Arsenal players pay cut / club financial losses? Merged thread.

As we're unlikely to see terraces again at football, this is the virtual equivalent where you can chat to your hearts content about all football matters and, obviously, Arsenal in particular. This forum encourages all Gooners to visit and contribute so please keep it respectful, clean and topical.
Jock Gooner
Posts: 2594
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 7:53 am

Re: Arsenal players pay cut / club financial losses? Merged thread.

Post by Jock Gooner »

nut flush gooner wrote:
Tue Apr 28, 2020 7:07 am
Jock Gooner wrote:
Mon Apr 27, 2020 6:46 pm
nut flush gooner wrote:
Mon Apr 27, 2020 5:39 pm
Jock Gooner wrote:
Mon Apr 27, 2020 5:01 pm
nut flush gooner wrote:
Mon Apr 27, 2020 3:59 pm


There's a difference between having money in the bank and being a profitable entity. Its inevitable Arsenal will post a heavy loss this accounting year with coronavirus being one reason and our league standing another. Just because wiggy has his fingers in many pies with great wealth that doesn't give Ozil the right to veto a pay cut. Everyone in this country will suffer financially as a result of the incoming recession, so footballers shouldn't be financially immune. I'm not particularly interested in what other clubs do tbh.


There is a huge difference between 'normal' businesses and top tier PL clubs and ultimately the club's profitability is not really Ozil's concern. The money in the bank, built up over the better years, is now being used to cover future payments due and to offset trading losses not to invest in the future. The club has run a trading loss for a number of years but then transfer income favourably adjusts the position to an apparent profit. Who knows....by the time the league is concluded and we sell Auba, buying a replacement for half his value, the books may not look quite as bad. However, if they do then we will simply continue in the direction that wiggy has taken us and his investment devalues.

Trading is over a full financial year so until we have a better handle on how much Covid-19 is going to affect the club's finances I don't have a problem with Ozil holding off a decision. He is contracted to the club so of course he has a legal right to veto a pay cut that's just a fact. Strange how the other players who didn't immediately agree to the "voluntary" 12.5% pay cut haven't been publicly named too. As far as I'm aware Ozil hasn't outright turned down the club's "offer" so it maybe a bit premature to judge his actions which is why I take take the view that I do.

As far as the actions of other clubs go, I would suggest that they are likely to provide a better benchmark than the current bunch of fuckwits in charge of our club. The bottom line is that it was Matt Hancock who decided to politicize footballers wages so if I was Herr Ozil I would be tempted to tell him to keep his big fucking nose out of things which don't concern him and to get on with his own job of putting NHS workers lives at risk through a lack of PPE.
Arsenal only has "cash balances" because of the way they conduct their transfer business, I do agree with that. But don't forget we are paying instalments for the likes of Pepe, so that can create an illusion that we are more flush than we really are.

From the last accounts its £167m, which for a big club really isn't that much maybe 2 marquee signings. The club lost £32 million last year. I can't see them doing anything but posting another loss, possibly more based on our current league position. Ozil's salary represents more than £1 in £10 that Arsenal has in the bank, sorry there's no way I am allowing someone like Ozil to hold the club to ransom. In all honesty, if it pisses him off so much that he fucks off to another club, so be it.


Apparently after you factor in player transfers / payments we are down to below the £100M figure for cash reserves. Like it or not Ozil is looking at that, the unused £50M bank facility, throw in one more season of silly money, no chance of a new contract and he thought fuck it Stan can afford it.

However, I admire your refusal to allow Ozil to hold the club to ransom and in that case very much look forward to seeing you on the news sometime soon. Just remember to watch out for Kolasinac when you make your move :lol:
Stan's other business interests have nothing to do with Ozil do they? Walmart aren't responsible for paying his wages because they are the biggest supermarket in the world. You can't look at the man at the helm of multiple businesses over the club that employs him. If Ozil is looking at cash in the bank he has no understanding about how businesses work. That cash in the bank is being depleted every day just to allow the club to carry on with everyday business.

