I haven't twisted anything you have written. You keep saying things like Arsenal are on of the richest clubs in the world, which may be true, but because of the recent trend of billionaires bankrolling clubs that isn't relevant, as Chelsea have vastly more amounts of money at their disposal, due to their rich owner, compared to Arsenal. You also write some things that are factually incorrect and monumentally stupid. This one however- You could easily have paid Nasri/Fabregas the wages they wanted, but THEY wanted to leave. Is one of the most ostrich like statements I have ever read. You seriously think that Arsenal can afford to pay salaries in the 150K - 200K a week scale? Or do you just want to believe it because otherwise it would lay bare the cynicism and rotten-to-the-core nature of the club you support?
I did find it amusing that Drogs seemed to suggest Cazorla would be on similar wages to Nasri/Fabregas I expect they are earning close to twice as much as Cazorla!
This is getting so tedious it's unreal. Point still soaring over your overinflated noggin. I couldn't give a **** how rich Chelsea or City are, the fact is that Arsenal ARE one of the richest clubs in the world, whether you like/believe it or not - so it is relevant! I have not once denied that a club like mine will be able to trump Arsenal in the transfer market, not once. My point is you have chosen to spend little on transfer fees, not because you have been forced. Ozil this year was a perfect example of how you can afford to buy expensive players. I can't even believe your last statement, truly astonishing. £300m odd income per year, barely spending anything and you can't afford to pay 150k-200k? You can, you are one of the only clubs to make sizable profit ffs! You just choose not to. Ozil an example again. Also love how you keep making a sly dig at Chelsea in every single post you make as if it's going to wind me up, whereas I haven't made a dig once. Says a lot about this argument to me. Please also expand on these 'monumentally stupid' points, because just saying they're stupid means absolutely **** all .....what? Please quote where I said anything remotely like that?
Drogs im sorry but the more you post the more you show you have no idea about Arsenals financial position since the move to the Emirates. We haven't chosen not to spend, we simply haven't been able to spend big money on players in recent years. NEW financial deals in place have meant that from THIS transfer window we have had proper funds available and now will continue to have the money to compete with the big money clubs, now we can afford to pay the big wages. Despite us being one of the richest clubs in world football we where hamstrung by the move to our new stadium and the long term sponsorship deals it tied us to. The thing your failing to take note of is how much income is disposable income. The big money clubs have been able to spend every season however much they like, Arsenal are only now entering a point where we can benefit from our financial muscle. Ozil is not an example that proves we where choosing not to spend, he is the proof that we are only now able to spend big money.
Oh and the Cazorla, Nasri/Fabregas thing: "Missed my point on Cazorla too, you got him fairly cheap due to Malaga's money troubles and I'm fairly certain his wages won't be on the small side which backs my point that you don't necessarily have to spend big to get high paid top quality players. You could easily have paid Nasri/Fabregas the wages they wanted, but THEY wanted to leave. " Reading back quickly i think this bit is probably the bit that came across like you thought Cazorla was an example of us paying high wages proving we could have paid Nasri what he wanted.
I'm not an Arsenal fan! So I'm not going to have the best knowledge on it, however to suggest Arsenal couldn't afford to pay Nasri/Fabregas what they wanted is ludicrous when you are one of the only clubs making large profits consistently. I understand the move to the new stadium will have scuppered things, and I did take that into account, however I think that will mainly have affected transfer fees and the whole point of my argument is that you don't have to spend big to pay big wages. The fact you have the 4th highest wage bill proves my point anyway. Didn't mean the Cazorla thing in that way, just using Cazorla as an example of the above point. Fairly cheap but still on a big wage, which I'm sure he is. The other point is seperate, I just think you could've paid Nasri/Fab what they wanted but they wanted to leave for other reasons.
Part of the reason we have posted profits is due to player sales as well. I do get the point you are making about wages but despite having a large wage bill we had a LOT of players on the books and still had to keep a tight watch on the wage structure and not breaking that due to other players then wanting more. I get what your saying i just think you may have underestimated how tight we have had to be financially over the last 8 years. Luckily though we are past that now, we have cleared the wage budget, tied down the core of our team to long contracts and can now afford to pay big transfer fees and big wages to rival the other top clubs. Now we finally get the benfit of being one of the richest clubs in the world. And the only reason i picked up on the Cazorla thing is because he is on less than 100k a week as only Podolski was getting that prior to Walcotts new contract. And Nasri and Fabregas are on 150-200k a week. So despite Cazorla probably being on high wages for Arsenal (who knows, probably in the region of 80-90k a week) it is no comparison to what we would have had to pay players like Nasri or Fabregas.
Maybe so, but I still believe you could've given players of the quality of Fab/Nasri what they wanted money-wise! Fair play for responding rationally too, unlike some...
Cesc was off to Barca whatever happened, it wasn't about money. Nasri wanted out and I don't think offering him more money would have made him stay. Personally I'd have loved to have kept Cesc, Nasri has been a bit part player since he moved to City.
Precisely what I said mate! They wanted out, but I still think Arsenal could've afforded what they wished for. Nasri was top quality at Arsenal, one of the best in the league at the time, he made an awful decision in terms of progressing a player but happy with the title I'm sure!
Really doubt he feels that happy with the title, I think had he won trophies at Arsenal, like RVP, it would've been so much more special and I think they would have enjoyed and remembered it far more than the success they've gotten at City and United.
