:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Aubameyang's Wang
Printable View
:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Aubameyang's Wang
I'm done.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aubameyang's Wang
So, we can easily cover the wage bill and have £40m left over, in TV revenue alone.Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ
So what about annual gate recipients and merchandise sales? The clubs general
Commercial value at home and worldwide?
Millions & millions of ££££’s, plus the fact that we always turn a profit every transfer window.
We have plenty of money :good:
You were done hours ago, but as per usual as with many of our debates. You tend to spend half the time trying to debunk points I never even made.
“it’s ridiculous to say Wenger wants to spend money”
Didn’t say that
“Your argument doesn’t work when you consider Everton”
Depends on what Everton are paying their players. Their wage bill comparative to ours is a lot smaller
“Mislintat would only have been responsible in pushing for us to sign Aubemeyang”
Didn’t claim he had anything to do with the player sales
I can see why, I don’t think you will get through on this one :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Delusions of Grandeur
What was our operating profit the last time we published a financial statement (hint it wasn’t 100s of millions)Quote:
Originally Posted by Aubameyang's Wang
A lot of premiership clubs actually operate at a moderate loss so it’s not to say we are making less
The tv money is by far our biggest revenue, the wage bill by far our biggest outgoing
And where have I said we don’t have any money.
Erm - we have hundreds of millions of quid to spend without having to tap cuntbag Stan up for a penny. This club is geared to make profit each year, by whatever means and at the expense of the football if that's what it takes. All that profit has been dumped in a bank account for some stupid reason. TV cash, sponsor cash, merchandising, player image rights, tours, prize money, players transfers. We must be fucking loaded up by now.
That money sitting in the bank account is 180 million which I’ve said from the beginning
https://www.google.com/amp/www.citya...four-other/amp
:gp:Quote:
Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn
HCZ takes another pasting :lol:
It varies over the course of the season and peaked around a quarter billion last year IIRC. However much it is, it's more than any other club in the world has down the back of their sofa. And that's just one element of the cash avalanche hitting the club. Everything is geared to making as much money as possible. Sensible for a business. Catastrophic for a football club, in terms of sporting achievement. Well, it's easy enough to see that of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ
The cash reserves don’t vary that much, because that is the cash you have to spend when all the financial obligations are met
Our revenue stream is increasing but so too are our outgoings, in the grand scheme of things unimportant but lord knows what we had to pay to that fat sweaty cunt Mino Raiola in January.
Forbes has us down as one of the richest clubs based on earning potential.
You originally said no club would spend all of their cash reserves but if you're saying a £50m player actually costs £100m.Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ
Wouldn't that mean we've just spent £200m and then add another £50m for Ozil's contract? ;)Quote:
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)
You introduced the discussion we had last week that was about Sven and the new DOF guy Raul. You introduced Ornstein to the debate along with his statement. Now you're trying the full spin. I asked you if you believed what was said about Wenger wanting to spend money because you introduced it like you believed it. A direct question which you spun and didn't answer. Spinning from Wenger not wanting to spend, to the club not wanting Wenger to spend but then you break down the math to say a significant amount is being spent! :lol: My head is spinning!Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ
The cash reserves are what we probably have give or take after the Aubemeyang sale
Plus as I’ve stated more than once the transfer budget would incorporate wages if the wages of the player coming in took the overall wage bill past what’s considered an acceptable limit (thus again talking about getting players off the wage bill before bringing new players in, the reason this whole tedious debate started)
The wages of Walcott, Coquelin, Giroud, Sanchez, Debuchy (probably about 20 million a year altogether)
Ozils new contract plus Aubemeyang and Mhkytarian (20 million added)
The sale of Ox, Walcott and Coquelin means we aren’t having to eat into the cash to bring in Aubemeyang
As I said to you a few weeks ago it’s irksome to have a debate with someone who tells you what you’re saying when you’re not saying that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Delusions of Grandeur
No the point of the Ornstein comment was a response to you implying that the club having no cash to spend was purely spin for Wenger, and I asked if that was the case why would Wenger be stating there is cash to spend (unless he’s so stupid he’s shitting on his own spin).
Again I never claimed Wenger wanted to spend money where the club didn’t but again don’t let that stop you.