WTF where did you get that from :lol: I haven't said anything about Stan's other businesses or Walmart. Where did Walmart come from :lol: I thought we had brought this to a natural conclusion but apparently not.

Ozil doesn't need to understand how businesses work or even care, just as long as there is enough in the pot to pay his wages we are obliged to pay them as and when they fall due under the terms of his contract.

Stan owns Arsenal and therefore he ultimately calls the shots and is Ozil's ultimate boss. Ozil has a contract for £350k per week. No doubt for that amount Stan sanctioned it. We pay it. The end.

User avatar
Herd
Posts: 6176
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 9:00 am

Re: Arsenal players pay cut / club financial losses? Merged thread.

Post by Herd »

I'm sorry but if I have signed a contract with you I expect you to pay ,I have zero sympathy for the club !
None of the Players consider Arsenal as anything more than a cash cow ,why idiots get on their back making ridiculous comparisons to Nurses and NHS is completely beyond me !
If Arsenal hadn't insured against loss of earnings, which considering they only have 4 main sources TV ,Sponsorships, gate money and merchandise,then they are negligent fuckwits !
Why the players contracts didn't have force majeure clauses in them is again completely beyond me ,goes to show Gazidis was as bad an MD as Wenger was a coach !
No Folks the shit the Premiership is up to it's necks in is entirely of its own making !
If I were them I'd hire a shit hot lawyer and see if I can void Ozils contract claiming frustration of contract and id like to take a peak at the sky contract too!
If they pay per season then they have to pay but im sure their lawyers make sure its tied to so many games !

nut flush gooner
Posts: 3113
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 10:23 am

Re: Arsenal players pay cut / club financial losses? Merged thread.

Post by nut flush gooner »

Jock Gooner wrote:
Tue Apr 28, 2020 1:15 pm
nut flush gooner wrote:
Tue Apr 28, 2020 7:07 am
Jock Gooner wrote:
Mon Apr 27, 2020 6:46 pm
nut flush gooner wrote:
Mon Apr 27, 2020 5:39 pm
Jock Gooner wrote:
Mon Apr 27, 2020 5:01 pm




There is a huge difference between 'normal' businesses and top tier PL clubs and ultimately the club's profitability is not really Ozil's concern. The money in the bank, built up over the better years, is now being used to cover future payments due and to offset trading losses not to invest in the future. The club has run a trading loss for a number of years but then transfer income favourably adjusts the position to an apparent profit. Who knows....by the time the league is concluded and we sell Auba, buying a replacement for half his value, the books may not look quite as bad. However, if they do then we will simply continue in the direction that wiggy has taken us and his investment devalues.

Trading is over a full financial year so until we have a better handle on how much Covid-19 is going to affect the club's finances I don't have a problem with Ozil holding off a decision. He is contracted to the club so of course he has a legal right to veto a pay cut that's just a fact. Strange how the other players who didn't immediately agree to the "voluntary" 12.5% pay cut haven't been publicly named too. As far as I'm aware Ozil hasn't outright turned down the club's "offer" so it maybe a bit premature to judge his actions which is why I take take the view that I do.

As far as the actions of other clubs go, I would suggest that they are likely to provide a better benchmark than the current bunch of fuckwits in charge of our club. The bottom line is that it was Matt Hancock who decided to politicize footballers wages so if I was Herr Ozil I would be tempted to tell him to keep his big fucking nose out of things which don't concern him and to get on with his own job of putting NHS workers lives at risk through a lack of PPE.
Arsenal only has "cash balances" because of the way they conduct their transfer business, I do agree with that. But don't forget we are paying instalments for the likes of Pepe, so that can create an illusion that we are more flush than we really are.

From the last accounts its £167m, which for a big club really isn't that much maybe 2 marquee signings. The club lost £32 million last year. I can't see them doing anything but posting another loss, possibly more based on our current league position. Ozil's salary represents more than £1 in £10 that Arsenal has in the bank, sorry there's no way I am allowing someone like Ozil to hold the club to ransom. In all honesty, if it pisses him off so much that he fucks off to another club, so be it.


