The ITK thread

[PleaseNotPoll]

My mistake, he's scored the same amount, despite being injured almost all of the time, costing £25m less and being a midfielder

In 5 times as long and costing you £26m in wages during that time!
Brilliant economy. I know you don't count that money though, because... reasons.

So you spent '**** all' on those transfers then ? Were Valencia making that £27m figure up then, because secretly they gave him to you for free ?

Did Lamela's club waive that £30m after all ?

We covered them with sales. I'm sure you know that though, so I'm not sure why you think it's relevant.
Arsenal, on the other hand, spent about £100m net in the last couple of seasons, plus about £350m in wages.
Wenger should be out the door for not challenging.

 

[PINKIE]

Does this mean that you're going to sell Kane for £40m to claim that the next round of dross that you buy doesn't count because you spent '**** all' ?

You bought those players, you didn't spend '**** all'. You might do well selling players but you are ****ing woeful at reinvesting it. Since the premier league began you have spent almost as much as Man Utd on transfer purchases, to achieve what ?

This is where your term '**** all' becomes appropriate

 

[MF SHAK]

will you losers kindly stfu


Newcastle are to make a substantial offer for Austin, but his agent is proving troublesome.

 

[PINKIE]

Arsenal, on the other hand, spent about £100m net in the last couple of seasons, plus about £350m in wages.
Wenger should be out the door for not challenging.

How is winning two trophies in those two seasons 'not challenging' ?

 

[PINKIE]

will you losers kindly stfu


Newcastle are to make a substantial offer for Austin, but his agent is proving troublesome.

Just add another £50k to the transfer fee to hire a hitman to take out the agent. Job done

 

[Hoddle is a god]

You might do well selling players but you are ****ing woeful at reinvesting it.

I might be prepared to concede that point if you, in turn, concede the fact that Arsenal spending the sums they do on wages that they do has shown a woeful return in terms of glory achieved.

You might do well in getting and keeping big players, but you're woeful at making them count.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

Does this mean that you're going to sell Kane for £40m to claim that the next round of dross that you buy doesn't count because you spent '**** all' ?

You bought those players, you didn't spend '**** all'. You might do well selling players but you are ****ing woeful at reinvesting it. Since the premier league began you have spent almost as much as Man Utd on transfer purchases, to achieve what ?

This is where your term '**** all' becomes appropriate

You really don't understand net spends, do you?
If two clubs are level and they both spend £50m on players in the summer, but only one of them has to cover the spending with sales, who do you think has an advantage?
You've been crying about being outspent by Chelsea for years, while ignoring the fact that you're doing it to virtually everyone else.

How is winning two trophies in those two seasons 'not challenging' ?

For the league or Champions League, as I've said repeatedly and you've not replied to once. You can't.
Arsenal are in the financial position to at least challenge for those trophies. They're not doing so.
Beating Hull and Villa shouldn't cover that up.

 

[PINKIE]

[QUOTE="PISKIE, post: 8098806, member: 1000255"You might do well selling players but you are ****ing woeful at reinvesting it.

I might be prepared to concede that point if you, in turn, concede the fact that Arsenal spending the sums they do on wages that they do has shown a woeful return in terms of glory achieved.

You might do well in getting and keeping big players, but you're woeful at making them count.[/QUOTE]

Not really HIAG. We've only just begun to spend big on players and in those last two seasons we've won 2 tophies. So the spend is justified.

We might have a higher wage bill than Spurs, but to attract players to play in the champions league, you have to pay the going rate. Also we finish above Spurs season after season, so again it's right that our players should earn more.

 

[Hoddle is a god]

I might be prepared to concede that point if you, in turn, concede the fact that Arsenal spending the sums they do on wages that they do has shown a woeful return in terms of glory achieved.

You might do well in getting and keeping big players, but you're woeful at making them count.

Not really HIAG. We've only just begun to spend big on players and in those last two seasons we've won 2 tophies. So the spend is justified.

We might have a higher wage bill than Spurs, but to attract players to play in the champions league, you have to pay the going rate. Also we finish above Spurs season after season, so again it's right that our players should earn more.

