Rival watch

[BrunelGooner]

Tbh this is not what was expected when the Emirates was built.

13 years after moving in you are haggling over £7.5m in a transfer worth a maximum £25m.

You got CL money for 10 of those 13 years, over £120m per season from tv deals, millions from sponsorship deals and millions from gate receipts (at least £3m per match if the average ticket cost £50.)

Why have Arsenal got no money?

The issue isn't just the money available for transfer fees, it's Premier League STCC rules on wage increases. As I said to Brian, we are a Europa League club paying Champions League level salaries. It simply isn't sustainable.

As of 2016, Premier League STCC rules state that teams in the top division cannot have wage increases of more than £7m per annum. We are teetering on the edge of that right now.

Ozil - £350k p/w
Aubameyang - £280k p/w
Lacazette - £183k p/w
Mkhitaryan - £180k p/w
Kolasinac - £120k p/w
Xhaka - £100k p/w
Sokratis - £92k p/w
Mustafi - £90k p/w

These are just some examples, but when you have squad players like Elneny and Jenkinson on between £50k - £60k p/w too, it all adds up. Unless we can offload some of these wages, it will inhibit our ability to bring players in because of how close we are to maxing the limit on the current wage rules. This is the main reason why we are hamstrung.

Our self-sufficient model was and is based on regular Champions League participation. We've not had that for 3 years. A loss of income plus an increase in wages - on top of the £17.1m payout Arsene Wenger & staff received for getting sacked - undeniably will lead to major financial issues.

There's a lot of excellent blogs and articles about how we got ourselves into this position, but if you want something really simple and concise that won't take long to read, this is the best I've found: https://bleacherreport.com/articles...enal-got-no-money-and-whats-their-plan#slide0

As for this not being anticipated to happen when The Emirates was built, you are absolutely right. However, there were several factors that didn't go in our favour which were out of our control.

The timing of the move was at the same time as the global depression, which impacted the sale of the flats in Highbury and made it a less cost-effective move.

The unanticipated bankrolling of Chelsea and Manchester City by external benefactors increasing the competition.

In terms of things that were in our control, Wenger staying on for too long didn't help, poor purchases made when money was available to spend freely, terrible negotiations of transfer fees and horrendous handling of player contracts.

Accumulating all of this together is a recipe for disaster.

 

[The RDBD]

We've allegedly had a second bid for Tierney rejected because we didn't offer £25m up front; we've offered £17.5m + £7.5m in add-ons and bonuses providing we get into the Champions League. Celtic, understandably, were not convinced by this.

There are two damning ways of looking at this :

1. As rcl said, you don't have the funds to pay the extra 7.5m now.

2. Celtic would accept 17.5m up front, but do not believe you will are
capable of getting CL soon enough for them to get that 7.5m .


On #2, Spurs could use Walker as a counterpart example.
Citeh were forced to pay nearly all of the fee up front.

The add-ons were probably such as played a minimum number of games
in PL/CL campaigns in a season where Citeh win either.
Citeh won the PL the next season. Add-ons duly collected. ***

So if you are sceptical of the buying club quickly triggering the add-ons,
then try to rinse the buyer for as much of the free up front as possible.


*** AFAIK similar happened to Madrid with Bale when they won the
CL in his first season there.

 

[remembercolinlee]

The issue isn't just the money available for transfer fees, it's Premier League STCC rules on wage increases. As I said to Brian, we are a Europa League club paying Champions League level salaries. It simply isn't sustainable.

As of 2016, Premier League STCC rules state that teams in the top division cannot have wage increases of more than £7m per annum. We are teetering on the edge of that right now.

Ozil - £350k p/w
Aubameyang - £280k p/w
Lacazette - £183k p/w
Mkhitaryan - £180k p/w
Kolasinac - £120k p/w
Xhaka - £100k p/w
Sokratis - £92k p/w
Mustafi - £90k p/w

These are just some examples, but when you have squad players like Elneny and Jenkinson on between £50k - £60k p/w too, it all adds up. Unless we can offload some of these wages, it will inhibit our ability to bring players in because of how close we are to maxing the limit on the current wage rules. This is the main reason why we are hamstrung.

Our self-sufficient model was and is based on regular Champions League participation. We've not had that for 3 years. A loss of income plus an increase in wages - on top of the £17.1m payout Arsene Wenger & staff received for getting sacked - undeniably will lead to major financial issues.

There's a lot of excellent blogs and articles about how we got ourselves into this position, but if you want something really simple and concise that won't take long to read, this is the best I've found: https://bleacherreport.com/articles...enal-got-no-money-and-whats-their-plan#slide0

As for this not being anticipated to happen when The Emirates was built, you are absolutely right. However, there were several factors that didn't go in our favour which were out of our control.