As i stated hours ago the club sets a transfer budget and if that budget is largely exhausted which may or may not include wages, agent fees, signing on fees, they will say that’s all the money we have to spend.
My sentence structure isn’t always the best when I’m typing large amounts but honestly if you’re unclear what I’m saying just ask rather than assume.
Because I’m tired of having to rebut things I’ve not even claimed
Maybe I’m just being garrulous but I can sum up the point in a couple of sentences
Look at the Cityam article that I linked NQ to which suggests that although the revenue is increasing our cash reserves have fallen from where they were, now I don’t know why this is but what I can speculate on is that considering since 2013 we have spent over 300million on players that some of this has gone to towards that.
Now going forward I’ve also not said there is no money, but I suspect that the club wants to keep its current wage structure rather than get it up to say the Man City level which would mean having to sell players to get them off the wage bill before we buy significantly in the summer.
If you find fault with any of that, great don’t care
I’m going to bed, if you feel the need to argue pointlessly for hours in future let me know and I will make bullet point presentations in my post so you don’t get confused over what I have or haven’t claimed.
You have no fucking clue what you're talking about or what point you're trying to make :lol:
Fakeyank was right, you just talk a load of BS :lol:
:gp:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dumbledore
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hk5FZm1eCjw
This stuff Wenger comes out with in regards to things being more predictable because of the amount of money in football...nobody asked for his opinion on it. :lol: He just offers it up when talking about why Aubameyang has come to England. Check from 13 minutes in.
Worth watching the rest. I don't know the Mirror is getting this click bait stuff about him regretting not selling Sanchez and confirming that Sanchez is getting paid a huge amount of money. They posted up the press conference on their page but have headlines that I haven't heard Wenger say in this conference.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/footb...lexis-11962396
Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ
Im not overly keen on the accountants/financial advisors wet dream debates..... but I've always found it slightly odd that an ongoing/continuous cost....i.e. Wages would be included in a 'transfer budget'. Though from what you say above I'm not clear if you think it is or isn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ
In any case if we under delegate sums to the transfer budget (in light of the huge sums we actually make and have) then the ' we have no money ' cry can always be dubiously used and frankly becomes a nonsense as a standalone figure and argument.
I’m not saying we don’t have moneyQuote:
Originally Posted by Blink 1nce Quince 2wice
For the millionth time
Spot on. Only a complete numpty like HCZ can argue we have no money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blink 1nce Quince 2wice
HCZ :haha:
It makes no sense and not clear what's been said. All I know is that we're being conned. Again. To the point where it sounds as if Everton are in a better financial position than us! That's how far these sort of debates go.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blink 1nce Quince 2wice
I’ll add that to the list of things I didn’t sayQuote:
Originally Posted by Delusions of Grandeur
As best as I could last night I broke it down into a paragraph for you.
But I’m interested in what you think, I’ve stated throughout that the amount of cash we have in the bank is 180million, and quite possibly some of it is earmarked for other things.
Do you think there is vastly more being hidden away somewhere?. And if so to whose benefit would that be?
You didn't say that, I said it sounds as if Everton are in a better financial position than us. You didn't dispute it either.Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ
I posted the following after you're claim that a £50m player could actually work out to be £100m.
This is the response I got.Quote:
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!
I mean, seriously! It gets to the point where these just sound like poorly researched rebuttals just to fill in the gaps for what the club hasn't told us. I'm checking out of this one. It will go on and on.Quote:
Everton are 49.9% owned by Farhad Moshiri, it’s fair to say they had more to spend than the proceeds of the Lukaku sale
I think my actual point was more nuanced than that Sherbert, but okay thanks for the reminder!Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ
You weren’t invited to start a debate in the first placeQuote:
Originally Posted by Delusions of Grandeur
Moshiri has stated himself that he has invested in the club both with players and infrastructure (still looking to get themselves a new stadium)
On top of that I made the point that the wages these new signings were on were likely to be less than what we’d have to pay any player joining us.
But you’re right this is circular. The whole argument started on the premise that we’d have to get rid of players to get them off the wage bill and probably bolster what we would spend in order to recruit heavily in the summer. You didn’t like that and then this tedious pointless back and forth happens
It's time to wave goodbye. :wave: