The Goon Thread

[SpurMeUp]

Ar5ena1's end goal is money. thus, if they are to spend money, they better well see a financial return on it.

most other clubs competing at this elite level are after trophies. therefore if they have x amount of spare cash, they will spend it in order to chase the trophies. Ar5ena1 are built on a fundamentally different model to their competitors. its a wonder how they even manage to stay in touch with them.

Maybe. However, you might ask the question, why wouldn't the Board accept a takeover bid from the Uzbek thug minority shareholder who's worth more than Abromovick? If they were only interested in money?

 

[Neymar]

Now make of that what you will, but that says to me that the gap between them and Chel53a is not that big. Yet Chel53a have won the league.

those stats dont reflect how many top top players teams like chelsea have churned through though. arsenal simply cant afford to churn through players at that rate to find an optimal set of players.

 

[Neymar]

Maybe. However, you might ask the question, why wouldn't the Board accept a takeover bid from the Uzbek thug minority shareholder who's worth more than Abromovick? If they were only interested in money?

many possible reasons

- the offer is not that good
- they believe the value of arsenal will rise in the future (very reasonable given how much the overall value of football seems to keep risisng)

im sure there are many more.

 

[Baleforce]

They're not that far off the big 3 to be fair. The following are the financial figures:

Man United £433m with wages 50% or £216m;
Emirates Marketing Project £347m with wages 59% or £205m
Chel53a £324m with wages 59% or £191m
Ar5ena1 £304m with wages 55% or £167m
Liverpool £256m with wages 56% or £143m
Spurs £181m with wages 55% or £100m

Now make of that what you will, but that says to me that the gap between them and Chel53a is not that big. Yet Chel53a have won the league. I think being in the top 4 allows you to buy a better standard of player, but with there are enough good players for the top 4 clubs to be on a close par with eachother given that it is CL football that the players seem to want. The figures above were last years, but Ar5ena1 have now grown top line to £345m off the back of the Puma deal.

My point is simply that they could be doing better than they are, as they have done in the past. They can afford to make a net spend of £40m each season without incurring debt, they don't have a stadium to finance, they don't have a training complex to finance. They lack ambition to be better. The biggest reason for why they have fallen away is David Dein no longer playing a part because he was the one with that ambition.

And @galeforce , that scummy club is no where near the perfect club to support!!!

Is that revenue or spend?

Absolutely, it's just a hypothetical, if an alien comes down from LV-426 and wants to affiliate itself with a club which doesn't cause it any stress then there really is only one answer.

 

[SpurMeUp]

So Neymar, to summarise, the Scum's fans are wrong, Wenger is a genius, and it would be impossible for them to buy better players to attain a few more league points without them spending hundreds of millions?

Where has the rolling hysterical smiley gone?

 

[Neymar]

So Neymar, to summarise, the Scum's fans are wrong,

some are

Wenger is a genius,

if anything, thats an understatement. demigod comes to mind

and it would be impossible for them to buy better players to attain a few more league points without them spending hundreds of millions?

its possible for them to improve the squad without spending hundreds of millions. but probably not in a way that would lead to a financial return on investment. which is the crux of this debate

 

[Gazzasrightboot]

those stats dont reflect how many top top players teams like Chel53a have churned through though. Ar5ena1 simply cant afford to churn through players at that rate to find an optimal set of players.

Chelsea have been able to do it and also posting a profit, so Arsenal could afford to churn through players at that rate. What Arsenal cannot do is compete for the same player as the other top 3, but as I said there are enough top players in the other leagues for them to cherry pick. There are squad limits, so to be a club in the CL, in the EPL based in London in a stable environment is not a bad draw for a player.

If Arsenal's end goal was money, they wouldn't have bought Ozil. They would be adopting a model far more close to our own. They would also be making more profit than they are currently making!

AFAIK, the debate here is could Arsenal be doing better than they are currently doing bearing in mind their finances. The answer is quite simply yes.

 

[Gazzasrightboot]

Is that revenue or spend?

Absolutely, it's just a hypothetical, if an alien comes down from LV-426 and wants to affiliate itself with a club which doesn't cause it any stress then there really is only one answer.

Fair point, but only Emirates Marketing Project in that list is loss making and they have been penalised by FFP as a result, so the spend would be similar between Chelsea and Arsenal say.

