So you think they are not told and its just sprung on them?Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss
Printable View
So you think they are not told and its just sprung on them?Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss
Said it might not be true as i had not seen the link and expected you to post it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
Go read Le Grove. Google Le Grove and find the AGM one. This ipod is too fiddly to copy and paste links.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie the Gooner
Has very little to do with them, so yep.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie the Gooner
Unless Wenger specifically states it elsewhere, this is what I think Le Grove is talking about (~10:40 mark)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrNXDAZIYZQ
From that alone it's difficult to ascertain how much involvement he had in the decision, but given his justification of it he is at the very least outwardly complicit.Quote:
"I know as well that in the modern world ticket pricing is a problem. We spoke about that alot at the board before that decision has been made, but just to keep the players we have to put our wages up so high that the financial situation becomes more and more difficlut for us"
Why is Wenger involved in deciding ticket pricing? Wenger speaks about the need to keep hold of players in the face of spiralling wage demands. It's self-evident that money affects the ability to build the team. Whether that is justification for involvement, however large or small it may be, I neither know enough to care or care enough to know.
The question in my mind is why?
Why is he talking about the need of extra funds to service player wages when we know that:
a) We have a combined Wage and Transfer budget
b) Funds garnered from players sales are reserved for this budget
c) We started the summer with a £30-£50m 'warchest' (speculatively)
d) We made a transfer profit and we didn't even manage to spend that
With gates stable at around £93m a price rise of 6.5% is little more than £6m. A sum that SwissRamble claims could easily have been offset had one of the minted board members swallowed the £3m in fees associated with Kroenke's buyout.
So why the line about needing a paltry £6m for wages when we did not even spend our transfer surplus let alone the supposed warchest?
And at the AGM why wouldn't they talk about about Tom Fox's bonus or what the criteria for it was?
Tom Fox, if you need reminding is Commercial Director, the guy who on seeing the 40,000 waiting list for season tickets said “As a US sports executive… you think, you’re not charging enough for tickets.”
Both Wenger and Gazidis have spoken about the long discussions over the ticket price hike, presumably to propogate the idea that it was not a decision taken lightly. Then again, maybe they were undecided as to how much they could get away with.
Whether or not Wenger 'should' be involve in pricing strategy, the point about whether Fergie or Mancini would be involved...they're not involved because they're too thick to be involved. Or, at least, there's never a consideration to involve them because they don't have the credentials to be involved. Wenger, on the other hand, is clued up on economics.
Too much is being made of it...as it so often is with the pathetic false outrage from fans when we don't have a clue what's going on.
:gp:Quote:
Originally Posted by Fist of Lehmann
That's a good post and hits a few points I'm driving at.
The £6million per year is £60mill plus interest over 10 years. Tidy even if everything else stays flat. Money men won't look at things the same way as fans.
My understanding of the whole story is when Wenger, Dein and rest of board signed up for the stadium they all agreed on not being able to spend for a few seasons, relying heavily on developing youngsters and limited top salaries. We achieved our primary goal of increasing the income from gate fees, how ever to fund the project they got into not so great commercial deals which were while not being high value was structured favorably. Unfortunately what happened next was the advent of Chelsea and a a steep increase in revenues of clubs like Real, Barca and Mancs. A lot of clubs started developing strong international scouting networks as well (not a strong point of English clubs before). The original plan could have been a few years of transition and then returning back to winning some trophies if not world domination. The unexpected events mentioned earlier coupled our inability to increase revenues meant that we not being able to compete with other top teams in terms of wages, gradually dawning on every one that we will develop great players but struggle to hold on to them. This i think is the point of disagreement that Dein had with the board, Dein wanting to get in investors who could help us through. Wenger is from what i gather on the Dein boat. Looks like he wanted t re-jig the whole team retaining only the top players, while the re-jig and and introduction/promotion of some young players worked what didn't work is retaining some Cesc and Nasri. Extending Cesc was always futile he did try for a gentle mans agreement for one season. The real disappointment for Wenger could have been losing out on Nasri and then losing out on Mata(again realiable people claiming we were in for him) due to wages. While we may have budgets to spend 20 to 25 mil on player fee we don't have budgets for huge salary. Despite of this we are still 4th or 5th on the highest salary league, largely as every one knows due to the relatively high average salaries that we play, again a problem when you see that a lot of performers were below average. The AGM has not provided any info in changing any of that. In hind sight we could all point at mistakes that could have been corrected, but i think i will take what has happened in the past 7 years including the lack of trophies.Its not an easy job building a new stadium(as others are finding out) and i think we have done an admirable job. What i'am worried about is in 2014 when we will improve our commercial revenues there is no saying what could happen to the other clubs for all that we know they could improve it further. The expectation on FFP bailing us out is misplaced. We know how Shitty has chosen to interpret it. Wenger has already made a public statement saying UEFA will struggle to enforce this (more of message to our board than anyone else). Footballisticly i would love to see honest, committed performances from the team which i think this squad will give as opposed to some other teams in the past which were supposedly high on quality.
