View Full Version : Summary from AST meeting
Nigel Philips, the AST's finance guru
- We sell to buy in the next three years unless we pay more for our tickets and/or perform better in the league or Champions League (finish higher/go further) because of our commercial deals aren't of the level of MUFC.
- Failing to qualify for the group stages of the Champions League could cost the club £25m.
- The Transfer Proceeds Account has roughly £30m in it and this has to be spent on signing new players and uplifting the contracts of current members of the squad.
- If we sold some of the younger players who aren't going to make it at the club, we'd be able to spend our cash better.
- Arsenal's wages are spread throughout the squad and there aren't the incentives for younger players to try to get a higher wage through performance as there are at other clubs.
- Arsenal pay Aaron Ramsey three times as much MUFC offered him. They offered him a junior contract but AFC offered him a first team player's contract on day one.
- Season tickets for next season are sold out.
- Just year one in four people took up the option of a season ticket offered to them from the waiting list.
- Club Level sold out early June.
- Queensland Road property deal has been completed and will raise the club £25m.
- Red & White are 400 shares short of 30%. There are only 2,800 shares not owned by Kroenke or R&W.
- If R&W reach 30% they can have access to the books and can reveal details about player's contracts, wages, club cost etc.
- Arsenal no longer have a board. Members of the current board - apart from Kroenke - have no more share holdings than members of the AST and Fanshare.
- Current board are understood to have a committment from KSE to keep their positions for a year following the takeover.
- Gazidis was interviewed by Wenger for his job. Doesn't have the same dynamic as other PL CEOs with their manager.
- The threat from the American owners is to lose relegation.
- Emirates Cup is unsustainable and it will probably be the last one this season.
- Asia Tour will be making the club a small profit.
The board of Arsenal Fanshare stopped purchasing shares during the takeover period but now have found some supporters who are willing to see to Fanshare rather than take the cash of Usmanov or Kroenke.
Apparently we only have £30 in something called a Transfer Proceeds Account. Tim Payton adds:
Speaking at last night's Arsenal Supporters Trust meeting, Payton said:
"You've got a manager where the short term matters like it never used to. So he might be just focused on the strongest squad he's got for next year.
"If Arsenal let Nasri sit there for one more year on that contract without signing a new one as the manager indicated he was fine with today, that's actually like paying Nasri £20m to play his last year.
"When he leaves for the bigger contract at the end of the year, that's inevitible, you need that kind of money to get that level of replacement in.
"So you could actually say that Nasri staying, that the TPA used up this year. You won't see any other signings coming in.
"That's the kind of constant thing Ivan (Gazidis) is having to weigh up. And at times at most football clubs board would be against manager.
"Do you think Harry Redknapp thinks about the long term future of Tottenham? All he thinks about is now, now, now.
"For a long time Arsene Wenger - some people might say - has become too much like a director, thinking always about the long term spending. But he's under a different pressure now.
"Is his desire to keep Nasri for one more year driven by the fact he knows how important that year is for him?"
KSE Comedy Club
12-07-2011, 08:08 AM
So we were all lied to then.
What a surprise.
Well that's fucking depressing :ilt:
KSE Comedy Club
12-07-2011, 08:14 AM
Well if they have raised £25m from the queensland road development, then that should be added to the transfer fund.
But it wont be.
Also, how the fuck have we only got £30m for transfers???? Its a fucking joke.
Well if they have raised £25m from the queensland road development, then that should be added to the transfer fund.
But it wont be.
Also, how the fuck have we only got £30m for transfers???? Its a fucking joke.
I dunno what they've been up to to be honest, but this stadium project is hardly what is was portrayed to be is it?
I honestly don't get it, not only are we not that great on the pitch, but it seems off the pitch it's not that great either.....and that's what we sacrificed the on the pitch side for.
We seemed to have more money in the days of Highbury.
We should trim the squad right down, there's plenty of players who aren't good enough and we could easily create some funds that way, we've got a big squad but it's there's too much dead wood.
Fist of Lehmann
12-07-2011, 08:31 AM
£30m.
For signing new players and uplifting contracts.
FFS.
If Diaby gets another random pay rise I'm killing someone.
selassie
12-07-2011, 08:31 AM
Well if they have raised £25m from the queensland road development, then that should be added to the transfer fund.
But it wont be.
Also, how the fuck have we only got £30m for transfers???? Its a fucking joke.
You know what, I think the whole financial situation at Arsenal is made out to be a lot more complicated than it really is. We make millions on Matchday, where on earth is that money going? We make millions out of players sales/merchandise etc?
