A breakdown of Arsenal's money schemes

[Marquis de Carabas]

http://swissramble.blogspot.ch/2012/10/arsenal-song-remains-same.html?m=1

Fascinating, one would hope that the increase in revenue stream will fill the need to sell players each year. An increase of some 60% would more than cover that. Roll on 2014. It will be an interesting summer next season as do we have anyone left to sell to fill the large loss poor commercial revenue gives us.

Also interesting that Arseblog states Gazidis' wages at £1.36m with a £675,000 bonus. That would explain that huge hike in staff wages.

Also still carrying players like Squillachi and Arshavin when they offer little to the squad pushes up the wage cost significantly.

[Fist of Lehmann]

As ridiculously overpaid as these high-flying executives are, even £1.36m is less than 1% of our reported overall wage bill of £143m.

Premiership wage bills tend to rise every year, that's just the nature of the football beast.

The fat trimming that Gazidis spoke about earlier this year proved tougher to implement than we all hoped. So in efficiency terms we still have players withdrawing a paycheck while contributing nothing to the football club.

[IBK]

http://swissramble.blogspot.ch/2012/10/arsenal-song-remains-same.html?m=1

Fascinating, one would hope that the increase in revenue stream will fill the need to sell players each year. An increase of some 60% would more than cover that. Roll on 2014. It will be an interesting summer next season as do we have anyone left to sell to fill the large loss poor commercial revenue gives us.

Also interesting that Arseblog states Gazidis' wages at £1.36m with a £675,000 bonus. That would explain that huge hike in staff wages.

Also still carrying players like Squillachi and Arshavin when they offer little to the squad pushes up the wage cost significantly.



Most pertinant of all:


The explosive wage growth is nothing new. In fact, since 2009 wages have gone up £39 million (38%), while revenue has only grown by £10 million (5%), leading to a significant worsening in the wages to turnover ratio from 46% to 61%. This is by no means terrible (most Premier League teams have a ratio above 70%, while Manchester City notched up 114% in 2010/11), but is of concern, especially as Manchester United have managed to maintain their ratio around 50%. Though not the only reason, this helps to explain why so little has been spent in the transfer market.

Most Arsenal fans perceive that the club is being run to make a profit, nothing more. The reality is that the club has been drifting a bit in terms of its commercial revenue, in comparison to other teams' growth. Wages are first and foremost determined by what the petro billionaires spend - so the level of wages that we have to pay for top players is pretty much outside our control.

So when you consider that currently we have little choice but to sell players to make any money (because wages take up almost all our non-sales profit); the club clearkly needs to be very careful not to increase the wage bill/ratio even higher, and every sensible company needs cash reserves - our activity/non-activity in the transfer market - that everyone has such an issue with - makes a lot more sense.

[Power n Glory]

Most pertinant of all:



Most Arsenal fans perceive that the club is being run to make a profit, nothing more. The reality is that the club has been drifting a bit in terms of its commercial revenue, in comparison to other teams' growth. Wages are first and foremost determined by what the petro billionaires spend - so the level of wages that we have to pay for top players is pretty much outside our control.

So when you consider that currently we have little choice but to sell players to make any money (because wages take up almost all our non-sales profit); the club clearkly needs to be very careful not to increase the wage bill/ratio even higher, and every sensible company needs cash reserves - our activity/non-activity in the transfer market - that everyone has such an issue with - makes a lot more sense.

:sulk:

[Kano]

Most Arsenal fans perceive that the club is being run to make a profit, nothing more. The reality is that the club has been drifting a bit in terms of its commercial revenue, in comparison to other teams' growth. Wages are first and foremost determined by what the petro billionaires spend - so the level of wages that we have to pay for top players is pretty much outside our control.

So when you consider that currently we have little choice but to sell players to make any money (because wages take up almost all our non-sales profit); the club clearkly needs to be very careful not to increase the wage bill/ratio even higher, and every sensible company needs cash reserves - our activity/non-activity in the transfer market - that everyone has such an issue with - makes a lot more sense.

if we didn't have such a ridiculous wage structure for young players that would free up wage money - so laying it onto other clubs preventing us from being able to afford 'top' players is not really true. we hinder ourselves in that regard.

[mastermind84]

if we didn't have such a ridiculous wage structure for young players that would free up wage money - so laying it onto other clubs preventing us from being able to afford 'top' players is not really true. we hinder ourselves in that regard.
no it wouldnt :haha:


United, Chelsea, and City also pay high wages for youngsters. We were the first to do that, and then those clubs got got hip to it and are now buying the best yonugsters too. And those clubs are still expanding the top salaries. If Arsenal stopped paying top salaries to younger first team-ish players, and then middle tier players which is usually the next step in these misguided rants by our fans, then we would not have a team that makes the Champions League every season.

Here is the truth, we are stuck. We cannot expand the Emirates anymore, TV income is a Premier League controlled thing, and those other clubs have more money than us and will always have more money. The talking point is "commercial contracts" but its not like United, Madrid, Bayern, Liverpool, etc wont end up with a bigger one the day we sign our newest one. The only hope is that FFP actually works and starts punishing big clubs for spending more than they earn and who incur large losses. If it does not, I can see Kroenke and co selling the club to a billionaire (not named Usmanov) and Arsenal joining that party.

[Power n Glory]

no it wouldnt :haha:


United, Chelsea, and City also pay high wages for youngsters. We were the first to do that, and then those clubs got got hip to it and are now buying the best yonugsters too. And those clubs are still expanding the top salaries. If Arsenal stopped paying top salaries to younger first team-ish players, and then middle tier players which is usually the next step in these misguided rants by our fans, then we would not have a team that makes the Champions League every season.

Here is the truth, we are stuck. We cannot expand the Emirates anymore, TV income is a Premier League controlled thing, and those other clubs have more money than us and will always have more money. The talking point is "commercial contracts" but its not like United, Madrid, Bayern, Liverpool, etc wont end up with a bigger one the day we sign our newest one. The only hope is that FFP actually works and starts punishing big clubs for spending more than they earn and who incur large losses. If it does not, I can see Kroenke and co selling the club to a billionaire (not named Usmanov) and Arsenal joining that party.

It still needs reviewing because the youth policy looks dead in the water now and we've lost quality experienced players because we've overvalued youth over experience for too long. We're quick to dish out contracts to kids but take ages to sort out deals for established first team players. With this structure, we'll never be able to keep our main players.

