A breakdown of Arsenal's money schemes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ice Berg Kamping

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:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mastermind84

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

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:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

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:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mastermind84

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!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mastermind84

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.

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.