Sure we have outgoings & debts but I don't believe for one minute the financial situation is half as bad as made out.
We have 30million available for transfers & contract renegotiations because that's all the board are willing to release, it's as simple as that. I don't believe for one minute we couldn't release more funds, it's ridiculous to think otherwise.
budesonide
12-07-2011, 08:35 AM
so much for doing things the right way!
the figures don't even make any sense for a 'company' apparently running an austerity model.
what the fuc*k has wenger and the board been doing the past 6 years? Dein was right after all then? The model they adopted was unsustainable and impractically stupid!
So much for careful planning when ramsey is on 1st team salary at a so-called top club! :rolleyes:
Letters
12-07-2011, 08:37 AM
I dunno what they've been up to to be honest, but this stadium project is hardly what is was portrayed to be is it?
Long term it will be. You didn't really expect us to be paying off a mortgage that size in 6 years did you?
I'm not sure it's true to say we had more money in the days of Highbury, it's just that wages and transfer fees had got less silly and you didn't have the billionaire owners sticking their beak in and inflating things even more.
We should trim the squad right down, there's plenty of players who aren't good enough and we could easily create some funds that way, we've got a big squad but it's there's too much dead wood.
Agree with that, although these days to stay near the top of the game (and whatever you think we are still near the top) you do need a big squad. But we could certainly do with losing some of the dead wood.
selassie
12-07-2011, 08:39 AM
so much for doing things the right way!
the figures don't even make any sense for a 'company' apparently running an austerity model.
what the fuc*k has wenger and the board been doing the past 6 years? Dein was right after all then? The model they adopted was unsustainable and impractically stupid!
So much for careful planning when ramsey is on 1st team salary at a so-called top club! :rolleyes:
The footballing model i.e. transfer policy, contract renegotation policy etc is based on flawed ideology, nothing more, nothing less.
budesonide
12-07-2011, 08:42 AM
You know what, I think the whole financial situation at Arsenal is made out to be a lot more complicated than it really is. We make millions on Matchday, where on earth is that money going? We make millions out of players sales/merchandise etc?
Sure we have outgoings & debts but I don't believe for one minute the financial situation is half as bad as made out.
We have 30million available for transfers & contract renegotiations because that's all the board are willing to release, it's as simple as that. I don't believe for one minute we couldn't release more funds, it's ridiculous to think otherwise.
someone is not coming clean somewhere.
but personally, I think the whole stadium project saw the board act in every way possible to maximise their share value.
Long term it will be. You didn't really expect us to be paying off a mortgage that size in 6 years did you?
I'm not sure it's true to say we had more money in the days of Highbury, it's just that wages and transfer fees had got less silly and you didn't have the billionaire owners sticking their beak in and inflating things even more.
You say that but we paid Campbell 100k a week and the likes of Henry, Vieira, Pires etc were on a fair amount I'm sure.
It might be that our squad is too big and we're paying the squad players too much though, we certainly more or less the same in the transfer market (if not less).
Fist of Lehmann
12-07-2011, 08:50 AM
You say that but we paid Campbell 100k a week and the likes of Henry, Vieira, Pires etc were on a fair amount I'm sure.
It might be that our squad is too big and we're paying the squad players too much though, we certainly more or less the same in the transfer market (if not less).
Yes, even by the rate of normal inflation it'd be less, but by the rate of football inflation, much much less.
And by the same token while £100k could get you a player of Henry's quality, how much could he have gotten now?
£250k at City?
budesonide
12-07-2011, 08:56 AM
Yes, even by the rate of normal inflation it'd be less, but by the rate of football inflation, much much less.
And by the same token while £100k could get you a player of Henry's quality, how much could he have gotten now?
£250k at City?
We were winning stuff then too --big fish in small pond and all that -- money isn't too much a factor for players in winning teams unless they fancy a new challenge. If we were losers as we are now back then, we wont have been able to retain half our squad no matter what we paid them.
Good post by Le Grove about the situation.
Good morning sports fans. Monday night beers eh? With hindsight, a choice poorer than a 5 year Denilson contract. I spent last night hanging out with the members of the AST and I have many things to report back to you…
Firstly, if you want the detail behind the members survey, you can find it all on the AST website.
I’ll run you through some of the highlights…
The amount of people who returned the survey was 382. Not bad out of 850 members. The split of people who returned it was quite varied as well, you had 213 Gold members, 73 shareholders, 82 red members, 11 overseas, 14 away scheme… even 3 junior gunners took time out which is very sweet.
On the self-sustaining model, 51% backed keeping the status quo with 38% looking for further investment by the major shareholders.
