needs to be there to cover the Ozil deal over the years or however much that amounts to.
That been said, there's was no reason to not have got one of suarez of higuain last summer and there's no reason to not spend this summer. Also, we should stop paying corporation tax like everyone else.
Where's this 70m figure come from?
Original post by baconbutty
Where's this 70m figure come from?
So, what is the magic figure Arsenal have as a transfer fund? Given all of the variables described above, it's safest to quote David Bowie, "It ain't easy", when trying to pin this down, but the oft-quoted £70 million is a reasonable estimate.
From Swiss ramble.
Original post by 419
From Swiss ramble.
That will be different now with the new sponsorship deals and the new tv deal won't it?
Original post by baconbutty
That will be different now with the new sponsorship deals and the new tv deal won't it?
Yes, hence why there's no more excuses. The debt is manageable. Money flowing in from all angles and loads of it.
I was just pointing out the cash reserve isn't as big in reality as it ostensible appears.
Original post by 419
Yes, hence why there's no more excuses. The debt is manageable. Money flowing in from all angles and loads of it.
I was just pointing out the cash reserve isn't as big in reality as it ostensible appears.
I was just pointing out the cash reserve isn't as big in reality as it ostensible appears.
Why was there an excuse before? Short term loans could of been taken or the club could of overspent in anticipation of the new deals couldn't they
Related discussions
- The Arsenal Thread XXVI
- The Arsenal Thread XXV
- What team do you support and why?
- Premier League Run In
- Premier League Predictions 2023-24
- Spanish books
- elsie wellbeing update at the end of 2023 :)
- Im bored as hell
- The Liverpool FC Thread XVII
- Tottenham Hotspur Society II
- ✨All Things Royal✨ Spam!
- Is Bukayo Saka the face of the Premier League?
- TSR emojis are so silly
- Does carbohydrates cause acne?
- Best football match you saw as a child?
- How to understand football as a girl - help
- What will the false prophet of revelation use at his disposal to deceive people ?
- Can a Premier League team win all these in one season or is it impossible?
- Chelsea transfer strategy
- Chelsea F.C. Thread IX