[mastermind84]

It still needs reviewing because the youth policy looks dead in the water now and we've lost quality experienced players because we've overvalued youth over experience for too long. We're quick to dish out contracts to kids but take ages to sort out deals for established first team players. With this structure, we'll never be able to keep our main players.

those two fullbacks are dead in the water? Or our #1 as well?

Here is the other thing, if we didnt pay Bendtner and Denilson the money they were seeking, another club would have. And I have seen how upset Arsenal fans got when the club let go of guys like Fran Merida, Jay Emmanuel-Thomas, and even Henri Lansbury. Bendtner and Denilson actually contributed to the first team and played well before they signed the new deals, unlike those other guys I mentioned who barely got a whiff of action.

The problem isnt giving those players a lot of money, the problem is we cannot make up the £100 million+ revenue difference between us and United. And even United are having issues because they cannot compete with City, Chelsea, Barca, and Madrid financially.


The only way this all changes is if FFP actually works. I dont believe it will. I wonder if Kroenke is hoping that premiership clubs breakaway from the current TV deals and each club has their own deals like in Spain. Even if that were to happen, United would always trump us, and I suspect Liverpool would too.

[Power n Glory]

those two fullbacks are dead in the water? Or our #1 as well?

Here is the other thing, if we didnt pay Bendtner and Denilson the money they were seeking, another club would have. And I have seen how upset Arsenal fans got when the club let go of guys like Fran Merida, Jay Emmanuel-Thomas, and even Henri Lansbury. Bendtner and Denilson actually contributed to the first team and played well before they signed the new deals, unlike those other guys I mentioned who barely got a whiff of action.

The problem isnt giving those players a lot of money, the problem is we cannot make up the £100 million+ revenue difference between us and United. And even United are having issues because they cannot compete with City, Chelsea, Barca, and Madrid financially.


The only way this all changes is if FFP actually works. I dont believe it will. I wonder if Kroenke is hoping that premiership clubs breakaway from the current TV deals and each club has their own deals like in Spain. Even if that were to happen, United would always trump us, and I suspect Liverpool would too.

Deja vu and it's too early to talk about our fullbacks and keeper because I remember Clichy, Denilson and Vela looking great in the early days. Regardless, if we're saying that they're our future, they will soon hit a brick wall, or glass ceiling with the wages because we won't change our wage structure. The set up we have now with players like Poldoski, Cazorla and Arteta is similar to what we used to do. They're not on silly wages and we'd have more of a chance of winning something with experience over youth.

That line about Man Utd and the £100m in sponsorship money brings back memories too. Back in the Highbury days, I remember the club saying our Nike sponsorship deal was crap and we needed to move stadiums to compete with United because Highbury was too small. Wash and repeat! Caught in the matrix.

[Kano]

so this is make an excuse for arsenal/wenger/board about everything thread?

please re-title and make it clearer next time.

ta

x

[GP]

Most pertinant of all:



Most Arsenal fans perceive that the club is being run to make a profit, nothing more. The reality is that the club has been drifting a bit in terms of its commercial revenue, in comparison to other teams' growth. Wages are first and foremost determined by what the petro billionaires spend - so the level of wages that we have to pay for top players is pretty much outside our control.

So when you consider that currently we have little choice but to sell players to make any money (because wages take up almost all our non-sales profit); the club clearkly needs to be very careful not to increase the wage bill/ratio even higher, and every sensible company needs cash reserves - our activity/non-activity in the transfer market - that everyone has such an issue with - makes a lot more sense.

:goodpost:

[mastermind84]

Deja vu and it's too early to talk about our fullbacks and keeper because I remember Clichy, Denilson and Vela looking great in the early days. Regardless, if we're saying that they're our future, they will soon hit a brick wall, or glass ceiling with the wages because we won't change our wage structure. The set up we have now with players like Poldoski, Cazorla and Arteta is similar to what we used to do. They're not on silly wages and we'd have more of a chance of winning something with experience over youth.

That line about Man Utd and the £100m in sponsorship money brings back memories too. Back in the Highbury days, I remember the club saying our Nike sponsorship deal was crap and we needed to move stadiums to compete with United because Highbury was too small. Wash and repeat! Caught in the matrix.
Clichy was very good and a successful player from our youth scheme. He was good for us and we sold him for a lot more than we bought him for. Vela, not so much but the club turned a big profit on him as well.

And you cannot ignore what happened with City and Chelsea entering the fray being a big reason why we cannot compete. But here is the truth that many of us never want to accept, Arsenal is and have always been a 2nd tier team. We have never competed with United, Madrid, Bayern, Barca, and only started doing it on a small scale because Wenger and co discovered undervalued player markets. Now everyone else has caught up, and City and Chelsea can spend more than everyone, and surpassed us there so we need to find another undervalued market.


I type all of this not to defend the board, but its not as easy as fans want it to be. I just hope FFP works, but I have my doubts because a)I dont think its enforceable b)if it is enforceable, Arsenal will still be behind United and the other true elite clubs like Bayern and Madrid because the principles of FFP favors the already big clubs.

[Power n Glory]

Clichy was very good and a successful player from our youth scheme. He was good for us and we sold him for a lot more than we bought him for. Vela, not so much but the club turned a big profit on him as well.

And you cannot ignore what happened with City and Chelsea entering the fray being a big reason why we cannot compete. But here is the truth that many of us never want to accept, Arsenal is and have always been a 2nd tier team. We have never competed with United, Madrid, Bayern, Barca, and only started doing it on a small scale because Wenger and co discovered undervalued player markets. Now everyone else has caught up, and City and Chelsea can spend more than everyone, and surpassed us there so we need to find another undervalued market.


I type all of this not to defend the board, but its not as easy as fans want it to be. I just hope FFP works, but I have my doubts because a)I dont think its enforceable b)if it is enforceable, Arsenal will still be behind United and the other true elite clubs like Bayern and Madrid because the principles of FFP favors the already big clubs.

I don't think anyone has a problem accepting that fact. We're not Liverpool supporters here. But, the fact is, we've been told the stadium would get us up to that level to compete and now we're here, we're being told it's sponsorship money like when we were at Highbury. Before we know it, they'll be talking about stadium capacity again. A constant cycle.

Chelsea and City are a factor but that doesn't explain why we haven't won a single trophy in years. Carling Cup, FA Cup or Champs League.