Apparently after you factor in player transfers / payments we are down to below the £100M figure for cash reserves. Like it or not Ozil is looking at that, the unused £50M bank facility, throw in one more season of silly money, no chance of a new contract and he thought fuck it Stan can afford it.

However, I admire your refusal to allow Ozil to hold the club to ransom and in that case very much look forward to seeing you on the news sometime soon. Just remember to watch out for Kolasinac when you make your move :lol:
Stan's other business interests have nothing to do with Ozil do they? Walmart aren't responsible for paying his wages because they are the biggest supermarket in the world. You can't look at the man at the helm of multiple businesses over the club that employs him. If Ozil is looking at cash in the bank he has no understanding about how businesses work. That cash in the bank is being depleted every day just to allow the club to carry on with everyday business.

WTF where did you get that from :lol: I haven't said anything about Stan's other businesses or Walmart. Where did Walmart come from :lol: I thought we had brought this to a natural conclusion but apparently not.

Ozil doesn't need to understand how businesses work or even care, just as long as there is enough in the pot to pay his wages we are obliged to pay them as and when they fall due under the terms of his contract.

Stan owns Arsenal and therefore he ultimately calls the shots and is Ozil's ultimate boss. Ozil has a contract for £350k per week. No doubt for that amount Stan sanctioned it. We pay it. The end.
When you suggest Stan is Ozils boss you are intimating that his salary should be paid from Stans personal wealth. But as you have clarified that’s not what you meant fair enough. Ozil is an employee of Arsenal football club, not Stan Kroenke there's a big difference, you're looking at things way too simplistically. The £100m you are talking about is an estimate based in last summers transfer activity things have moved on big time, I recogn the true figures are much lower as a result of our league position and as things stand we won't have a place in Europe next season. That's before we talk about any summer transfers. The cash reserve is a smokescreen, as I said it will be depleted very quickly in current trading conditions. Lets see what Ozil says when we haven't got a pot to piss in. I suspect it won't be any different to what he says today.

Stan didn't sanction Ozils wages he's as hands off as an owner can get. It was Wenger when he had control with Gazidis.

Ozil and his advisers are playing a game with Arsenal, his advisers are keeping an eye on the finances at the club. Ozil's stance is irrelevant really his agent will advise him on the way forward. In the UK we've handled this pandemic so bad there will be a second wave of Covid19 cases in the autumn making it next to impossible to have full capacity at football grounds which in turn will have a big affect on our future income. He knows he can rip up his contract and get a fat signing on fee at another club (MLS maybe) or take the piss and dig in at Arsenal while his teammates take cuts, great for team spirit yeah. If we are not careful we could end up having to lose some of our young talent to make sure Ozils ongoing salary commitments are met. He can get the fuck out as far as I am concerned. Arsenal should play hardball here and they have every right to given the lack of value for money ozil has given, business is business.

Jock Gooner
Posts: 2594
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 7:53 am

Re: Arsenal players pay cut / club financial losses? Merged thread.

Post by Jock Gooner »

nut flush gooner wrote:
Wed Apr 29, 2020 9:19 pm
Jock Gooner wrote:
Tue Apr 28, 2020 1:15 pm
nut flush gooner wrote:
Tue Apr 28, 2020 7:07 am
Jock Gooner wrote:
Mon Apr 27, 2020 6:46 pm
nut flush gooner wrote:
Mon Apr 27, 2020 5:39 pm


Arsenal only has "cash balances" because of the way they conduct their transfer business, I do agree with that. But don't forget we are paying instalments for the likes of Pepe, so that can create an illusion that we are more flush than we really are.

From the last accounts its £167m, which for a big club really isn't that much maybe 2 marquee signings. The club lost £32 million last year. I can't see them doing anything but posting another loss, possibly more based on our current league position. Ozil's salary represents more than £1 in £10 that Arsenal has in the bank, sorry there's no way I am allowing someone like Ozil to hold the club to ransom. In all honesty, if it pisses him off so much that he fucks off to another club, so be it.