The timing of the move was at the same time as the global depression, which impacted the sale of the flats in Highbury and made it a less cost-effective move.

The unanticipated bankrolling of Chelsea and Manchester City by external benefactors increasing the competition.

In terms of things that were in our control, Wenger staying on for too long didn't help, poor purchases made when money was available to spend freely, terrible negotiations of transfer fees and horrendous handling of player contracts.

Accumulating all of this together is a recipe for disaster.

Read the link you put in...really interesting...especially the list of 23 player who you sold for just £77m in the last 10 years...shocking stuff tbh.

 

[BrunelGooner]

Read the link you put in...really interesting...especially the list of 23 player who you sold for just £77m in the last 10 years...shocking stuff tbh.

I wouldn't really describe it as 'really interesting', more like ****ing pile of **** bullshit trash, but you're a Spurs fan, so I get why our demise would interest you

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

Why are we not in for Ziyech?

his release clause is 25 mill or something and he would be great for squad depth...could fill in for Son and give him real competition.

Very good player...silky and lively

He wants to be first choice at whatever club he joins. He made the same demands when he joined Ajax.
Not sure why Arsenal aren't saving about £50m and signing him instead of Zaha, though. Had a massive season last time out.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

Ozil - £350k p/w
Aubameyang - £280k p/w
Mkhitaryan - £180k p/w
Kolasinac - £120k p/w
Xhaka - £100k p/w
Sokratis - £92k p/w
Mustafi - £90k p/w
Elneny and Jenkinson on between £50k - £60k p/w

I'm sure that you remember me mentioning Arsenal's wage bill quite a while back and that it was unsustainable.
Wenger seemed to believe that giving average squad players large wages was a good idea, for some reason.
It just leads to a destructive spiral, as the better players want more and the whole thing inflates to ridiculous levels.
We've probably gone a little too far in the other direction, but it's something that we need to keep a real eye on.

 

[BrunelGooner]

Wenger seemed to believe that giving average squad players large wages was a good idea, for some reason.

He overvalued their importance to the club. My guess is he wanted to pay youth/fringe players handsomely to ensure they don't get poached by other clubs, as he was so sure of their potential to succeed. I suppose he saw it as paying competitive wages in a free market to incentivize them to stay. The obvious problem with giving younger/fringe players big money early on in their career is it can get to their heads or you find out they can't cut it at the top-level. Plenty of players have looked world-class at youth level but struggled to make the step up. However, you end up being stuck with them because no other club is willing to pay them the money they're currently on. After all, who wants to take a pay cut in a short career?

I think he should have kept the youth/fringe players on low wages. If hypothetically they did get poached by other clubs, so be it. You sell them, scout for new talent and the cycle continues. If it doesn't work out, there shouldn't be trouble moving them on because their wages are low.

 

["Thanks for that Brian"]

Arsenal supposedly committed to a self-sustaining model in 2008. Central to that model is the need to turn your squad over to protect its value and address expiring contracts and ageing assets.

This area of the business has been a ****tastrophe. Valuable assets have been allowed to leave for nothing and players have stayed until their ages have made them worthless.

As if that wasn't bad enough, Arsenal developed a taste for buying players who were too old for that model. Cech, Lichsteiner, Sokratis, Mkhitaryan, Aubameyang were all too old when they were signed. They weren't going to get any better, were on top wages and were going to depreciate faster than a new motor.

Spurs don't buy players over 27 years old without ****ing good reason - like our struggles to get a decent striker for under £15m (with llorente). The reason....?

THEY DON'T FIT A SELF-SUSTAINING MODEL.

It ain't rocket science but nobody seemed to be paying any notice, not even one of the richest businessmen in the world. Staggering!

 

[BrunelGooner]

Arsenal supposedly committed to a self-sustaining model in 2008. Central to that model is the need to turn your squad over to protect its value and address expiring contracts and ageing assets.

This area of the business has been a ****tastrophe. Valuable assets have been allowed to leave for nothing and players have stayed until their ages have made them worthless.

As if that wasn't bad enough, Arsenal developed a taste for buying players who were too old for that model. Cech, Lichsteiner, Sokratis, Mkhitaryan, Aubameyang were all too old when they were signed. They weren't going to get any better, were on top wages and were going to depreciate faster than a new motor.

Spurs don't buy players over 27 years old without ****ing good reason - like our struggles to get a decent striker for under £15m (with llorente). The reason....?

THEY DON'T FIT A SELF-SUSTAINING MODEL.

It ain't rocket science but nobody seemed to be paying any notice, not even one of the richest businessmen in the world. Staggering!