As for the transfer market, City and Chelsea have been a factor but it doesn't explain or excuse everything. There have always been undervalued players on the market and there still are now, otherwise we'd have never been able to buy Arteta, Poldoski, Merts and Cazrola. We can go back further and look at Nasri, Rosicky, Ade, Eduardo, Sagna, Vermaelen and Hleb as examples. All players that cost no more than £15m I believe. We abandoned our old strategy and went for younger players because Wenger thought he'd be able to have a line up of world superstars because he's always known about players like Ronaldo and Ronaldinho, but could never get them. With the boards backing, they trusted him to bring in and breed a new line up of stars because he was great at identifying undervalued players like Henry, Vieira and Pires.

We don't need to find a new undervalued market, we tried to do with the youth project, that flopped and now we're going back to what we know as seen over the last few windows. These undervalued players have always been there but we abandoned it. The Chelsea's and Man City's go after the players that are on everyone's shopping list and we've never been able to get those sort of players anyway.

[fakeyank]

I don't think anyone has a problem accepting that fact. We're not Liverpool supporters here. But, the fact is, we've been told the stadium would get us up to that level to compete and now we're here, we're being told it's sponsorship money like when we were at Highbury. Before we know it, they'll be talking about stadium capacity again. A constant cycle.

Chelsea and City are a factor but that doesn't explain why we haven't won a single trophy in years. Carling Cup, FA Cup or Champs League.

As for the transfer market, City and Chelsea have been a factor but it doesn't explain or excuse everything. There have always been undervalued players on the market and there still are now, otherwise we'd have never been able to buy Arteta, Poldoski, Merts and Cazrola. We can go back further and look at Nasri, Rosicky, Ade, Eduardo, Sagna, Vermaelen and Hleb as examples. All players that cost no more than £15m I believe. We abandoned our old strategy and went for younger players because Wenger thought he'd be able to have a line up of world superstars because he's always known about players like Ronaldo and Ronaldinho, but could never get them. With the boards backing, they trusted him to bring in and breed a new line up of stars because he was great at identifying undervalued players like Henry, Vieira and Pires.

We don't need to find a new undervalued market, we tried to do with the youth project, that flopped and now we're going back to what we know as seen over the last few windows. These undervalued players have always been there but we abandoned it. The Chelsea's and Man City's go after the players that are on everyone's shopping list and we've never been able to get those sort of players anyway.

:gp:

[LDG]

I don't think anyone has a problem accepting that fact. We're not Liverpool supporters here. But, the fact is, we've been told the stadium would get us up to that level to compete and now we're here, we're being told it's sponsorship money like when we were at Highbury. Before we know it, they'll be talking about stadium capacity again. A constant cycle.

Chelsea and City are a factor but that doesn't explain why we haven't won a single trophy in years. Carling Cup, FA Cup or Champs League.

As for the transfer market, City and Chelsea have been a factor but it doesn't explain or excuse everything. There have always been undervalued players on the market and there still are now, otherwise we'd have never been able to buy Arteta, Poldoski, Merts and Cazrola. We can go back further and look at Nasri, Rosicky, Ade, Eduardo, Sagna, Vermaelen and Hleb as examples. All players that cost no more than £15m I believe. We abandoned our old strategy and went for younger players because Wenger thought he'd be able to have a line up of world superstars because he's always known about players like Ronaldo and Ronaldinho, but could never get them. With the boards backing, they trusted him to bring in and breed a new line up of stars because he was great at identifying undervalued players like Henry, Vieira and Pires.

We don't need to find a new undervalued market, we tried to do with the youth project, that flopped and now we're going back to what we know as seen over the last few windows. These undervalued players have always been there but we abandoned it. The Chelsea's and Man City's go after the players that are on everyone's shopping list and we've never been able to get those sort of players anyway.

I agree with all of that :faint:

[mastermind84]

As for the transfer market, City and Chelsea have been a factor but it doesn't explain or excuse everything. There have always been undervalued players on the market and there still are now, otherwise we'd have never been able to buy Arteta, Poldoski, Merts and Cazrola.
thats a fair point, but outside of Cazorla I am not sure any of those guys were undervalued.



We can go back further and look at Nasri, Rosicky, Ade, Eduardo, Sagna, Vermaelen and Hleb as examples. All players that cost no more than £15m I believe.
only Adebayor was undervalued. Eduardo cost almost 10 million, iirc. 10 million for a player who only came from the Croatian League?


We abandoned our old strategy and went for younger players because Wenger thought he'd be able to have a line up of world superstars because he's always known about players like Ronaldo and Ronaldinho, but could never get them. With the boards backing, they trusted him to bring in and breed a new line up of stars because he was great at identifying undervalued players like Henry, Vieira and Pires.
we abandoned our strategy because Henry, Vieira, and Pires types cost 20-30 million now.


We don't need to find a new undervalued market, we tried to do with the youth project, that flopped and now we're going back to what we know as seen over the last few windows. These undervalued players have always been there but we abandoned it. The Chelsea's and Man City's go after the players that are on everyone's shopping list and we've never been able to get those sort of players anyway.
they arent out there is my point. During the 2nd Wenger era, our players were more valuable than United's. Now they are behind United, City, and Chelsea. Those undervalued players are now going for 15-20 million. Look at Anderson at United, he was sold to them for over 20 million 5 years ago. If Aaron Ramsey was 17 years old and leaving Cardiff today, he would be at least £15 million. Conversely, Ox 5-6 years ago would have been around what we paid for Theo.

Eden Hazard is 20 years old and was sold for 30 million. Same is true for that Lucas fella that is going to PSG.

Its not as easy as us fans think it is. This is not a defense of the board at all because I feel they have made many mistakes over the years, but signing quality players is tough. Look at Koscielny for instance, he was signed for 9 million at 24 and only one season in Ligue 1. Football player prices have gone up and its hard for many of us to understand.

Where Wenger and co erred at with "project youth" was wage inflation. They thought loyalty>>wages and that was shown to be wrong each time starting with Hleb and now RVP and Song, and potentially Theo.