Apparently after you factor in player transfers / payments we are down to below the £100M figure for cash reserves. Like it or not Ozil is looking at that, the unused £50M bank facility, throw in one more season of silly money, no chance of a new contract and he thought fuck it Stan can afford it.

However, I admire your refusal to allow Ozil to hold the club to ransom and in that case very much look forward to seeing you on the news sometime soon. Just remember to watch out for Kolasinac when you make your move :lol:
Stan's other business interests have nothing to do with Ozil do they? Walmart aren't responsible for paying his wages because they are the biggest supermarket in the world. You can't look at the man at the helm of multiple businesses over the club that employs him. If Ozil is looking at cash in the bank he has no understanding about how businesses work. That cash in the bank is being depleted every day just to allow the club to carry on with everyday business.

WTF where did you get that from :lol: I haven't said anything about Stan's other businesses or Walmart. Where did Walmart come from :lol: I thought we had brought this to a natural conclusion but apparently not.

Ozil doesn't need to understand how businesses work or even care, just as long as there is enough in the pot to pay his wages we are obliged to pay them as and when they fall due under the terms of his contract.

Stan owns Arsenal and therefore he ultimately calls the shots and is Ozil's ultimate boss. Ozil has a contract for £350k per week. No doubt for that amount Stan sanctioned it. We pay it. The end.
When you suggest Stan is Ozils boss you are intimating that his salary should be paid from Stans personal wealth. But as you have clarified that’s not what you meant fair enough. Ozil is an employee of Arsenal football club, not Stan Kroenke there's a big difference, you're looking at things way too simplistically. The £100m you are talking about is an estimate based in last summers transfer activity things have moved on big time, I recogn the true figures are much lower as a result of our league position and as things stand we won't have a place in Europe next season. That's before we talk about any summer transfers. The cash reserve is a smokescreen, as I said it will be depleted very quickly in current trading conditions. Lets see what Ozil says when we haven't got a pot to piss in. I suspect it won't be any different to what he says today.

Stan didn't sanction Ozils wages he's as hands off as an owner can get. It was Wenger when he had control with Gazidis.

Ozil and his advisers are playing a game with Arsenal, his advisers are keeping an eye on the finances at the club. Ozil's stance is irrelevant really his agent will advise him on the way forward. In the UK we've handled this pandemic so bad there will be a second wave of Covid19 cases in the autumn making it next to impossible to have full capacity at football grounds which in turn will have a big affect on our future income. He knows he can rip up his contract and get a fat signing on fee at another club (MLS maybe) or take the piss and dig in at Arsenal while his teammates take cuts, great for team spirit yeah. If we are not careful we could end up having to lose some of our young talent to make sure Ozils ongoing salary commitments are met. He can get the fuck out as far as I am concerned. Arsenal should play hardball here and they have every right to given the lack of value for money ozil has given, business is business.


When you suggest Stan is Ozils boss you are intimating that his salary should be paid from Stans personal wealth

Hang on you have just jumped from Walmart - nothing to do with Ozil - to Stan's personal wealth which is relevant. We are privately owned by Stan now so who do you think is ultimately responsible for paying Arsenal's way in the event that the club defaults on all its debts / salaries / contracts. If the clubs assets including the ground didn't cover what we were due who do you think is liable for any shortfall......

Stan owns Arsenal outright as a private concern so whichever way you want to look at it he is Ozil's ultimate boss. Stan is the one who gets to take any profit out of the club if he chooses and he is ultimately the man the banks would talk to if things went horribly south. Sure there is a Board structure in place but none of those employees of Arsenal (Stan) can pull a penny of profit out of the club without Stan's say so. You could throw the Board away and it's still Arsenal and it's still Stan's baby. There won't be any personal guarantees with the banks in the names of Sir Chips or KF that's for sure, the whole thing is underwritten by Stan's ownership and his personal wealth will absolutely have been taken into account by the banks when reviewing our facilities with them.