That is a pretty good analysis.
:tiphat:Quote:
Originally Posted by GB.
:gp:Quote:
Originally Posted by gunsofashburtongrove
Yeah, it's a fair enough summary but it misses out the bit about the board not changing direction once it realised the plan was heading for the buffers. And it fails to analyse the train of events that led to them exiting with hundreds of millions of pounds in their pockets at a time when, everyone seems to agree, more cash was needed to compensate for developments in football. What's happened over the last decade is this board has put themselves first, second and third. You just look at what's happened both on and off the pitch and it's self evident. If we don't excoriate them for being totally self centred pricks who are 100% greedy when even 90% greedy would have done us all a favour, then we must say they are the most fortunate beneficiaries of coincidence the world has ever seen.
Interesting and very believable. :good:Quote:
Originally Posted by gunsofashburtongrove
Hundreds of millions of pounds by selling shares, i don't have a problem with that because Kronke who's bought most has not converted his investment into liability for the club. I know Mancs who claim they would have our board over ours. The change in direction as i have mentioned towards the end is something I'am concerned with. I can think of two approachesQuote:
Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn
1. Get more money in read Usmanov types as supported by Dien or as AST has been wanting by way of equity etc
2. Pro-activley identifying commercial opportunities.
The first approach is definitely not what the board is going to take, while Dein might feel that being a consensus builder could moderate the effect of sugar daddy this could completely go out of control. The second is what we are after. Recruiting Ivan and the commercial officer etc are part of that. Unfortunately there are no intermediate targets which would tell us if we are making progress. Its wait and watch. So far some minor sponsorship deals, Asian tour and interpreting a waiting list of 40,000 as demand supply imbalance are their contribution. The first two are small gains out of nothing and the other very effective at antagonizing fans
I felt it was pretty much what I've said in the past, except with fewer paragraphs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coney
1. At the time of the hassle with the board, I'm not sure Dein was in league with Usmanov, rather with Kroenke which would have been less frigthening.Quote:
Originally Posted by gunsofashburtongrove
2. The Emirates sponsorship could have been worse but should have been much better. Manu managed massively more than us, though maybe our refusal to do summer tours to build up more Far Eastern support might have made us less sellable as a name.
1. Yes. But he was representing R&W for some time (not sure if he is ). The gist is i think he is believes in getting an investor in who would spendQuote:
Originally Posted by Coney
2. Yes. Though i don't know the exact details most commercial deals like most player payments are structured -over a period of time etc. The emirates deal was structured favorably as i understand. I don't think the board can be faulted for the earlier deals they took what was best at the time. That said there is a propensity to stick to the plan when the environment around football has changed. The board has to be aggressive and inventive from now on at least
I don't disagree, what I'm saying is the board has chosen to place the entire burden on the fan base while ensuring their own return has been absolute. Was it inconceivable to make an arrangement with Kroenke that saw some of that money come back into the club? Did they really need every last penny for themselves right there and then? It also culled their interest in the club. What's it to them now if the club does well or falls down the table? In fact why are they still here? What's their role? What's their incentive? What do they stand to lose if they do not perform? It seems like they are stuffed shirt just crowding out the good seats. Why? Continuity seems to be the only answer, but why do we need continuity of a failed plan? And it has certainly failed. The intention (allegedly) was to retain our status in the top flight. In spite of Chelsea and City's emergence the plan has rolled on without taking account of these developments. That suggests to me it was never the real plan in the first place. And I agree 100%, there's no way these financial fair play rules are going to change anything. The top people at Arsenal aren't naive enough to think otherwise. So why another bullshit line? I watch what they do and not what they say, and I see them all getting rich while the team struggles against mounting odds. The board has done a very bad job and they've profited handsomely. They should be given zero credit as a result. They rely on the fans 100% but don't have the good grace to let the fans know what their intentions are, beyond some BS matra about "doing things the right way". Do they forget we are a football team and not a branch of M&S? I don't like these people. I don't like them because of what they have done to the club.
Sensible post.Quote:
Originally Posted by gunsofashburtongrove
I see that you don't totally disagree. Your first suggestion is probably what Dein and few other members wanted, not sure what would have been the trade off. I don't think its has been a entirely failed plan though. I have been watching Arsenal since the mid/late 80's . Arsenal were never a big club then, which is not the case now i think the stadium decision was bold and well executed, but the failure in part has been in not adapting to the changed environments.Quote:
Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn
Stan seems to be silent only with the fans
http://cache3.asset-cache.net/xc/130...BC0EF0114804BA
Wonder what he is saying to them lolQuote:
Originally Posted by gunsofashburtongrove
Why does American tailoring look so shite even when its cost a squillion dollars?Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie the Gooner
Wengers like Stfu Stan your runing my team talk time lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Ice Berg Kamping