[Power n Glory]

thats a fair point, but outside of Cazorla I am not sure any of those guys were undervalued.



only Adebayor was undervalued. Eduardo cost almost 10 million, iirc. 10 million for a player who only came from the Croatian League?


we abandoned our strategy because Henry, Vieira, and Pires types cost 20-30 million now.


they arent out there is my point. During the 2nd Wenger era, our players were more valuable than United's. Now they are behind United, City, and Chelsea. Those undervalued players are now going for 15-20 million. Look at Anderson at United, he was sold to them for over 20 million 5 years ago. If Aaron Ramsey was 17 years old and leaving Cardiff today, he would be at least £15 million. Conversely, Ox 5-6 years ago would have been around what we paid for Theo.

Eden Hazard is 20 years old and was sold for 30 million. Same is true for that Lucas fella that is going to PSG.

Its not as easy as us fans think it is. This is not a defense of the board at all because I feel they have made many mistakes over the years, but signing quality players is tough. Look at Koscielny for instance, he was signed for 9 million at 24 and only one season in Ligue 1. Football player prices have gone up and its hard for many of us to understand.

Henry and Vieira type players get to that sort of price range when the big clubs start sniffing around. We were linked with Falcao before he moved to Porto. They bought him for stupid money. Less than £5m. Look what he's worth now.

Ba, Cisse….look what they'd be worth if Newcastle sold them now. Eduardo cost us £10m but would have been worth double that if he hadn't have broken his leg. Nasri and Hleb are other examples. Hazard and Lucas are the Rondalinho's and Robinho's of this generation. Clubs have known about them for ages and we've never stood.

Prices have gone up on players because it's not £1997 anymore. It's 2012. A player that would be £5m - £7m will now probably cost a few more millions. It's not as if we haven't boosted our revenue earnings either. If Spurs, Sunderland, Fulham, Villa, Everton, Newcastle…etc can find these sorts of player, then it shouldn't be a problem for a guy like Wenger and it isn't when you look at the amount of players we''ve signed recently. Most of us have been saying we've needed more Sagna, Vermaelen, Eduardo type signings for years! We're now starting to see it, finally!

[mastermind84]

Henry and Vieira type players get to that sort of price range when the big clubs start sniffing around.
well that is exactly my point. The big clubs are finding those players much sooner than they used to. And we were fortunate in the cases of Henry and Vieira that they played in Serie A which is a youth adverse league, and at the time was spending tens of millions on established players. Thats why I mentioned Hazard, Lucas, even Ox to an extent. These players are being spotted at much younger ages than when Wenger first came to Arsenal. Its why Wenger made the risk of going even younger.



We were linked with Falcao before he moved to Porto. They bought him for stupid money. Less than £5m. Look what he's worth now.
Porto bought him for cheap but some 3rd party held his rights as well (and still do)

On top of that, he was seen as a bit of a fallen star at the time, he didnt set the Argentine league on fire like people had expected. I used to watch him at River and thought dude was overrated. It could have been a good gamble to take him if we believed in his talents tho.


Ba, Cisse….look what they'd be worth if Newcastle sold them now. Eduardo cost us £10m but would have been worth double that if he hadn't have broken his leg. Nasri and Hleb are other examples. Hazard and Lucas are the Rondalinho's and Robinho's of this generation. Clubs have known about them for ages and we've never stood.
Nasri and Hleb went for about 12 million in a pre City, Barca and Madrid mega TV contract world. That is at least 20 million now. Eduardo was not an undervalued signing no matter how much you try to project the future with him, I am only talking about at the time of signing.

Ba is a guy no one wanted, and presumably no one still wants, because of his knee issue. Cisse is kind of shit, imo but he did score goals last season for them. I think a better example from Newcastle is Cabaye and Ben Arfa. We all know why Ben Arfa went for cheap, but Cabaye was a great deal. A guy like Ba and Ben Arfa are big time gambles because of their injury or mercurial natures.

The club did not make an error going too young, the error was believing that those young kids would think of the club before money. It clearly failed.


Prices have gone up on players because it's not £1997 anymore. It's 2012. A player that would be £5m - £7m will now probably cost a few more millions. It's not as if we haven't boosted our revenue earnings either. If Spurs, Sunderland, Fulham, Villa, Everton, Newcastle…etc can find these sorts of player, then it shouldn't be a problem for a guy like Wenger and it isn't when you look at the amount of players we''ve signed recently. Most of us have been saying we've needed more Sagna, Vermaelen, Eduardo type signings for years! We're now starting to see it, finally!
the club has boosted its earning, but not to the extent of United, Chelsea, and City.

And Fulham, Villa, Everton? really? Everton's best player was a £16 million signing. The rest of those guys wouldnt get into our first team. Same with Fulham and especially Villa. Villa tried to run with the big boys but MON had no idea what he was doing and now they are rebuilding again.

and again, Verm, Sagna, and Eduardo types were not undervalued players. Not in the slightest.

[Özim]

Here is the other thing, if we didnt pay Bendtner and Denilson the money they were seeking, another club would have.
Let's clear this up, noone would have paid Bendtner/Denilson and co what we pay them...that's one of the big reasons we can't get rid of them and have to ship them out on loan, subsidising their salaries to do so.

We've been paying our young unproven players far too much for far too long and the reasons these kids join us?
A. A big pay day at a young age
B. Opportunities of first team football no other team gives them a hope of getting

Do you really think these kids would sign for us if other big clubs offered them the same opportunities? The few that do make it move on as soon as it suits to those big clubs they never offered them the package we offered them at a young age.

[Joker]

The FFP would probably help us and other big clubs, as it's purpose seems to be to prevent a smaller club being bought up by a billionaire owner who bankrolls it, and helping it break into the upper echelons of the league. It's a protectionist measure, and it's no surprise that the established clubs are backing it.

[mastermind84]

Let's clear this up, noone would have paid Bendtner/Denilson and co what we pay them...that's one of the big reasons we can't get rid of them and have to ship them out on loan, subsidising their salaries to do so.
you are saying this with hindsight, my statement is pertaining to the year 2009 when those two players signed their contract raises. In 2009, those players would have got nice raises elsewhere. You have to remember that Denilson played pretty good at 21 years old for a side that made the CL semifinal and was a top 4 side in hte premiership. Bendtner was rumored to have interested clubs like Bayern, Inter, and Milan before we gave him the new contract.


We've been paying our young unproven players far too much for far too long and the reasons these kids join us?
A. A big pay day at a young age
B. Opportunities of first team football no other team gives them a hope of getting

Do you really think these kids would sign for us if other big clubs offered them the same opportunities? The few that do make it move on as soon as it suits to those big clubs they never offered them the package we offered them at a young age.
now this is an entirely different conversation, the club did (maybe still does) offer bigger wages to guys who are teenagers. I remember Traore was all set to move to Benfica, but Benfica wanted to only offer half the wages Arsenal were paying him. I think he was on 624,000 a year, and Benfica wanted to offer 300,000 a year. Ramsey is another example of that.

