:blink:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dumbledore
The other day you made a post saying how big our net spend has been.
Printable View
:blink:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dumbledore
The other day you made a post saying how big our net spend has been.
Ffffffiiiiiiiiggggggghhhhhhttttttttt!!!!!!!
No I didn't :blink:Quote:
Originally Posted by Letters
Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ
Vermaelen.
I win again.
Vermaelen was sold for £15 millionQuote:
Originally Posted by Dumbledore
That’s why I said over 15 million
I believe it was £15m + £1.
He actually posted 6 clubs I think (all big clubs) and ours was the only positive one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Letters
You also believe that your dad is living with Father Christmas and the Easter Bunny in imagination landQuote:
Originally Posted by Dumbledore
Rather than in prison where he will never get out because he’s the biggest nonce case in British history
Letters:haha:Quote:
Originally Posted by Özim
Just pack it in mate, you're done.
:rose:
If we take the last two transfer windows we are definitely upQuote:
Originally Posted by Özim
But take the last five years, our net spend is about 200 million.
The argument was always made by Wenger and his defenders that he couldn’t compete but he’s had plenty of money to spend and he’s wasted the vast majority of it.
Wasted a big chunk of it on Lacazette too, if current rumour and speculation is to be believed. That claim we signed Laca instead of Auba because we were penny pinching - if that's true and we have ended up with both anyway, dear oh dear. That would be mismanagement on an epic scale.
Until you have the actual figures for what we earn from the stadium, the sponsors, transfers and actual expenditure, it's not worth trying to argue that we've spent all our money. Whenever we don't spend as expected, these stories and theories start floating around despite revenue going up and up. It was the same when we only signed Ozil and again when we only signed Cech.Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ
As seen from the report, the manager covered for Sanchez when reports flew about a training ground bust up with Kos. People thought Henry was stirring when he noticed something wasn't right with that goal celebration. The team tried to cover it up with their IG and Twitter accounts. Nature of the business. Cover the bullshit up.
So.... these rumours of us not having money are just cover stories for Wenger. Someone is feeding us bullshit because if any of it's true, that last ditch attempt to sign Lemar or us being close to signing Mbappe last summer were fantasy tales spun to con the fans.
We have more money than any other club in the world. We saw that report a while back, we have around a quarter billion in cash and have done for several seasons. But we can't spend any of it because it's need for "cashflow". It's not clear whose cashflow they are talking about. And there's all the extra TV money and sponsorships, that would have covered the extra transfer expenditures. We're the richest club in the world because we work at it, we make it a priority. If they started claiming this poverty bullshit again then only Ty will believe it.
http://www.goonersweb.co.uk/forum/sh...23#post4435223Quote:
Originally Posted by Dumbledore
:coffee:
:haha:Quote:
Originally Posted by Letters
Letters 1 - 0 Dumbledore
That doesn't mean we have a high net spend, it's just higher than theirs:coffee:Quote:
Originally Posted by Letters
Letters :bow:Quote:
Originally Posted by The Emirates Gallactico
Dumblebore :pal:
I didn’t say we had no money in fact i stated we have about 180million in cash reserve and yes that’s before other income.Quote:
Originally Posted by Delusions of Grandeur
The sponsorship deal and the stadium naming deal will bolster our finances, but a Club our size will have outgoings. We have paid off a lot of the loan we took out to build the stadium but we are still paying a mortgage essentially.
So no not all the money we make on profit can be spent on transfers. Plus when the club say there is no money available it means they allocate a certain amount for a transfer budget.
Anyway if you listen to the Ornstein interview, he says it’s Wenger who claims there is money to spend but the club that say otherwise
Christ alive, my brother thinks Xhaka will come good. If it was 12 months earlier it might be tenable to think that way but not now
:lol: Do you believe that?Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ
Was thinking the same, there really doesn’t appear to be much strategy in place, it’s all so reactive and done on a whim. Now we have both strikers worth over 100m, someone’s nose is going to be put out of joint.Quote:
Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn
I don’t know what you’re askingQuote:
Originally Posted by Delusions of Grandeur
Are you asking me if Ornstein has just made that up?
Like I say I’m sure there is money to spend and actually it probably makes sense that probably after he’s badly spent so much of it that the club is probably more inclined to be parsimonious than the manager.
