Ditto to the lot Mr V except the line about Mr U. I'm a little unsure about unproven allegations against him though it must be said that what I am also thinking along the lines of what he could do for us with his funds. That he is a near 30% shareholder makes one wonder why he is not allowed a seat on the board. Currently in all but special resolutions as I recall, he is outvoted.
What are you talking about ? Limited company or Publicly owned, I get a percentage of the profit according to how many shares I have .. as a dividend. It makes no difference whether I am a limited company or PLC ! If I get a dividend payment - that money is mine. No, I haven't taken cash out of the company but I am entitled to my share of the profit, to do what I want with. Kroenke still gets to take money from the club if he wants to, without investing.
How is his strategy unique ? Surely every company operates in this way. Some people get more than others in the form of bonuses or shares, but, every club pays its best players more than the rest .. they do this at semi pro level too. If I am better than my colleague I expect to get more money than him/her, if I am making money for the company.
Yep, but if he takes dividends all the other people with shares get dividends, so all the Arsenal Supporters and minority shareholders etc. who have shares would know exactly how much Kroenke was taking out of the club. That would be terrible PR, so he won't do it.
Salaries are driven by supply and demand. Now I am not going to be like you and assume that everybody else is ******ed. Arsenal do not pay their young players more than they have to. We pay them no more, and no less, than it takes to get them to agree to a contract. We try and sign them to long term contracts because for young players, it is more likely that their value will increase than decrease. There may be a few we lose on, but on average we gain. Now the alternative to developing loyal young players for less than we could buy them is the buy established players route. Signing players is an auction. This is a concept where clubs bid a continually higher amount until only one is left. It didn't used to be exactly this way, but selling clubs have wised up and so have players. You now have to offer both the highest salary and the higest fee to get a player. If a club like man City want a player, it doesn't matter what Arsenal are willing to offer, it will never be enough. Lets be clear. Arsenal will ALWAYS lose the auction. That is its purpose, so that the selling club and player get the highest amount of money that any club is willing to pay. It has nothing to do with what an individual, or an individual club, thinks player is worth. So, Arsenal do not set wages, the market sets the wages. Traditionally we have done far, far worse with the "Quality" stars we have brought in, in terms of performance and loyalty, than the young players we have developed.
Well generally speaking Arshavin, Nasri, Chamackh, Rosicky, Squillacci, Silvestre, in recent years have disappointed. This is probably 50% of the number we have brought in. If we were to adopt a buying strategy ths number would have to grow much higher. 50% is a very good percentage for youth players, but it isn't for "Quality Players".
You get a set amount of value per share if the company decides to release a dividend (Arsenal never have) they are not obliged to give a dividend. So the profits Arsenal have mae have stayed in the business we have never given our profits to anyone.
Running a business at profit does many things including raising the share value, but it still doesn't mean he pockets the money - it is ploughed straight into the club as you will see our debts have been massively wiped off over the last few years as well as we have built up a very high cash reserve (100mn) which I think should be used to pay off debt, but I am not sure what the penalties are for paying it off early. He can use his share holdings as leverage to borrow but that doesn't really effect us unless he goes broke in which case his shares will be sold to another investor. Unlike the Glazers his holdings aren't financed with debt so we don't have the same worries that UTD do.
