To adequately replace Fabregas, I think we would need to be looking at a £30m player. Someone like Goetze would be ideal, but if we're going to sign him then I think we need to be looking at spending this sort of money - and increasing our wage ceiling.
Yep, sorry this is where the confusion has come! Like someone else has said though, if it returns us to CL football (which is seems almost certain to do), it has been a good investment.
The Telegraph have got it wrong. The accounts for 2011 show the costs exactlly as SpursLegend quotes and they are quoted precisely. The other numbers quoted show that the Telegraph is talking about the same year. They have made the mistake of confusing total costs with wage costs. What the numbers will be for this year is not yet known but I would expect only a small increase in wages and some decrease in turnover so we may be up around 60%. I don't really understand your obsession with the ratios anyway Piskie. Surely a football club SHOULD be spending a high proportion of its revenue on football related costs like paying players. It remains surprising to me that a much bigger club like Arsenal have let Spurs overtake them in terms of squad quality despite having more resources and paying out more money. Do you think your squad deserves to be paid more than ours?
The more I read about our needs and how they are not met and that in not meeting those needs, we slide further from being a truly competitive side as we should be, the greater it seems is the urgency that our philosophy as a club should change. However I wonder how this is possible under the current regime. More likely, our redemption would lie with a wealthy suitor who would buy out Mr Kroenke. Someone who loves the club as we do, unlike the silent American whose family supposedly loves London.
Just a couple of corrections. I believe it's correct that our overall staff salaries rose above £100mill for the first time in our CL year. I don't know where everyone gets this £90mill figure from because it wasn't in our financial report. However, the FR also states that this was inflated by CL bonuses and it also states that our wage bill has been reduced since the end of the financial year by player departures. We won't have much of an idea as to the size of those bonuses for qualifying and progressing in the CL until next(this) year's report but I think you can see that we weren't in any real financial trouble after missing out on the CL, otherwise we wouldn't have been able to reject a £35mill bid for Modric and wouldn't have bid £20mill for Mata and £12mill for Diarra. Also, it's worth remembering that even though we've spent more net, we still have more of our expensive players at our club helping us compete. Isn't AOC the most expensive purchase you still have at your club? Also, our team is better. I'm not trying to cause an argument but it's starting to show that we haven't sold a first choice player since 2008 and have continued to invest in new players, whilst you've sold player after player from the first 11 with a handful of replacements in, few of whom would be considered an adequate replacement. Sure our method has been hit and miss but it's got us there eventually, within our means and has never threatened the future of our club. A good business reinvests and looks to expand and grow and Arsenal have done that in the past but in different ways, like growing your own talent, which isn't as viable as it once was. Your club will probably join the rest of the 21st century clubs this summer. I don't really pay much attention to Arsenal's accounts but I can't imagine your assets have gone up since the new stadium, albeit your liabilities have come down, that was a necessity but that amount has been reduced.
Sorry YV but you are wrong. Note 4 in the Annual report has the details: 4. Operating expenses (£k) Staff costs 91,063 (2011) 67,073 (2010) Note 6 makes it clear that these costs include all staff
There's soo much wrong with this its amazing. 'Tippy tappy crap?... tell that to Barcelona'. You sound like Andy Grey or Alan Hansen who still think that football from the 1980's and 90's was tactically comparable to the modern game. Soo it sounds like you are implying we should go back to a 442?... seriously?? The top teams no longer play 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 anymore and for good reason. These formations have been abandonned in favour of various four banded formations that allow for more fluidity within their constraints. Football is changing and evolving, its adapt or be left behind. - We have more pace on the wings than anyone. Sagna -- Walcott & Santos -- Gervinho are as quick as ANY wide players in world football. I dont think purely pace is the issue. - There's nothing simple about a complete tactical reshuffle. It requires new personnel and many games to adjust (just look at Chelsea). Consider this.. In the last few seasons (this one excluded) when we had Fabregas in the team we would generally outplay and pass most other premierleague sides to death. Our main issue was that offensively we lacked sharpness / precision and often failed to take advantage of the numerous chances we created. Those previous teams were lacking upfront (mainly because we were often without RVP of long periods of time and Wenger did'nt want to replace him). In 2007/2008 we led the premierleague for almost 5 months, we had Fabregas and Flamini in midfield, Hleb on the wings and an in form Adebayor who scored 30 goals. If we also had a 'fully fit' Van Persie to contribute we would surely have won the league. Now our team just lacks the creative quality we've had in previous years.
Talking of investment.. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2102440/Tottenham-takeover-AEG-make-450m-bid.html I would argue Bale, Lennon, Benny and Walker are quicker!
Maybe, I dont think there's anyone as quick as Walcott in the league and I bet Gervinho would match bale in a 100 metre sprint. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNZwjXCXsis My point was just that I don think our team lacks pace.
This is the point right here, there are too many extremes. We don't need to match the spending of City et al, but we also don't need to worry about doing a Rangers. PISKIE - your other point is irrelevant. Nobody said Spurs haven't spent money to assemble their squad, we are saying if Spurs who have less money than us can afford to spend money, why can't we ?!! Those commenting on the thread not being about football can take themselves elsewhere and leave the adult discussion to the adults, nobody forced you to come here, muppets
!!!!!!!!!!!!! WOW If this is true then Spurs are going to need CL football to survive at the top level. If they slip this season then it's Leeds time.
I'll tell you what, if it were my money, I would insist on player sales, trim the fat from the squad THEN investment, not the other way round - all in the closed season of course.
I feel this is the ONLY way we can move forward. If we are to compete with the others we have little or no choice but to invest. If the owners are happy with the club not being competitive then there will not be investment, but I cannot see Arsenal fans accepting that no way no how. The boos are already ringing out, the board better not take Arsenal fans for fools.
How Arsenal can have such poor squad depth, yet so many players is absolutely beyond me. There's a wealth of players that can be sold - both in the squad and out on loan. It's at ridiculous levels now. A massive clear-out is needed.
Exactly. We have 2 main Wenger teams, pre and post the Invincibles. Pre Invincibles played fast counter attacking football with no main playmaker. Post Invincibles played slow possession football with a main playmaker. It is clear which method was successful. Could we merge the 2 ? Why not, mix up our play and we immediately have a Plan B we have been missing.