 

[Baleforce]

Chel53a have been able to do it and also posting a profit, so Ar5ena1 could afford to churn through players at that rate. What Ar5ena1 cannot do is compete for the same player as the other top 3, but as I said there are enough top players in the other leagues for them to cherry pick. There are squad limits, so to be a club in the CL, in the EPL based in London in a stable environment is not a bad draw for a player.

If Ar5ena1's end goal was money, they wouldn't have bought Ozil. They would be adopting a model far more close to our own. They would also be making more profit than they are currently making!

AFAIK, the debate here is could Ar5ena1 be doing better than they are currently doing bearing in mind their finances. The answer is quite simply yes.

But, could they do that much better that it would be worth doing, they are in the CL every year, does spending a few million more make them likely European Cup winners?

 

[SpurMeUp]

many possible reasons

- the offer is not that good
- they believe the value of Ar5ena1 will rise in the future (very reasonable given how much the overall value of football seems to keep risisng)

im sure there are many more.

Money is no object when you are worth $13.6 billion!!! Abromovich has a paltry 7.9b by comparison. You seem absolutely sure the Scums transfer policy is sound, despite what their fans think and despite their results. Available players who neutrals consider improvements for them, you dismiss as not good enough and you state 'genius' as being too mild to describe Wenger's ability...have you considered applying for Head of Managerial Blow Jobs round there!?

 

[Baleforce]

Fair point, but only Emirates Marketing Project in that list is loss making and they have been penalised by FFP as a result, so the spend would be similar between Chel53a and Ar5ena1 say.

My point was that the other three can spend more, a lot more, as its not real money, FFP seems to be fading away, is now a sensible time for Arsenal to join a dingdong measuring contest?

 

[Neymar]

Chel53a have been able to do it and also posting a profit,

which is perhaps why they are so brick atm, and mourinho is getting mad. in all seriousness though, are they making a profit? gab marcotti suggested otherwise on the times podcast iirc. it helps them stay within ffp (because of technicalities in how ffp is written), but im not sure it is really a profitable venture.

so Ar5ena1 could afford to churn through players at that rate. What Ar5ena1 cannot do is compete for the same player as the other top 3, but as I said there are enough top players in the other leagues for them to cherry pick. There are squad limits, so to be a club in the CL, in the EPL based in London in a stable environment is not a bad draw for a player.

so why dont other clubs likes us or liverpool get these players instead then? the kind of players arsenal get are fully within ours and liverpool's reach imo

If Ar5ena1's end goal was money, they wouldn't have bought Ozil. They would be adopting a model far more close to our own.

they needed ozil. the fans were on the verge of a revolt. you need to sell a dream to your fans every so often. ozil was arsenal selling their fans a dream.

They would also be making more profit than they are currently making!

who knows? i would add however that its not just about YoY profits. its about increasing/maintaining the overall business value too. and probably a lot more other stuff. which as fans, we really have no idea.

AFAIK, the debate here is could Ar5ena1 be doing better than they are currently doing bearing in mind their finances. The answer is quite simply yes.

again youve asked the wrong question here imo. the question should be "can arsenal maximise profits by spending more on players?" this would probably be a far more interesting debate imo

 

[Gazzasrightboot]

But, could they do that much better that it would be worth doing, they are in the CL every year, does spending a few million more make them likely European Cup winners?

I think that is exactly the point. Yes they could by showing a bit more ambition. I likened it earlier to our own situation. I would be severely disappointed if we were not trying to close the gap, which we are doing through the new stadium, new training facilities etc.... If when the stadium is built, we just accept our lot and think "well we will never match the top 4" I would be incredibly disappointed. There are always ways of closing the gap. Better purchasing, better scouting, better youth, better tactics etc.... To just carry on doing the same thing is lacking in ambition which I think is the point that is being debated.

 

[Neymar]

Money is no object when you are worth $13.6 billion!!! Abromovich has a paltry 7.9b by comparison.

you just dont get it do you? there are some people in this world that dont buy a club just because they want to win trophies. there are people in this world who dont view football as a profit free environment.

You seem absolutely sure the Scums transfer policy is sound, despite what their fans think and despite their results. Available players who neutrals consider improvements for them, you dismiss as not good enough and you state 'genius' as being too mild to describe Wenger's ability...have you considered applying for Head of Managerial Blow Jobs round there!?

you just dont get it mate. and because there are enough people who think along the same lines as you, guys like kroenke will always stand to make a fortune from owning sports clubs

 

[Gazzasrightboot]

My point was that the other three can spend more, a lot more, as its not real money, FFP seems to be fading away, is now a sensible time for Ar5ena1 to join a dingdong measuring contest?