96% of Arsenal fans backed keeping Fanshare going, not surprising really, we all like having a say, that’d be diluted massively if we didn’t have Fanshare.
The AST have more shares than the board combined.
Interestingly, 70% of Arsenal fans surveyed believed Red&White should be invited to the board. That’s up a whopping 30% on last year when the same question was asked. The realisation that Stan Kroenke is the poorer end of the Billionaire spectrum is finally coming home to roost. Usmanov could buy our club with a cheque, Stan has had to beg, borrow and steal to push this deal through.
I think part of the above is also based on the disappointment of KSE keeping so damn quiet. He’s not made statement of intent since taking over and I think that worries people. 80% think they should be more transparent.
On the footballing side, 37% of fans are highly unsatisfied with what they’re being served up. Only 11% felt that way last year, that is a massive increase. Only 22% are satisfied these days.
69% of fans think Wenger’s footballing philosophy takes too much precedent over trophies. 69% would like David Dein back to bring in some checks and balances.
78% of fans disagreed with the season ticket price hike. Fair play, that’s to be expected. 96% think their club is in danger of pricing them out of going, which is a very sorry state of affairs.
Safe standing areas anyone?
47% still felt they were getting good value for money though!
51% do not feel they have a strong sense of belonging to the club. That disconnect from the fanbase is definitely something many people spoke to me about last night, episodes like Nasri and Cesc only go to further enhance that feeling.
Now onto some off survey stuff…
We’re now into the elite league of spenders. We shouldn’t be knocking around with the Everton’s and Villa’s, but we are bottom of the elite. We’re top 8 in Europe for spending power.
Ways we could have given ourselves more spending power last year would have been to have finished 2nd which would have given us £2million more. If we’d won our group and landed a quarter-final slot in the Champions League that would have been an extra £4-5million.
Our commercial revenue sits at £220million.
£90-100mill match day
£85mill TV
£45mill Commercial (£30 Commercial, £15mill Retail)
We have the 4th highest wage bill in the country. Traditionally that reflects your league position. If we finish above that position this year, we’ve outperformed financial expectations.
Saying we’ve got £100million cash in the bank is a fallacy. After all our expenses are taken out, we’re left at near enough break even. United earn a massive £50million more than us in commercial revenue, which is why there is such a massive shortfall.
Outgoings per years…
£110million wages
£20million loan
£50million other costs (electricity, hotels, merchandise, stadium costs)
The gap between the £170mill and the £220mill revenue isn’t liquid cash. So we’re roughly breaking even.
Stadium Loan Debt breakdown…
Total build Cost £440million
£220million Loan
£10milion from Supporters
£80million from ITV (10% stake in the club)
£90million from the Emirates
£55million from Nike (7 years with a 3 year contractual extension they took up) (The AST reckon the Nike deal at the time was a good one, others in the room disagreed)
Our current commercial revenue is £17.5 million a season. If we negotiated now, we’d be able to get and extra £32.5million a year.
Usmanov would and could come in a buy the club outright and pay off all the debt giving us a platform to compete. The AST say financial penalties make this a bad use of cash.
The AST were suggesting that in the 3 years we have to wait to renegotiate those commercials, it might be worth us speculating to accumulate. Nike aren’t going to want to do a massive deal with a team that isn’t competing at the highest level. Also, if we drop out of the Champions League, that would cost us a massive £25million a year.
Stan isn’t leveraging any debt against the club, but he’s also not investing a single penny of his money into the playing side.
On the salary side of things. We’re so high because we have such a massive squad and we pay the kids way more than they get elsewhere. Aaron Ramsey joined us in part because he was offered £500k more a year to join us over United. Sure, that looks like money well spent, but it wouldn’t if it were Denilson or the countless other failed youth products we have coming off the conveyor belt.
I actually asked what our wage bill would be if you pound for pound matched our squad with United’s. Apparently the AST know this wastage figure but they wouldn’t share it with me. It would be worth knowing wouldn’t it? If we didn’t work in this idealistic salary world that saw everyone kind of earning similar money, what would our wage bill be? £30million cheaper? That’d be a nice amount of money to free up…
Arsenal are at barely 20% of their commercial potential…
Manchester City doing that massive deal with Ethihad is causing concern because it effectively means FFP is dead. Are UEFA going to ask the questions they should be about that deal? Will they be kicked out of Europe? If they don’t, our self sustaining business model just becomes a best practice guide for business books. Not a competitive advantage. That would be a real shame.