Looking at this way too simplistically :lol: I would suggest that you are overcomplicating the issue of whether Ozil gets paid or not. I agree that the future for the club's finances is grim if this virus isn't dealt with successfully but we come back to Ozil and the here and now. The club's financial outlook really isn't his problem and in the same way that a sugar daddy owner can sink personal money into his club, Stan is also liable to ensure that Ozil's contract is paid. That is achieved firstly through cashflow or then its into the bank facility, if that's fully drawn then it's Stan's decision as to whether to extend the club's bank facility or even to cover it himself. If he fails to pay up then Ozil takes the club to court and wins. The resulting charging order would be against Arsenal but that is Stan whichever way you look at it.

Ozil knows he is finished with us so there is nothing we can do but meet his contracted salary for the final year. If by the end of next season the club is down to its final couple of quid of the bank facility then Ozil will still be entitled to stick his paw out to be paid and it will be Stan who ultimately decides whether to increase our borrowing to meet it or to sell a couple of players or the ground for flats or to sell the club to some other billionaire to deal with. Obviously it will never reach Stan because the club has enough working capital, credit and assets between Ozil and him and as long as that remains the case for another year then Ozil gets paid.

I get that you are pissed with Ozil and you are right that we could end up having to cash in on a player or two to help balance the books but that doesn't change anything. Perhaps the club would have been better served negotiating a position with the players a bit more cautiously than they did but it would appear that they believed that peer pressure would do the job for them - but it didn't work. From what I've heard in the news most clubs have agreed wage deferrements with their players and I still think that would have been a sensible way to go for the first 3 months of this saga with a review at expiry to then consider other options.

nut flush gooner
Posts: 3113
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 10:23 am

Re: Arsenal players pay cut / club financial losses? Merged thread.

Post by nut flush gooner »

Jock Gooner wrote:
Thu Apr 30, 2020 2:30 pm
nut flush gooner wrote:
Wed Apr 29, 2020 9:19 pm
Jock Gooner wrote:
Tue Apr 28, 2020 1:15 pm
nut flush gooner wrote:
Tue Apr 28, 2020 7:07 am
Jock Gooner wrote:
Mon Apr 27, 2020 6:46 pm




Apparently after you factor in player transfers / payments we are down to below the £100M figure for cash reserves. Like it or not Ozil is looking at that, the unused £50M bank facility, throw in one more season of silly money, no chance of a new contract and he thought fuck it Stan can afford it.

However, I admire your refusal to allow Ozil to hold the club to ransom and in that case very much look forward to seeing you on the news sometime soon. Just remember to watch out for Kolasinac when you make your move :lol:
Stan's other business interests have nothing to do with Ozil do they? Walmart aren't responsible for paying his wages because they are the biggest supermarket in the world. You can't look at the man at the helm of multiple businesses over the club that employs him. If Ozil is looking at cash in the bank he has no understanding about how businesses work. That cash in the bank is being depleted every day just to allow the club to carry on with everyday business.

WTF where did you get that from :lol: I haven't said anything about Stan's other businesses or Walmart. Where did Walmart come from :lol: I thought we had brought this to a natural conclusion but apparently not.

Ozil doesn't need to understand how businesses work or even care, just as long as there is enough in the pot to pay his wages we are obliged to pay them as and when they fall due under the terms of his contract.

Stan owns Arsenal and therefore he ultimately calls the shots and is Ozil's ultimate boss. Ozil has a contract for £350k per week. No doubt for that amount Stan sanctioned it. We pay it. The end.
When you suggest Stan is Ozils boss you are intimating that his salary should be paid from Stans personal wealth. But as you have clarified that’s not what you meant fair enough. Ozil is an employee of Arsenal football club, not Stan Kroenke there's a big difference, you're looking at things way too simplistically. The £100m you are talking about is an estimate based in last summers transfer activity things have moved on big time, I recogn the true figures are much lower as a result of our league position and as things stand we won't have a place in Europe next season. That's before we talk about any summer transfers. The cash reserve is a smokescreen, as I said it will be depleted very quickly in current trading conditions. Lets see what Ozil says when we haven't got a pot to piss in. I suspect it won't be any different to what he says today.