Absolutely, but recent accounts show that Chelsea have not outspent Arsenal and have turned a profit. I don't think it is about joining a dingdong measuring contest, it is about looking to address your weaknesses and becoming a more successful football club.

 

[Baleforce]

I think that is exactly the point. Yes they could by showing a bit more ambition. I likened it earlier to our own situation. I would be severely disappointed if we were not trying to close the gap, which we are doing through the new stadium, new training facilities etc.... If when the stadium is built, we just accept our lot and think "well we will never match the top 4" I would be incredibly disappointed. There are always ways of closing the gap. Better purchasing, better scouting, better youth, better tactics etc.... To just carry on doing the same thing is lacking in ambition which I think is the point that is being debated.

I think we are doing everything we can to close the gap to Arsenal, but I'd be very surprised if Levy has any ideas of getting anywhere near Manchester or Chelsea, or Madrid or Munich, the drawbridge was raised a long time ago. One of those clubs could fail for sure, one of City or Chelsea probably will as its only investment that has propelled them this far, when the money leaves so will hope, then the fans and income streams, they have no real historicity, the other three though, are in a different echelon.

 

[Gazzasrightboot]

which is perhaps why they are so **** atm, and mourinho is getting mad. in all seriousness though, are they making a profit? gab marcotti suggested otherwise on the times podcast iirc. it helps them stay within ffp (because of technicalities in how ffp is written), but im not sure it is really a profitable venture.

Well their audited accounts show them making a profit. Those accounts are prepared on the same basis as Arsenal's so comparability is fair. And whilst Mourinho is going mad, let's not forget that he has won the league. That's the point.

so why dont other clubs likes us or liverpool get these players instead then? the kind of players Ar5ena1 get are fully within ours and liverpool's reach imo

Champions League.

they needed ozil. the fans were on the verge of a revolt. you need to sell a dream to your fans every so often. ozil was Ar5ena1 selling their fans a dream.

Their fans are on the verge of a revolt this season so they're not doing a great job at selling the dream! And I'm sure they could have bought a cheaper player to sell the dream.

who knows? i would add however that its not just about YoY profits. its about increasing/maintaining the overall business value too. and probably a lot more other stuff. which as fans, we really have no idea.

Business value is linked to profits. The value of a football club will not be the asset value of the balance sheet, but rather a multiple of profits or revenue. If you look at the prices Aston Villa and Liverpool were sold for, you can clearly see that it was linked to multiple of revenue rather than any asset side. YoY profits and a manageable wage bill coupled with "success" are going to be what drives the price of a football club.

again youve asked the wrong question here imo. the question should be "can Ar5ena1 maximise profits by spending more on players?" this would probably be a far more interesting debate imo

Well if that is the question, I have been answering the wrong question. I thought we were talking about Arsenal's lack of ambition and the fact that they could perform much better. If the question is can they maximise profits by spending more on players, then it's a simple debate. The answer is no!

 

[Gazzasrightboot]

I think we are doing everything we can to close the gap to Ar5ena1, but I'd be very surprised if Levy has any ideas of getting anywhere near Manchester or Chel53a, or Madrid or Munich, the drawbridge was raised a long time ago. One of those clubs could fail for sure, one of City or Chel53a probably will as its only investment that has propelled them this far, when the money leaves so will hope, then the fans and income streams, they have no real historicity, the other three though, are in a different echelon.

I'm not so sure about that, but I guess there's no way to prove it one way or another. If that is the case, then I will be disappointed.

 

[Baleforce]

I'm not so sure about that, but I guess there's no way to prove it one way or another. If that is the case, then I will be disappointed.

It's an interesting one, is it better for him to have the ambition that we could be at that level, or for him to be realistic?

Personally I'd go with the latter.

 

[Gazzasrightboot]

you just dont get it do you? there are some people in this world that dont buy a club just because they want to win trophies. there are people in this world who dont view football as a profit free environment.

you just dont get it mate. and because there are enough people who think along the same lines as you, guys like kroenke will always stand to make a fortune from owning sports clubs

Kroenke is not making a fortune yet. He's not been paid any dividend for the last 2 years, and pays himself a salary of £25k a year. The other Kroenke earns £12k a year. If he were profit orientated, he would either pay himself a handsome salary, handsome dividend or he is planning on selling his shares at some point in the future.