Despite reports you may have read, 6,000 people haven’t given up their season tickets. What has actually happened is 2000 have sacked in their tickets and the normal 1 in 4 who take them up when offered has grown. People as high up as 13,000 on the list have managed to land themselves pairs of tickets this year. What the figures don’t take into account is the amount of loans and shares going on this year. My relatives found out the hard way what giving up your season ticket does when they packed it in after Zaragoza 95… people won’t make that mistake again so would rather sub out their seats until they see some investment.
Shows you that people are voting with their wallets… if the club won’t invest, why should the fans? What would that figure look like if we missed out on Champions League next year? We haven’t put a season ticket on general sales since we signed Bergkamp… lets hope it never gets to that!
£40million of Queensland money will work its way back into the club at some point… all profit
Nik B’s shirt number that was 52 represented the amount of pounds in thousands he earned a week last year. A pretty vulgar choice of number now I know that. Good riddance to him I say. I hope he has to share a bunk with Jan Koller in Germany. I know he’s retired, but Nik B deserves it.
The two players every AST member singled out for departure if they mentioned names in the survey were Denilson… and Abou Diaby. Seems there is a lot of disdain for the Frenchman. That was a surprise to me!
Nasri & Cesc
There was a lot of debate around these two scoundrels. Basically, if we keep Nasri, that has an on cost of £25million. Yep, that’s our transfer proceeds account for next year blown. I understand that Wenger is trying to make a stand, but for me, he should be doing that with a player he can keep and sell on next year. Making a point that ultimately will cost the fans money is ludicrous. If you think about it… a 6.5% season ticket price rise raised about £5million this year. Does anyone fancy footing a 26% increase in ticket prices next year?
Not me.
We did get a bit of debate going about Cesc. I’m still unsure why people think we have to let him go for £35million. Outside of sentiment, there is no reason. If Barca don’t value him like Madrid did Ronaldo, that’s not our problem. Have him when you do value him, like after a massive injury to Xavi.
http://le-grove.co.uk/2011/07/12/ast-meeting-breakdown-keeping-nasri-for-a-26-increase-in-season-ticket-price/
it's interesting that wenger wants to keep nasri and potentially forgoe the spending opportunities available or bank the cash. complete role reversal to the perception that he and everyone else have developed over the years.
it's interesting that wenger wants to keep nasri and potentially forgoe the spending opportunities available or bank the cash. complete role reversal to the perception that he and everyone else have developed over the years.
Yeah, but there was business logic to his previous standing.
There is none whatsoever in what he's saying about the Nasri situation. Just plain stupidness.
Yeah, but there was business logic to his previous standing.
There is none whatsoever in what he's saying about the Nasri situation. Just plain stupidness.
quote you in the other thread about this. if nas rumours are true, we've put a deal worth just short of £19m on the table, for basic wages that he hasn't signed.
there is complete football sense in wanting to keep hold of one of your best players. this is the game i thought he would play. if nas won't sign, keep him here, get a good season out of him, let chelsea and man u get their creative players they need elsewhere and let him go abroad next season.
given that nas wouldn't sign the contract that has been on the table since last summer, then something has to give for the club here. either to a competitor, losing money or weakening the squad. it's all about the lesser of two evils and given the criticism he has faced about caring for business over football, then in this case, he doesn't seem he is.
AKBapologist
12-07-2011, 09:53 AM
I told you so?
quote you in the other thread about this. if nas rumours are true, we've put a deal worth just short of £19m on the table, for basic wages that he hasn't signed.
there is complete football sense in wanting to keep hold of one of your best players. this is the game i thought he would play. if nas won't sign, keep him here, get a good season out of him, let chelsea and man u get their creative players they need elsewhere and let him go abroad next season.
given that nas wouldn't sign the contract that has been on the table since last summer, then something has to give for the club here. either to a competitor, losing money or weakening the squad. it's all about the lesser of two evils and given the criticism he has faced about caring for business over football, then in this case, he doesn't seem he is.
I get what you're saying, but do you really think he's going to put 100% into trying to push Arsenal forward in his final year?? I mean, if we sold now, and went for, say, Mata (yeah I know it's unlikely)....would we not get the same return (a year settling to consider), but for someone who has a comittment to the club going forward?
It sends some good messages out, i.e., we won't be pushed around. But when you consider that we're effectively getting one year from someone who's comittment is questionable, for what we could get over a foure year period, it doesn't add up.
Of the 30mil quoted as transfer funds / player contract improvements, does this include provision for Nasri, or have we spent 20 mil of that already on a player who doesn't want to be here....
Xhaka Can’t
12-07-2011, 10:10 AM
I have to agree with LDG.