Wenger has been reluctant to spend at times because he is a natural prevaricater, is obssessed with getting value because he thinks like an economics graduate (which he is) and doesn’t want to upset members of the squad he likes.
But let’s be fair, a lot of the money he has spent has been wasted. So the club might think, do we really want him spending more than necessary. I know Wenger has a lot of control but I don’t think it extends to setting his own transfer budget
I didn't ask if Ornstein made it up but you've answered the question and must know it’s ridiculous to believe it's Wenger the one wanting to spend.Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ
PR games. Wenger has contacts. The club has contacts. I don't know which side of the fence Ornstein is on, but I know the fans are being fed bullshit.
I don’t think Wenger is especially bothered I certainly don’t think it’s a source of tension between him and the club
All I’m saying is that if the club was purely spinning for Wenger, wouldn’t he also just say there is no money?
It’s quite possible Wenger is briefing against the club, they’ve done it to him in the past
Ornstein I doubt is on any side, he just reports what he’s told. In fact the only time he has even ventured an opinion is about the debacle of August
My own opinion is that there is money, we don’t have a Scrooge McDuck vault that the board take turns in swimming around in. But irregardless Wenger is given a set transfer budget to work with, now in the past had Wenger wanted he could have made a plea to the club to use that but he chose not to. And now I think it unlikely the club would give it to him if he did ask.
Sven had to convince Wenger to sign Aubameyang. It was Ivan and Sven out in Dortmund getting the deal done. But we're supposed to believe Wenger wanted Aubameyang all along but it was the club pushing for Lacazette?
I don't believe these supposed murmurs behind the scenes of Wenger being denied. Whenever Wenger has a press conference, how he chooses to speak of teams that spend lots of money suggest he thinks of it as an unfair advantage. Also, from his own mouth, he said he'd have the final say and that Gazidis has nothing to do with transfers. Obvious bullshit. I really have no idea what's going on but we've got too many people trying to feed the fans their version of events with a spin.
I don’t disagree.
All I’m going by is what Ornstein has stated which you jumped on, I’m speculating as to the reasons why. What I’m saying is the money was in the budget to sign Aubemeyang, but the club spent ages trying to offer less than what Dortmund wanted for the player and it’s the club that told Ornstein that there was no money for the transfer fee and wages to make another significant signing.
What I’m saying is that it’s possible that Wenger has claimed there is money to spend to contradict the board to suggest that it’s not his fault that things are going so badly, I’ve not stated for a second that Wenger is more willing to spend the money.
And the club may possibly be claiming that there is no money because it doesn’t want to break its own structure to prop up a manager they know is failing.
It’s as you say PR and bullshit, what I can gleam is that there more money than the club is willing to spend but it’s certainly not in the United/City brackets.
And to pre empt a response I’m not saying you are either
Also I’d remind you that you dismissed out of hand that anyone but Wenger was involved in our January transfer dealings.
As I said at the times the sale of Walcott and Coquelin were dithering free, and it seems clear that the wage bill was being freed up.
Was what happened all planned for at the start of the window? No. But opportunities were taken when they arose
It's not the Ornstein post that bothers me. I jumped from the exchange you had with Cripps which sounds as if you were saying we needed to sell in order to buy.Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ
We shouldn't have to dip into our cash reserves since the stadium pays for itself and we're able to generate so much from sponsors. That's the part of the narrative I'm not buying into and that's when you brought up Ornstein.Quote:
We have about 180million in cash reserve but no business is ever going to blow its entire cash reserve
Plus unless we clear the wage bill first, that money has to be used towards wages as well
Plus there is the signing on fee and agents fees....the actual transfer fee to buy a player out of his contract is often the tip of an iceberg.
I would say if we clear out more of the shit in the summer off the wage bill and maybe get some transfer fees for some of them, we can spend most of that amount and still strengthen the squad quite a bit.
We'll see what happens with this supposed power struggle. All will be revealed at some point. I don't think it's a case of the club not allowing Wenger to spend because they've lost faith in him.
I said there was no evidence of anyone else being involved with the sales of Coquelin and Walcott. Sven is a scout. He has a connection with Dortmund so it makes sense for him to be involved with that transfer. The Greek kid could have also been someone he's had an eye on and recommended or backed as a good signing. That's work already done.Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ
I don't think our scout has looked through our finances and picked out players that we should sell. There were murmurs of a clear out during the summer before these appointments and it started with Gabriel, Gibbs, Perez and we've been looking to offload Debuchy for ages, Chambers was also meant to go too. The process started before these arrivals.