[Xhaka Can’t]

The FFP would probably help us and other big clubs, as it's purpose seems to be to prevent a smaller club being bought up by a billionaire owner who bankrolls it, and helping it break into the upper echelons of the league. It's a protectionist measure, and it's no surprise that the established clubs are backing it.

I think it is a side-effect rather than the intention being protectionist.

[Syn]

I think it is a side-effect rather than the intention being protectionist.

If it's a side-effect at all.

[GP]

http://imageshack.us/a/img42/2915/52323442813633057862120.jpg

[Joker]

I think it is a side-effect rather than the intention being protectionist.

Actually you're probably right, however I think the reason some clubs (not just Arsenal) have come out so strongly in favour of it is because of the side effects of increasing protectionism.

[IBK]

Mastermind :bow: Great points.

[Power n Glory]

well that is exactly my point. The big clubs are finding those players much sooner than they used to. And we were fortunate in the cases of Henry and Vieira that they played in Serie A which is a youth adverse league, and at the time was spending tens of millions on established players. Thats why I mentioned Hazard, Lucas, even Ox to an extent. These players are being spotted at much younger ages than when Wenger first came to Arsenal. Its why Wenger made the risk of going even younger.



Porto bought him for cheap but some 3rd party held his rights as well (and still do)

On top of that, he was seen as a bit of a fallen star at the time, he didnt set the Argentine league on fire like people had expected. I used to watch him at River and thought dude was overrated. It could have been a good gamble to take him if we believed in his talents tho.


Nasri and Hleb went for about 12 million in a pre City, Barca and Madrid mega TV contract world. That is at least 20 million now. Eduardo was not an undervalued signing no matter how much you try to project the future with him, I am only talking about at the time of signing.

Ba is a guy no one wanted, and presumably no one still wants, because of his knee issue. Cisse is kind of shit, imo but he did score goals last season for them. I think a better example from Newcastle is Cabaye and Ben Arfa. We all know why Ben Arfa went for cheap, but Cabaye was a great deal. A guy like Ba and Ben Arfa are big time gambles because of their injury or mercurial natures.

The club did not make an error going too young, the error was believing that those young kids would think of the club before money. It clearly failed.


the club has boosted its earning, but not to the extent of United, Chelsea, and City.

And Fulham, Villa, Everton? really? Everton's best player was a £16 million signing. The rest of those guys wouldnt get into our first team. Same with Fulham and especially Villa. Villa tried to run with the big boys but MON had no idea what he was doing and now they are rebuilding again.

and again, Verm, Sagna, and Eduardo types were not undervalued players. Not in the slightest.

As said before, Hazard, Lucas and all the other big names touted that we have no chance have getting have always existed. Before Ronaldinho moved to Barca, we had no chance of getting him. When Robinho was out growing the Brazilian league we had no chance. Same goes for players like Veron, Ballack, Crespo…they were always bound for big clubs and we never had a chance because they were out of our price range.

As for all this talk about undervalue, it doesn't matter. They're still the sort of players we've needed over the years to perform at a consistent level. The young players we've had haven't been able to perform at the required standard over a season and it has cost us. It was the wrong strategy because they had a losers mentality and didn't know how to win. We valued youth over experience and that was where we went wrong. Wenger went too far down the road and forgot how we were able to build a championship winning team when he first arrived. Without the old English players like Adams, Dixon and co, the new foreign players would have been soft and never would have had that strong mentality. We're now starting to see a bit more of balance now with experienced players talking on the pitch and giving orders. We didn't have that with the kids because none of them knew how to lead.

As for looking down at clubs like Everton, Fulham…they've had a few players that could have done a job for us. Fellani, young Arteta, Dembele, Baines, Pineaar, any of their keepers over Almunia….we'd have been better off buying a players that work hard and are consistent over young inconsistent players that may or may not turn into world beaters. Most of the kids we've developed have gone to lower league and small clubs and aren't even the main stars for them either. I think we'd have done a lot better if we had experienced players playing alongside Cesc, Nasri and RVP. Loyalty and money wasn't to blame for all cases. Most of them jumped ship because they knew we were a club that wasn't going anywhere. They joined us because we had players like Henry and Bergkamp and because we had a history of winning and suddenly that all changed.

[IBK]

you are saying this with hindsight, my statement is pertaining to the year 2009 when those two players signed their contract raises. In 2009, those players would have got nice raises elsewhere. You have to remember that Denilson played pretty good at 21 years old for a side that made the CL semifinal and was a top 4 side in hte premiership. Bendtner was rumored to have interested clubs like Bayern, Inter, and Milan before we gave him the new contract.


now this is an entirely different conversation, the club did (maybe still does) offer bigger wages to guys who are teenagers. I remember Traore was all set to move to Benfica, but Benfica wanted to only offer half the wages Arsenal were paying him. I think he was on 624,000 a year, and Benfica wanted to offer 300,000 a year. Ramsey is another example of that.

I don't think its necessarily an issue of overpaying our players per se - because as mastermind says, generally speaking we have to offer contracts to persuade promising young players to stay. We don't do it out of the goodness of our hearts, we do it because the club depends on developing rather than purchasing talent. It might be a valid argument to say that we trust in the potential of too many prospects, but I don;t think we can be criticised for overpaying per se.

[Power n Glory]

This is totally backwards because you don't need to prop up the wages of players like Denilson, Bendy, Wilshere, Ramsey or Ox to stay! Nobody is coming in for them and they're smart enough to know that they're at a club that will give them a chance to play regualr first team football. No other top Prem club is going to offer that and they themselves know this because we have a reputation of giving young players a shot.

And with that argument and defending such a backwards policy, it makes no sense to then look at the top performers of the club, the guys that get us Champs League football and then talk about greed and disloyalty. The young kids won't leave because of their wages, they'll complain and leave if they're not given a fair shot to play first team football. Bendy, Merida, Vela, Pennant, Quincy....you can look at Coquelin' recent complaints and he mentions nothing about wages. Chesney threatened to leave if he wasn't given a shot a couple of years ago.