We saw some absolutely cracking first class football from Nasri - wonderful stuff. But only when things were going well.
Think back to how he performed last season as a whole. Do we really want another season of that? I simply don't think it is worth the risk of having him play out the last season of his contract, hoping he replicates his 3 months of excellent form for a longer period this season.
It is often said that it is not how you start a season, but rather how you finish it that counts. This is a particularly apt statement to make in respect of Nasri.
If he doesn't sign, he has to go.
I get what you're saying, but do you really think he's going to put 100% into trying to push Arsenal forward in his final year?? I mean, if we sold now, and went for, say, Mata (yeah I know it's unlikely)....would we not get the same return (a year settling to consider), but for someone who has a comittment to the club going forward?
It sends some good messages out, i.e., we won't be pushed around. But when you consider that we're effectively getting one year from someone who's comittment is questionable, for what we could get over a foure year period, it doesn't add up.
Of the 30mil quoted as transfer funds / player contract improvements, does this include provision for Nasri, or have we spent 20 mil of that already on a player who doesn't want to be here....
i'd like to think he's professional enough to, he hasn't shown anything on the field to show that he would act in such a way. sure, there was a dip in performance after the cc final but that was a general malaise across the whole team, not just him individually.
we could sell now to a domestic rival but how many people would get on the clubs back for doing that too? its a not a clear win situation anymore, something has to give somewhere. he wants to keep him and seems to be trying to convince him to sign but nas can't be forced to. the desire to get him on a four year deal is clearly there.
i'm still confused about the whole 25m being lost if we keep nas and eating up the transfer funds. i dont see how ast have come to that conclusion.
AST are suggesting if we keep him and he goes in a year's time for nothing, we lose the 22M quoted that we'd get for him now + roughly 20M on a replacement.
Given that if he goes in a year's time his replacement will be Diaby/Vela, they might be wrong on the second part...
i'd like to think he's professional enough to, he hasn't shown anything on the field to show that he would act in such a way. sure, there was a dip in performance after the cc final but that was a general malaise across the whole team, not just him individually.
we could sell now to a domestic rival but how many people would get on the clubs back for doing that too? its a not a clear win situation anymore, something has to give somewhere. he wants to keep him and seems to be trying to convince him to sign but nas can't be forced to. the desire to get him on a four year deal is clearly there.
i'm still confused about the whole 25m being lost if we keep nas and eating up the transfer funds. i dont see how ast have come to that conclusion.
I think the general gist, is that we have a pot of 30mil for next season's transfer kitty. I.e. this is what the board make available (every year??) for contract renegotiations, and player purchases. I'm guessing this is not about this years funding.
We obviously bolster that by selling (the part about the selling after three years).
What they're saying, is that if we keep Nasri for a year, and allow him to go for free, we're effectively paying out the 20mil you cite as his potential contract extention, as we don't recoup a fee for him. We then need to replace the cunt....which for a player of his quality, requires investment of AT LEAST 20mil....
If we signed him up again, 20 mil would be spent, but we have the player under contract, and a sell on fee in future, OR, four years if him comitted to trying to win Arsenal trophies. If we let him go for free, we have to spend 20mil to replace him...no return.
AST are suggesting if we keep him and he goes in a year's time for nothing, we lose the 22M quoted that we'd get for him now + roughly 20M on a replacement.
Given that if he goes in a year's time his replacement will be Diaby/Vela, they might be wrong on the second part...
so that extra 22m quoted now would be in addition to the £30m kitty they say is available, or inclusive? and if we spend £20m on a replacement, would that come out of next years kitty?
so that extra 22m quoted now would be in addition to the £30m kitty they say is available, or inclusive? and if we spend £20m on a replacement, would that come out of next years kitty?
From what I understand, the 22M would be added to the 30M for this year and the replacement money would come out of next year's transfer fund, yes.
The 30M for new transfers and wage increases doesn't include money we bring in from player sales.
More simply (albeit very vaguely).
Nasri stays and signs new deal, 4 years:
Tansfer/contact pot = 120Million
Less 15mil contract extention (assuming sale after 3 years) = 105Million
Sale value 20million? = 125Million
Nasri fucks off next season (net 4 year effect):
Transfer Pot =120Million
Sale proceeds nil = 120Million
New player of same worth 20mil = 100Million
New player contract 3 years @ 70k = 89Million
Difference is quite considerable....
so if we keep nas, then we are not losing money from this years kitty, so that is £19m left, with gerv coming in.
still with walcott and rvp to renegotiate too...
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.