I've wondered about why we have all this cash sitting in our bank account and wondered if our majority shareholder had any plans for them which he has not disclosed to us. As we all know he has not said much beyond his family liking London. So it came as no surprise that when this was reported today that Stan Kroenke was about to bid for the LA Dodgers. Source - http://www.stltoday.com/sports/foot...cle_2fa6ec8a-6b89-54bf-9006-254a979eaa2b.html Could a healthy balance sheet at Arsenal assist in proving the man's credit-worthiness? Unexpectedly as the report also suggested, Mr Kroenke was not available for comment. In this and matters concerning Arsenal, in time-honoured manner, he predictably stays silent. I think Jayram should investigate this
I would doubt that Arsenal's bank balance would have any bearing on Kronke's private investments seeing as they are both two separate entities.
Possibly. I think its combination of three things.. 1. The board. High ticket prices, large corporate membership packages I think its pretty evident that the board are really running arsenal to make as much profit as possible. Money comes first, the team second. 2. Arsene Wenger. He still believes in his policy of signing youth. 3. Kroenke. Seems to have his finger in many pies at the moment. I'm not sure how much time and effort he's actually putting in to Arsenal.
I was thinking that if Kroenke needed financing for his new deal and was required to show that he had the means to borrow to buy the Dodgers then setting out Arsenal's balance sheet would be a fine way of indicating his worth before a host of possible financiers. They are not entirely separate entities in the sense that they are part of his portfolio.
Well its there for every body to see that what is happening at our club or the way the board of directors, owners, shareholders or what ever name you wish to give are running the club to maximize as much profit from fans, champions league money etc. They contradict themselves behind the idea of we produce stars, we don't buy them like the mug Gazidis statement. Fair enough and we have produce some world class players but they all have been sold as soon as they are developed and the money from their transfers has not been used to replace them. We are back in square one nurturing young talent and the same process occurs every year. Kronke is like all businessmen always looks out to make money. He has no history of running a successful club, passion.
It has bugged me for a while as to why Kroenke chose us. To him it's all about business. Quite soulless if you ask me pal.
A friend of mine who is in F1 once pointed out to me that the likes of smaller teams such as Jordan and the like develop drivers and sell them on. In a way and sadly, Williams have become like that too. Formula 1, like football is a business and in business you do what you need to survive, get to the next year and all the coming years. You also build up enough till that day comes when you sell it on. Mr Kroenke isn't in this because his family loves London. It's all business. However, it's our club.....
Actually he has a good history of involvement with many successful clubs in the USA spanning soccer, football and Hockey. The LA Rams are one of the biggest teams in the NFL. Also regarding the speculation that he's simply preventing Arsenal from spending to procure financial backing for his bid to buy the Dodgers - is tenuous at best. He is estimated to have a personal wealth of $3.2bn - more than enough to buy the Dodgers outright if he wanted.
It's no secret that Arsenal have decided to take a route that means balancing the books. So it's not easy or to meet the overinflated value of player's transfers and wages and it's not really desirable to do so either, given that FFP will curb it anyway. I'd like to see some investment in key areas in our squad, but it takes the right conditions for that player to (1) become available (2) For his club to agree to sell him (3) for the player to agree to move to our club (4) for a transfer fee to be agreed (5) for wages and personal terms to be agreed. A wish list is just that. A dose of reality however, takes a little more comprehension than simply saying that our owners have 'no passion' and are only interested in making a profit.
I think superficially the answer is yes. As most people are aware, about 6, or 7 years ago, Arsenal Football Club adopted a policy of financial prudence in the transfer market and developing players through investment in a youth system. This was seen to be a 10-15 year strategy that included investing in a new stadium. The payoff to this strategy was that the board believed that a club with a large stadium and no debt, would have the financial strength to compete with any other club in the league forever. Now, whether YOU believe in this strategy or not, that was what this group dreamt up. Kronke, I believe bought the club because he believed in, and still believes in this strategy. Whilst not providing short-term success, it will increase the value of the club, and give him a good return on his investment. Although there is some money to spend (my quess is that it is about 60M), The over-riding principle and policy will not be broken. Despite what YOU think, it is their opinion that spending the money, on who is available, is not going to make a significant enough impact on the pitch, to be worth spending it now. I think they all feel that having that money in reserve "just in case" is more important. I think they spend a lot of time working on this and (again, no matter what YOU think) they don't feel that there is enough certainty that if they blew the lot signing Goetz and Mata for example, that there is any guarantee that they would play better than Ramsey and Rosicky, or if they did, that they would play well enough to change our results enough to make a difference. Overall, they will not change the policy, or do anything that will threaten the ultimate goal of emerging from debt in how ever many years time it is, with a massively strong financial situation. So, I would say that Kronke isn't the reason for the policy, but it is the reason he owns the club, and he is the reason why the policy continues.
To compare Kronke with Gillett and Hicks is simply a nonsense argument. In what way has Kronke demonstrated that he is like those two, other than they are from the USA ?
Kroenke comes in, and suddenly Arsenal spend more money than they have done in AGES during the Transfer Window. Yes they sold Cesc & Nasri, which was in all likelyhood nothing to do with Kroenke, and somehow he's the bad guy. Amazing. He's not going to stick billions into the club, and I personally don't want him to. I'm happy with the club being run within its means (note: difference between the way the club is currently run, and running within its means). Do some research guys, learn what he's like, his business values etc. then come back and post. Some of the tripe that ends up on this forum!
to make money. but i bet you he improves the club by doing it. research the way he works, you might just like him. todays top news: businessman...buys...business!
oh...well i was genuinely interested in your opinion on it and where he's going wrong. don't offer things you won't deliver on!!
Well your wage strategy is a little unique, so I am not sure I would understand it. You do realize that your wage strategy is totally insane. We are not going to sign "Quality players" with a subjective and arbitary wage structure.
He is a 60%+ share holder but it is still a publicly limited company - he can't just take profits out of it. In Public companies dividends and selling share are the only way you can take money out of a company. What he can do is borrow against his holdings - which is a) his right, b) done by every rich businessman in the world. He already has a large portfolio of sports franchises so i see nothing wrong with him adding to it (especially as the team appears to be at a cut-price deal). People need to realise both the club and football in general is a business (and we are fans not consumers - and worse off consumers with a high inelasticity of demand). As a owner he is doing fine in terms of a business (less so as a club). I would love to see an increase in spending on the club in player purchases and a higher tier wage structure (within reason) especially as i think this can be done with our current resources without a need for outside investment. But there seems to be something behind the scenes at the club that is wrong in terms of Wenger/Gazidis/Kronke when it comes to what we are told and what we see. But to be honest I don't think I would prefer Usmanov even if he did go out and spend 100mn for both moral and ethical reasons - it cheapens what we as a club, I believe, strive to represent.
Except that he doesn't take any money out of the club for his personal wealth - so that kind of knackers your argument