It's never about wages for these guys. But it can boil down to that for some of our established stars and it baffles me that some could suggest that it's okay to pay over the odds for the players that aren't on anyones radar while important first teamers walk season after season because the club aren't smart enough to offer a cash incentive to our top performers. It's backwards. Ice, I don't understand how you can have so much venom for guys like RVP, Theo, Cesc...etc yet excuse us paying over the odds for players who haven't even contributed half of what these guys have over the years.

[gooners]

I don't understand how you can have so much venom for guys like RVP, Theo, Cesc...etc yet excuse us paying over the odds for players who haven't even contributed half of what these guys have over the years.

wait till those players decide they've had enough of the policies that many many of their predecessors took issue with! -- you know, when the replay button is pressed again. :good:

[mastermind84]

This is totally backwards because you don't need to prop up the wages of players like Denilson, Bendy, Wilshere, Ramsey or Ox to stay! Nobody is coming in for them and they're smart enough to know that they're at a club that will give them a chance to play regualr first team football. No other top Prem club is going to offer that and they themselves know this because we have a reputation of giving young players a shot.
there is a market outside of the premiership.

and yes, teams were coming for those players at the time they signed contracts. Its not about propping up wages, its about keeping up with other CL teams. If you drop the salary of middle/young players (and I knew it was going to come to bashing the wages of middle players) then they are going to leave.

that doesnt dismiss that we need to pay more for top players tho. I have never said that. If you have a world class striker like RVP, you have to at least give him a tough decision financially. Clearly the club did not do that.


And with that argument and defending such a backwards policy, it makes no sense to then look at the top performers of the club, the guys that get us Champs League football and then talk about greed and disloyalty. The young kids won't leave because of their wages, they'll complain and leave if they're not given a fair shot to play first team football. Bendy, Merida, Vela, Pennant, Quincy....you can look at Coquelin' recent complaints and he mentions nothing about wages. Chesney threatened to leave if he wasn't given a shot a couple of years ago.
there is nothing backward about it. You keep saying it, but look at United, Chelsea, City, etc. Their middle tier and young players get paid a lot too. Apparently Daniel Welbeck and Tom Cleverly are getting 60k a week. What have those two done in their careers so far, especially Cleverly?

Chesney can threaten to leave because he can get that salary somewhere else.


It's never about wages for these guys. But it can boil down to that for some of our established stars and it baffles me that some could suggest that it's okay to pay over the odds for the players that aren't on anyones radar while important first teamers walk season after season because the club aren't smart enough to offer a cash incentive to our top performers. It's backwards. Ice, I don't understand how you can have so much venom for guys like RVP, Theo, Cesc...etc yet excuse us paying over the odds for players who haven't even contributed half of what these guys have over the years.well you have made that up, no one has said that except you in this post.

[GP]

Top Post there. 100% correct.

[Power n Glory]

there is a market outside of the premiership.

and yes, teams were coming for those players at the time they signed contracts. Its not about propping up wages, its about keeping up with other CL teams. If you drop the salary of middle/young players (and I knew it was going to come to bashing the wages of middle players) then they are going to leave.

that doesnt dismiss that we need to pay more for top players tho. I have never said that. If you have a world class striker like RVP, you have to at least give him a tough decision financially. Clearly the club did not do that.


there is nothing backward about it. You keep saying it, but look at United, Chelsea, City, etc. Their middle tier and young players get paid a lot too. Apparently Daniel Welbeck and Tom Cleverly are getting 60k a week. What have those two done in their careers so far, especially Cleverly?

Chesney can threaten to leave because he can get that salary somewhere else.

well you have made that up, no one has said that except you in this post.

Check the post history of the guys cosigning your argument and see what they have to say about players like RVP, Walcott, Song, Nasri…..it's not made up. They applaud us paying the 'market value' for young players but not for our seniors. That doesn't make sense to me. Check it out for yourself.

Also, has it ever occurred to you that we're responsible for inflating the market for young players? I remember, years ago, Benetiz was saying Liverpool couldn't offer the sort of wages Arsenal were offering to young players. I laughed when I first heard the claim, but it makes a lot of sense now.

Man Utd's players, according to this article, they're paying Cleverley, Smalling and Jones £40,000k a week. It's similar to what we pay for some of our young players, but there are guys in the squad that are supposed to be £50 - £60k a week as well.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2047197/Manchester-United-reward-Tom-Cleverley-new-deal-2015.html

But as you've rightly argued, we were one of the first to go younger and look for fresh new talent. Most clubs were looking for established stars that could jump straight into the first team. Man Utd have only just started to tighten their belts. Guys like Smalling and Jones are new additions and fit into their new long term strategy because they know they can't spend crazy money like they used to. Ramsey and Ox snubbed Man Utd in favour of us and maybe now so maybe they have decided to bring their wages up a bit more to compete with us. As said, this is new territory and we were the first to go this route and now other clubs are starting to follow. They're practically forced to because of the homegrown player rules and FFP ruling.

Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with us bringing in players like Ox, Ramsey, Wilshere, Walcott, but we had a serious imbalance. It was to the extent that we couldn't even play half of the players we bought and would have to play them out of position just so they get first team experience, or we're having to loan them out. A good chunk of the youth that played during the Chelsea Carling Cup final era have all left and things haven't gone according to plan. We should have had a team built from that phase. But now, it looks like we have the right balance with Wilshere, Gibbs, and Coquelin, playing alongside experienced players like Podolski, Merts, Giroud, Gervinho, Sagna and Arteta. The balance looks a lot better now, so it's not all bad news.

[IBK]

This is totally backwards because you don't need to prop up the wages of players like Denilson, Bendy, Wilshere, Ramsey or Ox to stay! Nobody is coming in for them and they're smart enough to know that they're at a club that will give them a chance to play regualr first team football. No other top Prem club is going to offer that and they themselves know this because we have a reputation of giving young players a shot.

And with that argument and defending such a backwards policy, it makes no sense to then look at the top performers of the club, the guys that get us Champs League football and then talk about greed and disloyalty. The young kids won't leave because of their wages, they'll complain and leave if they're not given a fair shot to play first team football. Bendy, Merida, Vela, Pennant, Quincy....you can look at Coquelin' recent complaints and he mentions nothing about wages. Chesney threatened to leave if he wasn't given a shot a couple of years ago.