The thing I really struggle with is, if the average Arsenal fan can see where these problems are coming from, if fans from other clubs can identify where the problems are coming from, how have people who've worked in the club not realised? What are they being hired for? What was the criteria for employing them? Who decided to employ them?

It's extremely concerning this was allowed to happen for so many players, and only now, in 2019, we are hearing from Sanllehi that players with 2 years left on their deal, who don't commit to the club, will be sold.

You don't need to be a genius to know this ****. It's common ****ing sense.

 

[BrunelGooner]

It ain't rocket science but nobody seemed to be paying any notice, not even one of the richest businessmen in the world. Staggering!

This is also where the blame lies solely on Kroenke. Whilst he does get flack for other things that I personally don't feel should be attributed to him, he should not have allowed Gazidis, Wenger, Dick Law and the rest of them to stay on as long as they did.

He let them get away with this sheer incompetence for too long.

There are a lot of billionaire football club owners who are total dickheads, but this is the downside of having an owner that isn't interested in football and only sees you as a business opportunity.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

This is also where the blame lies solely on Kroenke. Whilst he does get flack for other things that I personally don't feel should be attributed to him, he should not have allowed Gazidis, Wenger, Dick Law and the rest of them to stay on as long as they did.

He let them get away with this sheer incompetence for too long.

There are a lot of billionaire football club owners who are total dickheads, but this is the downside of having an owner that isn't interested in football and only sees you as a business opportunity.

We've got an owner like that. Thankfully he doesn't do anything and largely stays away from the club.
I'm not sure that Levy entirely gets football either, but I think that he does get business.
It's not good business for a football club to be **** at football. Simple really, but so many of these owners and chairman don't get it.

I've said it before, but I think that a lot of Arsenal fans miss where the club deviated from a very successful formula.
Dein left and he wasn't replaced. The club lost a chairman and a Director of Football.
Silly power battles absorbed the board's attention, while Wenger had nobody to focus him and bring in the right players.

Emery did well at Seville, who had Monchi running things behind the scenes for ages.
He then took over a PSG team stocked up with oil money superstars and took what he was given.
He doesn't have any experience of running a whole club's squad needs.

 

[BrunelGooner]

We've got an owner like that. Thankfully he doesn't do anything and largely stays away from the club.
I'm not sure that Levy entirely gets football either, but I think that he does get business.
It's not good business for a football club to be **** at football. Simple really, but so many of these owners and chairman don't get it.

I've said it before, but I think that a lot of Arsenal fans miss where the club deviated from a very successful formula.
Dein left and he wasn't replaced. The club lost a chairman and a Director of Football.
Silly power battles absorbed the board's attention, while Wenger had nobody to focus him and bring in the right players.

Emery did well at Seville, who had Monchi running things behind the scenes for ages.
He then took over a PSG team stocked up with oil money superstars and took what he was given.
He doesn't have any experience of running a whole club's squad needs.

Isn't Levy a lifelong Spurs fan? It probably helps having someone that high up at your club who is actually passionate.

Having owners that do nothing and stay away from the club does have its benefits, as Kroenke for the most part doesn't interfere. However, there are drawbacks to this when **** hits the fan and you need someone to be proactive. To show some leadership.

Completely agree about Dein and the internal politics affecting us. We've lacked direction since his departure and I don't know why the club thought amalgamating his and Wenger's responsibilities was going to work. As much as I criticised Wenger in the last 6 years, he should never have been allowed to have much power. I guess this was a byproduct of his early success and loyalty to us, which essentially gave him a carte blanche to do what he liked.

The only other place Emery's done well on a frugal budget was when he was at Valencia. Regularly securing top 3 finishes in La Liga with no money and having to nurture stars, then sell them. I'm not sure if he had a director of football at Valencia, but he's proven that he can do well on tight finances.

The problem is there is a lot of competition now in the Premier League and as more clubs spend money, it becomes increasingly harder to remain competitive unless you spend big too (or if your manager can work miracles). He's going to have to pull a rabbit out the hat to secure CL football next season, considering every other club around us (possibly even Chelsea) look like outspending us this Summer, when we've got the most positions which need upgrading.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

Isn't Levy a lifelong Spurs fan? It probably helps having someone that high up at your club who is actually passionate.

Having owners that do nothing and stay away from the club does have its benefits, as Kroenke for the most part doesn't interfere. However, there are drawbacks to this when **** hits the fan and you need someone to be proactive. To show some leadership.

Completely agree about Dein and the internal politics affecting us. We've lacked direction since his departure and I don't know why the club thought amalgamating his and Wenger's responsibilities was going to work. As much as I criticised Wenger in the last 6 years, he should never have been allowed to have much power. I guess this was a byproduct of his early success and loyalty to us, which essentially gave him a carte blanche to do what he liked.

