Super Super Quality Transfer Speculation & Shit

[Joker]

......until we have paid off the stadium debt, renegotiated sponsorship deals etc, and made sure our transfer pot is more than 30mil each year. You know, so we're not spending more cash than we actually have.

So you're saying making a bit more money available to spend over the last 5 years would have had led to the debt level exploding? Are we in such a dire financial position that a transfer pot of £30M would result in huge ecoonmic problems for the club? If that's the case the board have run the club in the shoddiest way imaginable, and moving to the new stadium has been a bad idea. Either that or the money is available to spend (as the board claim) and it's Wenger whose shown an incredible disregard for the club by failing to spend it on quality players.

And I think people exaggerate the dangers of debt, you can see it in the hysterical reaction of the Tories to the budget deficit. Excess debt is not sustainable for governments or companies, and City's finances are not healthy for the game. However, I think either the board or Wenger are being overly traditionally Victorian in their views about debt. Running a deficit temporarily by bringing in high quality players may end up being self financing, especially if we actually lift a trophy, which will attract more supporters to take up season tickets, and creates more demand for merchandise, etc.

[LDG]

So you're saying making a bit more money available to spend over the last 5 years would have had led to the debt level exploding? Are we in such a dire financial position that a transfer pot of £30M would result in huge ecoonmic problems for the club? If that's the case the board have run the club in the shoddiest way imaginable, and moving to the new stadium has been a bad idea. Either that or the money is available to spend (as the board claim) and it's Wenger whose shown an incredible disregard for the club by failing to spend it on quality players.

And I think people exaggerate the dangers of debt, you can see it in the hysterical reaction of the Tories to the budget deficit. Excess debt is not sustainable for governments or companies, and City's finances are not healthy for the game. However, I think either the board or Wenger are being overly traditionally Victorian in their views about debt. Running a deficit temporarily by bringing in high quality players may end up being self financing, especially if we actually lift a trophy, which will attract more supporters to take up season tickets, and creates more demand for merchandise, etc.

Simply, we have 30mil before player sales, which needs to cover transfers and wage increases. So hopefully, shifting some deadwood, and cutting the wage bill will help increase that pot. Then we're reliant on our manager to spend it in the best possible way, improving our squad.

We have this 30mil, after covering all our bases. I won't go into detail, as it's far too complicated, but was very well covered by Swiss Ramble's blog a few months back.

Moving to a new stadium was not a bad idea. We just about managed it at the right time, when the "mortgage" and repayment deal was at the best we could have gotten it, and before the recession. We were unlucky that the recession hit just at the point we were trying to sell the flats...else the landscape may have looked slightly rosier.

And without that additional revenue from the stadium, there is no way we would be where we are now. In fact, there is an argument that we would be considerably worse off.

The only ****ing problem which stinks to high heaven, is the agressive takeover by Kronke. He has put NOTHING into the club, but is looking to take EVERYTHING out of it. And it's the shareholders who sold out to this man. Not Arsene Wenger. You can blame our manager for buying the wrong players, but not for what he has to spend.

[Özim]

The only ****ing problem which stinks to high heaven, is the agressive takeover by Kronke. He has put NOTHING into the club, but is looking to take EVERYTHING out of it. And it's the shareholders who sold out to this man. Not Arsene Wenger. You can blame our manager for buying the wrong players, but not for what he has to spend.

It's OK, they like his "sort".

[LDG]

It's OK, they like his "sort".

He's a vulture.

And he has a moustache.

[Globalgunner]

The only ****ing problem which stinks to high heaven, is the agressive takeover by Kronke. He has put NOTHING into the club, but is looking to take EVERYTHING out of it. And it's the shareholders who sold out to this man. Not Arsene Wenger. You can blame our manager for buying the wrong players, but not for what he has to spend.

Not true, Kroenke put a whole lot of cash into peoples pockets, people like Lady Nina, and the rest who saw their share prices quadruple in value in about 3 years and made a mint. Problem is Stan ran into a brick wall at 69% ownership with Usmanov holding the rest. If Stan had been able to buy the company outright, he might have invested more in the club to increase its success and value. Right now it is a cold war, style East-west standoff. Kroenke is the one who is now recouping his investment, with only the bare minimum going back into the playing staff. Just enough to keep us in the CL places. We are a cash machine now for Kroenke and Usmanov, both staring at each other balefully across an ocean of currency

[Japan Shaking All Over]

Just came across this....its title was Giroud in - Van Persie out? - cant see why we cant have both - although two out one in sounds about right a la Arsenal

It’s hardly going to take the most paranoid conspiracy theorist to put together the two biggest Arsenal stories from yesterday together and making the assumptions that I am going to to here.

For starters yesterday morning we had Peter Hill-Wood loudly proclaiming that Arsenal will not match the riches on offer for Van Persie if he moves to the likes of Man City, which is practically giving the green light for a rich team to make the Dutchman a big offer (a la Nasri).