It's never about wages for these guys. But it can boil down to that for some of our established stars and it baffles me that some could suggest that it's okay to pay over the odds for the players that aren't on anyones radar while important first teamers walk season after season because the club aren't smart enough to offer a cash incentive to our top performers. It's backwards. Ice, I don't understand how you can have so much venom for guys like RVP, Theo, Cesc...etc yet excuse us paying over the odds for players who haven't even contributed half of what these guys have over the years.

I think you have misunderstood the point. As Masterminded has explained, we are talking about the time when either these players are signed, or when they are offered contract extensions. It just doesn't make sense to argue on the one hand that the club and the board are obsessed with making money rather than achieving success on the pitch, and on the other hand to suggest that they are paying over the odds for young players and their subsequent wages for the hell of it. Any contract extensions that these players are given are on the basis of the market, and either the existing or potential demand from elsewhere for their services.

It is misleading to apply hindsight, to point to the current crop of players who have underperformed and can't be shifted because of their wage demands and to conclude that we paid over the odds at contract time. This is the same as looking at Cesc or RVP at the date they left the club and concluding that their original contracts were too low. Generally, players are paid what the market dictates at the time they sign.

What Arsenal, as a developmental club, may have done is to stick too many eggs in one basket - hence the current glut of difficult to shift players. What they cannot be accused fairly of is willfully paying over the odds at contract time.

The other issue that needs to be remembered is that we are Arsenal centric, and dwell on our players. Every club in the league has players whom their managers hoped would succeed, but who have failed to do so. We may have more than most, but in a sense that is because of our fairly unique position - rich enough to be able to pay for prospects - not rich enough to reward the best talent. Sure the club can be criticised in hindsight for taking too many risks on unproven players, but its a criticism that relies largely on hindsight; forgets that despite noteable failures, one of the manager's greatest talents is creating top talent, and ignores the inescapable fact that players sales are and have been crucial to the club's financial stability.

Finally, I am a football fan and have venom for players that are disloyal to my club. Simple, really. I have always said that its a free world and players are entitled to chase whatever money is available. Doesn't mean that I like it, though.

[Power n Glory]

As said, we practically created this market. We were aggressive with our approach and search for young players when nobody really cared that much about it. There weren't that many clubs doing what we do now and now most are having to play catch up because new Fifa and FA rules have made it that way. We weren't paying out of the goodness of our own hearts but thought we were being smart by paying young players with longevity low first team wages. We may pay more but we get more bang for our our buck, as they say.

It's not hindsight because a lot of us have said we need to a balance of youth and experience for ages. Now that we're seeing our wage bill sky rocket and it's clear that this stratgey doesn't come cheap, we're right to question the logic in all this. Certain players have never convinced the fans of their quality and the fact that we can't shift them on to other clubs is further proof. It's not hindsight at all. These discussion have been going on for years and now we have reached another layer of problems. On the pitch, our strategy seemed naïve and shortsighted and now it looks that way for our longterm financial strategy. I mean, what the heck is going on? It seems like we've been sold a crock of crap from these guys.

I'm a football fan too, obviously and I'm pissed about the way the club is run. Forget players leaving, I used to get upset about that each summer when I was younger but our problems now seem a lot bigger. I can understand why people get upset when players leave for selfish financial reason and lie about never wanting to leave. But we're now talking about a deeper level of deception here. The whole purpose for moving to the Emirates was based on a lie and the fans have been bamboozled. That pisses me off more than any one player leaving will. I used to think we're a club doing things the right way, but this looks like an elaborate long con.

[Kano]

I'm a football fan too, obviously and I'm pissed about the way the club is run. Forget players leaving, I used to get upset about that each summer when I was younger but our problems now seem a lot bigger. I can understand why people get upset when players leave for selfish financial reason and lie about never wanting to leave. But we're now talking about a deeper level of deception here. The whole purpose for moving to the Emirates was based on a lie and the fans have been bamboozled. That pisses me off more than any one player leaving will. I used to think we're a club doing things the right way, but this looks like an elaborate long con.
this is exactly it. once the next stage of securing bigger all singing, all dancing investments has been wrapped up, watch that share price grow and we will be flogged off to some other set of owners when the time is right to maximise the sell value. end of year accounts mean fuck all in the bigger scheme and analysis will always bring up either a positive or negative spin, depending on who is selling it to us. the whole club has become rotten from the root upwards and all we can do is sit back, watch and hope for the best.

[Xhaka Can’t]

Check the post history of the guys cosigning your argument and see what they have to say about players like RVP, Walcott, Song, Nasri…..it's not made up. They applaud us paying the 'market value' for young players but not for our seniors. That doesn't make sense to me. Check it out for yourself.



Why should he check the post history? If you make an accusation - back it up.

[Power n Glory]

Why should he check the post history? If you make an accusation - back it up.

Because that is what it is there for and it's not as if I'm trying to catch anyone out. Ice and GP are more than welcome to explain their views right here in this thread. Ice has already done so in fact. It's not an accusation either. If anything, I've been accused of making something up, when I know what certain posters have said in the past.

[Xhaka Can’t]

Nah. If you are going to attribute things to people in such a general way, it is up to you to be more specific, rather than require someone to trawl through a bunch of posts from unspecified people. If you make an assertion, back it up.

[Power n Glory]

Nah. If you are going to attribute things to people in such a general way, it is up to you to be more specific, rather than require someone to trawl through a bunch of posts from unspecified people. If you make an assertion, back it up.

No. They are big boys, they know what they have said and they don't need you to fight their battles. If Mastermind doesn't want to check for it, that's his choice.

[mastermind84]

Check the post history of the guys cosigning your argument and see what they have to say about players like RVP, Walcott, Song, Nasri…..it's not made up. They applaud us paying the 'market value' for young players but not for our seniors. That doesn't make sense to me. Check it out for yourself.

Also, has it ever occurred to you that we're responsible for inflating the market for young players? I remember, years ago, Benetiz was saying Liverpool couldn't offer the sort of wages Arsenal were offering to young players. I laughed when I first heard the claim, but it makes a lot of sense now.
of course it occurred to me, thats why I said it. I was implying that. You can say it was wrong to do that, but if we dont then we dont sign players like Cesc, Ramsey, and Clichy. That was the untapped market we exploited until other clubs caught wise to what we were doing.