The only other place Emery's done well on a frugal budget was when he was at Valencia. Regularly securing top 3 finishes in La Liga with no money and having to nurture stars, then sell them. I'm not sure if he had a director of football at Valencia, but he's proven that he can do well on tight finances.

The problem is there is a lot of competition now in the Premier League and as more clubs spend money, it becomes increasingly harder to remain competitive unless you spend big too (or if your manager can work miracles). He's going to have to pull a rabbit out the hat to secure CL football next season, considering every other club around us (possibly even Chelsea) look like outspending us this Summer, when we've arguably got the most positions to reinforce.

Levy's a longtime Spurs fan, but he saw us as a massive opportunity, more than anything.
ENIC already owned a bunch of other clubs and he got to try things out with them and learn what works and what doesn't.

Wenger wasn't given too much power, in my opinion, but too much responsibility.
He was a coach that was asked to basically run the whole club. That shouldn't have been his job.

Emery did well at Valencia, but he had players like David Silva, David Villa, Mata, Morientes, Albiol and Albelda when he joined.
They've always had the usual European model and had a DOF or Sporting Director, but I'm not sure who it was at the time.

The competition in the Premier League seems best challenged by having a long-term vision for a club and sticking to it.
Wolves have taken a slightly dodgy approach, but it's working well for them.
Spending tons of money will only get you so far. Unless you can outspend everyone else, it's probably not the way to go.

 

[The RDBD]

BrunelGooner said: ↑
Ozil - £350k p/w
Aubameyang - £280k p/w
Mkhitaryan - £180k p/w
Kolasinac - £120k p/w
Xhaka - £100k p/w
Sokratis - £92k p/w
Mustafi - £90k p/w
Elneny and Jenkinson on between £50k - £60k p/w

You can nearly afford Bales' full wages on a loan deal,
by getting rid of all but the first three in that list.

 

["Thanks for that Brian"]

The most unbelievable part of Arsenal's failure to 'get' what is required to be a self-sustaining club, is that they were ****ing brilliant at it only a few years ago.

Go back to Vieira, Henry, Overmars, Van Persie, Vermaelen, Petit, etc., top dollar was extracted from clubs for only a season or two of performance at a top level, post-move, because they were ready for being moved on and done brilliantly by the club.

The contrast of recent years is stark in comparison.

 

[BrunelGooner]

So the latest on Zaha today is, despite him pleading to Parish and co. to sort out a move to Arsenal, they are standing firm and will demand £100m.

£100m. . Our record signing is £56m. Palace want us to pay almost double that. And, to compound matters, United would receive £25m of that fee, so they'd indirectly benefit from this transfer.

Yeah, I think it's safe to say this will not be happening.

Sorry Wilf, but it looks like you're destined to end your career at Palace....unless a club from the MLS or Far/Middle East fancies taking you on in your twilight years.

 

[remembercolinlee]

So the latest on Zaha today is, despite him pleading to Parish and co. to sort out a move to Arsenal, they are standing firm and will demand £100m.

£100m. . Our record signing is £56m. Palace want us to pay almost double that. And, to compound matters, United would receive £25m of that fee, so they'd indirectly benefit from this transfer.

Yeah, I think it's safe to say this will not be happening.

Sorry Wilf, but it looks like you're destined to end your career at Palace....unless a club from the MLS or Far/Middle East fancies taking you on in your twilight years.

Truely odd of him to sign a new contract last year with no release clause if he was looking to move.

 

[humanbeingincroydon]

Truely odd of him to sign a new contract last year with no release clause if he was looking to move.

Similar could be said for Aubameyang a couple of years ago

 

["Thanks for that Brian"]

So the latest on Zaha today is, despite him pleading to Parish and co. to sort out a move to Arsenal, they are standing firm and will demand £100m.

£100m. . Our record signing is £56m. Palace want us to pay almost double that. And, to compound matters, United would receive £25m of that fee, so they'd indirectly benefit from this transfer.

Yeah, I think it's safe to say this will not be happening.

Sorry Wilf, but it looks like you're destined to end your career at Palace....unless a club from the MLS or Far/Middle East fancies taking you on in your twilight years.

I'm pretty sure that reflects our looks at Zaha in the last two summers, only the asking prices were around £50m and £70m respectively...and he was younger and had suffered less injuries.

You can buy an equivalent foreign player for about half that price. If you do this, you've completely ****ing lost it.

 

[Alfie Conn]

David Moyes 6 yr contract with Man Utd expires today, 5+ yrs since he was fired , tough old life