I also said I'm not jumping to any conclusions without further evidence. I haven't seen anything yet to suggest that someone new has come in and told Wenger who needs to be sold.
I just remembered we bought Perez last year. Of course there was no plan.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Overmars
The Emirates stadium deal brings us in thirty million a year, in the grand scheme of things that’s chicken feed. Of course that’s just one revenue stream
But if you consider that if you want to sign one 50 million player, in addition you have the adds on, the wages which if you are not adding to your current wage bill is another 40 million over four years...and you are looking at up to 100 million (if you don’t sell that player in that time)
And When I spoke about having to sell players it’s more about clearing the wage bill. Santi Cazorla and Cech for instance we will probably lose for nothing but the wage bill gets lowered exponentially.
Basically you have no clue what you're arguing and you're just spouting circular hypothetical crap as usual.Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ
:tiphat:
Why do you bother trying to reason with the simpleton? :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Delusions of Grandeur
Only a tit would genuinely believe we have no money :lol:
This is the fantasy economics and speculation I wanted to avoid. You're contradicting yourself slightly.Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ
Based off these reports, we supposedly earned £142m last season off league position and TV money alone.
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/f...-a7748851.html
How is it that we're in 5th for prize money and tv money received last summer but 15th when it comes to net spend during the summer?
So how much are Liverpool and Everton spending on players? Did Everton blow all their Lukkau money on Sigurdsson? So it wasn't £45m they spent...it was closer to £75m- 85m? But then again, they're also paying Rooney's wages, Theo Walcott plus his wages...would that mean they've paid close to £60m for Theo? What about Keane, Pickford, Klaasenn and Tosun? Does the £20m - £25m they paid for each of those players really work out to be £40m - £50m a pop? That's working out to be over £300m spent in season by Everton! :lol:
When you apply these crazy economics to other teams besides Arsenal, you start to see how it doesn't add up. Just look at the net spend summer league table. Also, I don't think a club hands the player the full 4 years worth of their salary right up front. That makes no sense and why the calculations are all wrong in the first place.
You've made this very same stance when we signed Ozil. Speculating that we may have blown the entire budget on one player, had nothing left and could be in trouble. Next year we went on to sign Sanchez, Welbeck, Gabriel, Chambers, Ospina and the rest is history.
The club will have our heads spinning trying to debate this and work out what's going on whilst pocketing the money. Shit, maybe it's Wenger and his cronies swallowing up the money. We need factor that in when playing fantasy economics.
They produce a set of audited accounts every year. It’s no secret.
So the club would not have been bothered at all if Wenger had not sold Coquelin or Walcott in addition to the wages of Ozil, Aubemeyang and Mkhitaryan and transfer fees for Aubemeyang....Especially when the wage bill going into January wasn’t exponentially smaller than that of Chelsea/City/United.Quote:
Originally Posted by Delusions of Grandeur
It was you who stated that I’d ascribed these powers to Mislintat (he’s a scout, his job is to reccomend players) I stated that Wenger hasn’t been left to his own devices in terms of outgoings, just as much as it’s been proven a certainty that he’s not being left to his own devices on players coming in.
Everton are 49.9% owned by Farhad Moshiri, it’s fair to say they had more to spend than the proceeds of the Lukaku saleQuote:
Originally Posted by Delusions of Grandeur
That’s a very Letters style answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ
http://www.totalsportek.com/money/ar...ayer-salaries/
This is the Arsenal wage bill as of Feb 1st 2018 and that I’ve worked out comes to £101,320,000 a year
This is about in line with Liverpool and not significantly less than Chelsea’s wage bill
Any big name signing we make from now on is going to demand 100-150k a week minimum
Everton might have spend more than us on transfers but their wage bill is significantly smaller than ours (quite possibly Walcott and Rooney are their only 100k + players currently)
This also doesn’t figure in bonus clauses in the contract
I’ve never made the argument that we don’t have money. The amount we both spend on wages and actually as I stated above in the transfer market in the last five years suggests otherwise. But it’s done to a set structure, which might all well be bullshit compared to what the club makes. But it’s equally bullshit to make an assessment on what the club can spend compared to what it has spent by one summers transfer spending.