Then, later on in the afternoon, it is very loudly revealed that Arsenal have agreed a £13million deal (with Marouane Chamakh probably going the other way) with Montpellier for the Ligue 1 top scorer Olivier Giroud. The big 24 year-old is obviously very talented with 25 goals and 9 assists from just 43 games for the Ligue 1 Champions last season.

Now maybe I may be a bit feeble-minded, but those two bits of news have made it quite clear to me that Robin Van Persie will not be playing for the Gunners next season, as Giroud is never going to sign for someone without being promised a starting place after the season he’s had, so he is a ready-made replacement.

Am I right?

[Japan Shaking All Over]

And there was this, title......Arshavin out, Dzagoev in

Arsenal are about to sell their Russian midfielder-and then buy a Russian midfielder! by BA

Andrey Arshavin had a great start to Euro 2012 and has made Arsene Wenger’s job of recouping some of his transfer fee a lot easier. He has been on loan at his old club Zenit St. Petersburg and his resurgence of form has made the club keen to keep him.

Zenit were being cute by trying to get him for another season on loan as they knew that Arsenal did not want him back, but his display against the Czech Republic has drawn interest from other clubs. Metro reports that Fulham have inquired about Arshavin , and this has led the Russian club to open talks with the Gunners about signing the midfielder.

Now Wenger is in a position to demand a decent amount for Arshavin, who cost around £15 million when Arsenal bought him. He plans to use the proceeds to sign Arshavin’s international team mate and leading scorer in Euro 2012, Alan Dzagoev. The 21-year old is a creative and attacking midfielder who showed that he can finish after smashing two goals past the Czechs.

Dzagoev plays for CSKA Moscow and only has a year left on his contract. He has played 153 games for his club and scored an impressive 37 goals from midfield. Arsenal might need to move quickly, as Chelsea and Roman Abramovich are also keen on the young star.

[Niall_Quinn]

I guess you could argue what PSG, City, Chelsea are doing isn't ambitious (although I would disagree) but even then, it's more ambitious than Kroenke's "vision" for our club, which is to finish in the top 4, and use the revenue to run a steady ship maintain healthy profits, all for the benefits of the shareholders as very little will be reinvested into the team, only enough to keep us in the Champions League places.

We don't know for sure that this is Kroenke's model. It's highly likely he's here to milk the club but not enough time has elapsed yet to confirm this. That said, he's verbally confirmed it on several occasions so I don't hold out much hope. Leaving comedy clubs like Chelsea aside, I certainly agree the last batch of shareholders were greedy beyond belief and should be condemned for what they did.

[Niall_Quinn]

Simply, we have 30mil before player sales, which needs to cover transfers and wage increases. So hopefully, shifting some deadwood, and cutting the wage bill will help increase that pot. Then we're reliant on our manager to spend it in the best possible way, improving our squad.

We have this 30mil, after covering all our bases. I won't go into detail, as it's far too complicated, but was very well covered by Swiss Ramble's blog a few months back.

Moving to a new stadium was not a bad idea. We just about managed it at the right time, when the "mortgage" and repayment deal was at the best we could have gotten it, and before the recession. We were unlucky that the recession hit just at the point we were trying to sell the flats...else the landscape may have looked slightly rosier.

And without that additional revenue from the stadium, there is no way we would be where we are now. In fact, there is an argument that we would be considerably worse off.

The only ****ing problem which stinks to high heaven, is the agressive takeover by Kronke. He has put NOTHING into the club, but is looking to take EVERYTHING out of it. And it's the shareholders who sold out to this man. Not Arsene Wenger. You can blame our manager for buying the wrong players, but not for what he has to spend.

Always £30mill, isn't it?

Yes, that's the problem. The shareholders past and probably present. Our bunch don't have as much cash as the criminals at Chelsea and City. You could say they are still in the wanting zone whereas the latter are in the living it large zone. I'm sure our greedy bastards are ambitious in the respect at least.

[Cripps_orig]

MAROUANE FELLAINI admits he may be forced to leave Everton to fulfil his desire to play European football.

The Belgium midfielder, who signed a new long-term contract in November, has been linked with a money-spinning move to Chelsea this summer.

Fellaini, 24, is currently happy with life at Goodison Park but the lure of playing in the Champions League or Europa League could tempt him away.

He said: "If I have got to go, I will go. If not, I repeat, I am at Everton.

“I am ambitious — I want to play in the Champions League or in the Europa League.

“Last season we finished seventh and were not able to qualify for Europe, which was a shame."

Fellaini added: “If an ambitious club comes in for me? Why not, just to gain experience.

"But I’m on vacation right now, I do not give speculation too much attention.

“Every year they say I’ll be transferred to the left or right but I’m still at Everton.

“If it comes, I take, if it does not come, I stay at Everton, where I am happy, and where I still have a four-year contract.

“Everything goes fast in football. You can be transferred tomorrow, as you can be in one or two years.”

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...-football.html

Must Get