Stan didn't sanction Ozils wages he's as hands off as an owner can get. It was Wenger when he had control with Gazidis.

Ozil and his advisers are playing a game with Arsenal, his advisers are keeping an eye on the finances at the club. Ozil's stance is irrelevant really his agent will advise him on the way forward. In the UK we've handled this pandemic so bad there will be a second wave of Covid19 cases in the autumn making it next to impossible to have full capacity at football grounds which in turn will have a big affect on our future income. He knows he can rip up his contract and get a fat signing on fee at another club (MLS maybe) or take the piss and dig in at Arsenal while his teammates take cuts, great for team spirit yeah. If we are not careful we could end up having to lose some of our young talent to make sure Ozils ongoing salary commitments are met. He can get the fuck out as far as I am concerned. Arsenal should play hardball here and they have every right to given the lack of value for money ozil has given, business is business.


When you suggest Stan is Ozils boss you are intimating that his salary should be paid from Stans personal wealth

Hang on you have just jumped from Walmart - nothing to do with Ozil - to Stan's personal wealth which is relevant. We are privately owned by Stan now so who do you think is ultimately responsible for paying Arsenal's way in the event that the club defaults on all its debts / salaries / contracts. If the clubs assets including the ground didn't cover what we were due who do you think is liable for any shortfall......

Stan owns Arsenal outright as a private concern so whichever way you want to look at it he is Ozil's ultimate boss. Stan is the one who gets to take any profit out of the club if he chooses and he is ultimately the man the banks would talk to if things went horribly south. Sure there is a Board structure in place but none of those employees of Arsenal (Stan) can pull a penny of profit out of the club without Stan's say so. You could throw the Board away and it's still Arsenal and it's still Stan's baby. There won't be any personal guarantees with the banks in the names of Sir Chips or KF that's for sure, the whole thing is underwritten by Stan's ownership and his personal wealth will absolutely have been taken into account by the banks when reviewing our facilities with them.

Looking at this way too simplistically :lol: I would suggest that you are overcomplicating the issue of whether Ozil gets paid or not. I agree that the future for the club's finances is grim if this virus isn't dealt with successfully but we come back to Ozil and the here and now. The club's financial outlook really isn't his problem and in the same way that a sugar daddy owner can sink personal money into his club, Stan is also liable to ensure that Ozil's contract is paid. That is achieved firstly through cashflow or then its into the bank facility, if that's fully drawn then it's Stan's decision as to whether to extend the club's bank facility or even to cover it himself. If he fails to pay up then Ozil takes the club to court and wins. The resulting charging order would be against Arsenal but that is Stan whichever way you look at it.

Ozil knows he is finished with us so there is nothing we can do but meet his contracted salary for the final year. If by the end of next season the club is down to its final couple of quid of the bank facility then Ozil will still be entitled to stick his paw out to be paid and it will be Stan who ultimately decides whether to increase our borrowing to meet it or to sell a couple of players or the ground for flats or to sell the club to some other billionaire to deal with. Obviously it will never reach Stan because the club has enough working capital, credit and assets between Ozil and him and as long as that remains the case for another year then Ozil gets paid.

I get that you are pissed with Ozil and you are right that we could end up having to cash in on a player or two to help balance the books but that doesn't change anything. Perhaps the club would have been better served negotiating a position with the players a bit more cautiously than they did but it would appear that they believed that peer pressure would do the job for them - but it didn't work. From what I've heard in the news most clubs have agreed wage deferrements with their players and I still think that would have been a sensible way to go for the first 3 months of this saga with a review at expiry to then consider other options.
I think we will just have to agree to disagree here. You are looking at Stan as an individual rather than his company KSE, his personal wealth sits outside of KSE and Arsenal Holdings. Arsenal as a standalone business as we all know is set up to spend what it earns. I doubt very much there will be any cash in the bank once all this COVID stuff has washed through. By the time the next accounts are issued, Ozil will literally have a few months left on his contract. I just hope his stance doesn't hit us on the pitch. To lose either saka or martinelli would be a disaster.