Man Utd's players, according to this article, they're paying Cleverley, Smalling and Jones £40,000k a week. It's similar to what we pay for some of our young players, but there are guys in the squad that are supposed to be £50 - £60k a week as well.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2047197/Manchester-United-reward-Tom-Cleverley-new-deal-2015.html
I dont understand the "50 to 60k a week as well comment." Does that apply to us or United?

and you see what I mean about other clubs doing the same. United had to do that to either sign those guys as well. Look how much Macheda is on as well.




But as you've rightly argued, we were one of the first to go younger and look for fresh new talent. Most clubs were looking for established stars that could jump straight into the first team. Man Utd have only just started to tighten their belts. Guys like Smalling and Jones are new additions and fit into their new long term strategy because they know they can't spend crazy money like they used to. Ramsey and Ox snubbed Man Utd in favour of us and maybe now so maybe they have decided to bring their wages up a bit more to compete with us. As said, this is new territory and we were the first to go this route and now other clubs are starting to follow. They're practically forced to because of the homegrown player rules and FFP ruling.
exactly


Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with us bringing in players like Ox, Ramsey, Wilshere, Walcott, but we had a serious imbalance. It was to the extent that we couldn't even play half of the players we bought and would have to play them out of position just so they get first team experience, or we're having to loan them out. A good chunk of the youth that played during the Chelsea Carling Cup final era have all left and things haven't gone according to plan. We should have had a team built from that phase. But now, it looks like we have the right balance with Wilshere, Gibbs, and Coquelin, playing alongside experienced players like Podolski, Merts, Giroud, Gervinho, Sagna and Arteta. The balance looks a lot better now, so it's not all bad news.
and like I said earlier, the club foolishly thought "loyalty>money"

and because of that, we lost a generation of players.

[Xhaka Can’t]

No. They are big boys, they know what they have said and they don't need you to fight their battles. If Mastermind doesn't want to check for it, that's his choice.

I'm not fighting a battle for anyone, spouting off generalities of how you interpret statements without even specifying where the statements you are using to support your argument come from simply means you have no argument.

Using your approach, I can make any ludicrous claim I want to support my view and then require whoever I'm arguing with to go through the Board to disprove it.

[Power n Glory]

I'm not fighting a battle for anyone, spouting off generalities of how you interpret statements without even specifying where the statements you are using to support your argument come from simply means you have no argument.

Using your approach, I can make any ludicrous claim I want to support my view and then require whoever I'm arguing with to go through the Board to disprove it.

Mate, let's the cut the post etiquette nonsense. If Ice and GP tried to deny what they've said then I'd see a reason to find their posts as evidence. they're not, Ice has defended his position, we move on.

[Power n Glory]

of course it occurred to me, thats why I said it. I was implying that. You can say it was wrong to do that, but if we dont then we dont sign players like Cesc, Ramsey, and Clichy. That was the untapped market we exploited until other clubs caught wise to what we were doing.


I dont understand the "50 to 60k a week as well comment." Does that apply to us or United?

and you see what I mean about other clubs doing the same. United had to do that to either sign those guys as well. Look how much Macheda is on as well.




exactly


and like I said earlier, the club foolishly thought "loyalty>money"

and because of that, we lost a generation of players.


The £50k - £60k comment applies to our players.

I agree, money doesn't equal loyalty, especially for young players who just want to make it on the world stage and show their talent. At this stage in their career, they'll sign for anyone that will offer a good education and give them a chance to play. Money isn't a huge factor unless we're talking silly sums. As a young player, the choice should be obvious if it came down to choosing between us, Chelsea, City and Man Utd.

[mastermind84]

The £50k - £60k comment applies to our players.
it applies to their players as well
remember United paid 20 million for a 19 year old Anderson.

in fact, if you look at United's squad htey have a lot of players they gave big contracts to at similar ages to our players. And because of that, they are still playing Scholes and Giggs.


I agree, money doesn't equal loyalty, especially for young players who just want to make it on the world stage and show their talent. At this stage in their career, they'll sign for anyone that will offer a good education and give them a chance to play. Money isn't a huge factor unless we're talking silly sums. As a young player, the choice should be obvious if it came down to choosing between us, Chelsea, City and Man Utd.

I disagree with that, players want money and money first. Regardless of age, especially now since they can get mega contracts at earlier ages like Hazard.

[Power n Glory]

it applies to their players as well
remember United paid 20 million for a 19 year old Anderson.

in fact, if you look at United's squad htey have a lot of players they gave big contracts to at similar ages to our players. And because of that, they are still playing Scholes and Giggs.



I disagree with that, players want money and money first. Regardless of age, especially now since they can get mega contracts at earlier ages like Hazard.

But how much are Anderson and Nani earning a week?

I don't agree with that otherwise the kids like Vela, Bendy..etc. Coquelin is another example.They'd have sat on our bench and collected a pay check since we pay a lot of money for our young players. I think most young players are more concerned about playing time and games. Diarra is another example. He was at Chelsea but was fuming because he wasn't getting game time. He left for us and the same happened, so he left again. It's not always about money.

[GP]

it applies to their players as well
remember United paid 20 million for a 19 year old Anderson.

in fact, if you look at United's squad htey have a lot of players they gave big contracts to at similar ages to our players. And because of that, they are still playing Scholes and Giggs.


I disagree with that, players want money and money first. Regardless of age, especially now since they can get mega contracts at earlier ages like Hazard.

Good post.

[Xhaka Can’t]

I'm not fighting a battle for anyone, spouting off generalities of how you interpret statements without even specifying where the statements you are using to support your argument come from simply means you have no argument.

Using your approach, I can make any ludicrous claim I want to support my view and then require whoever I'm arguing with to go through the Board to disprove it.


Latest Reputation Received (10 point(s) total)
05-10-2012 03:54 PM
Thread: A breakdown of Arsenal's money schemes
shut up dickhead

:haha: I wonder who this brave soul is.

[GP]

:haha: I wonder who this brace soul is.

shut up dickhead

[Xhaka Can’t]

I knew it!

[V-Pig]

I cunningly disguised it by becoming ever-so-slightly sloppy on my grammar.

Shut up, dickhead.

[Xhaka Can’t]

I knew it!

[GP]

you shutup dick head haha lol jk

[V-Pig]

you shutup dick head haha lol jk

This post <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Classic insults

[McNamara That Ghost...]

Can we get back to debate? Thanks.

[V-Pig]

Can we get back to debate? Thanks.

(Maccy <<< Classic Mods) tbf

[GP]

Maccysaur used Mod Power.


It's super effective.