All it takes is for us to finish above you, even for one season, and you entire argument is blown out of the water.

I think a lot of Gooners fear that the most, because they know that, should it happen, Wenger will be drummed out of the club in total shame.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

We might have a higher wage bill than Spurs, but to attract players to play in the champions league, you have to pay the going rate. Also we finish above Spurs season after season, so again it's right that our players should earn more.

You must log in or register to see images

 

[PINKIE]

You really don't understand net spends, do you?
If two clubs are level and they both spend £50m on players in the summer, but only one of them has to cover the spending with sales, who do you think has an advantage?
You've been crying about being outspent by Chelsea for years, while ignoring the fact that you're doing it to virtually everyone else.

For the league or Champions League, as I've said repeatedly and you've not replied to once. You can't.
Arsenal are in the financial position to at least challenge for those trophies. They're not doing so.
Beating Hull and Villa shouldn't cover that up.

Chelsea as you know have benefited from a massive cash injection from a rich benefactor. So it stands that they have outspent us on less than a level playing field. They've outspent everybody and been propelled to the top on the back of it

This idea that you peddle that Spurs are somehow the only club to spend competently is hogwash. Arsenal pay their players more because we can afford to pay them more. We have a bigger stadium, more supporters, bigger revenue streams etc. So if you want to start getting into transfer / wages spending on money 'earned' then Arsenal are justified in their financial approach.

We play in the Champions League, so naturally that will attract higher wages. But in pure terms of spending on transfers Arsenal have far outperformed Spurs, both in the amount spent and the success that it has brought. The fact that you spent £120m to miss out once again on the top 4 is only bettered by Brenda and his calamitous approach at LIverpool.

 

[PINKIE]

All it takes is for us to finish above you, even for one season, and you entire argument is blown out of the water.

Yawn ... change the record HIAG. Your North London Power shift has fizzled out in hilarious fashion for the last two decades

 

[Hoddle is a god]

Because we cannot sustain the ridculous level of wages that you spend, Spurs have to offer up front incentives to clubs and players to get them to come to us. It also means that we cannot expect to keep those players for very long.

None of this is very difficult to work out.

 

[Hoddle is a god]

And each new season brings the famous shift closer.

I may sound a little controversial here, but I think this year could be our year (although I won't be drawn completely on the whole "shift" issue).

 

[PINKIE]

Because we cannot sustain the ridculous level of wages that you spend, Spurs have to offer up front incentives to clubs and players to get them to come to us. It also means that we cannot expect to keep those players for very long.

None of this is very difficult to work out.

Our wages are congruent with our revenue streams and on a par with what players playing at the top level expect.

What you are essentially saying about Spurs is that you are bribing players to come to your club, because they will never find success there and eventually move on to a club that can win trophies.

 

[PINKIE]

And each new season brings the famous shift closer.

I may sound a little controversial here, but I think this year could be our year (although I won't be drawn completely on the whole "shift" issue).

Last season the gap was even bigger than the one before.

Why do you do it to yourself HIAG

 

[Hoddle is a god]

Our wages are congruent with our revenue streams and on a par with what players playing at the top level expect.

What you are essentially saying about Spurs is that you are bribing players to come to your club, because they will never find success there and eventually move on to a club that can win trophies.

The very same can be said for Arsenal!


Even though you pay them silly money, they still don't get success!

Unbelievable! You couldn't make this up!

 

[Hoddle is a god]

Last season the gap was even bigger than the one before.

Why do you do it to yourself HIAG

Yes, that's why it was controversial.

 

[PINKIE]

The very same can be said for Arsenal!


Even though you pay them silly money, they still don't get success!

Unbelievable! You couldn't make this up!

We just won two trophies in two seasons HIAG

I'd say you couldn't make this up, but you have a history of making comments that come back to haunt you

 

[Hoddle is a god]

So, you're saying that two domestic cup wins in 9 years is a good return for the hundreds of millions of £s you've spunked away in wages?