Jock Gooner
Posts: 2594
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 7:53 am

Re: Arsenal players pay cut / club financial losses? Merged thread.

Post by Jock Gooner »

nut flush gooner wrote:
Mon May 04, 2020 2:08 pm
Jock Gooner wrote:
Thu Apr 30, 2020 2:30 pm
nut flush gooner wrote:
Wed Apr 29, 2020 9:19 pm
Jock Gooner wrote:
Tue Apr 28, 2020 1:15 pm
nut flush gooner wrote:
Tue Apr 28, 2020 7:07 am


Stan's other business interests have nothing to do with Ozil do they? Walmart aren't responsible for paying his wages because they are the biggest supermarket in the world. You can't look at the man at the helm of multiple businesses over the club that employs him. If Ozil is looking at cash in the bank he has no understanding about how businesses work. That cash in the bank is being depleted every day just to allow the club to carry on with everyday business.

WTF where did you get that from :lol: I haven't said anything about Stan's other businesses or Walmart. Where did Walmart come from :lol: I thought we had brought this to a natural conclusion but apparently not.

Ozil doesn't need to understand how businesses work or even care, just as long as there is enough in the pot to pay his wages we are obliged to pay them as and when they fall due under the terms of his contract.

Stan owns Arsenal and therefore he ultimately calls the shots and is Ozil's ultimate boss. Ozil has a contract for £350k per week. No doubt for that amount Stan sanctioned it. We pay it. The end.
When you suggest Stan is Ozils boss you are intimating that his salary should be paid from Stans personal wealth. But as you have clarified that’s not what you meant fair enough. Ozil is an employee of Arsenal football club, not Stan Kroenke there's a big difference, you're looking at things way too simplistically. The £100m you are talking about is an estimate based in last summers transfer activity things have moved on big time, I recogn the true figures are much lower as a result of our league position and as things stand we won't have a place in Europe next season. That's before we talk about any summer transfers. The cash reserve is a smokescreen, as I said it will be depleted very quickly in current trading conditions. Lets see what Ozil says when we haven't got a pot to piss in. I suspect it won't be any different to what he says today.

Stan didn't sanction Ozils wages he's as hands off as an owner can get. It was Wenger when he had control with Gazidis.

Ozil and his advisers are playing a game with Arsenal, his advisers are keeping an eye on the finances at the club. Ozil's stance is irrelevant really his agent will advise him on the way forward. In the UK we've handled this pandemic so bad there will be a second wave of Covid19 cases in the autumn making it next to impossible to have full capacity at football grounds which in turn will have a big affect on our future income. He knows he can rip up his contract and get a fat signing on fee at another club (MLS maybe) or take the piss and dig in at Arsenal while his teammates take cuts, great for team spirit yeah. If we are not careful we could end up having to lose some of our young talent to make sure Ozils ongoing salary commitments are met. He can get the fuck out as far as I am concerned. Arsenal should play hardball here and they have every right to given the lack of value for money ozil has given, business is business.


When you suggest Stan is Ozils boss you are intimating that his salary should be paid from Stans personal wealth

Hang on you have just jumped from Walmart - nothing to do with Ozil - to Stan's personal wealth which is relevant. We are privately owned by Stan now so who do you think is ultimately responsible for paying Arsenal's way in the event that the club defaults on all its debts / salaries / contracts. If the clubs assets including the ground didn't cover what we were due who do you think is liable for any shortfall......

Stan owns Arsenal outright as a private concern so whichever way you want to look at it he is Ozil's ultimate boss. Stan is the one who gets to take any profit out of the club if he chooses and he is ultimately the man the banks would talk to if things went horribly south. Sure there is a Board structure in place but none of those employees of Arsenal (Stan) can pull a penny of profit out of the club without Stan's say so. You could throw the Board away and it's still Arsenal and it's still Stan's baby. There won't be any personal guarantees with the banks in the names of Sir Chips or KF that's for sure, the whole thing is underwritten by Stan's ownership and his personal wealth will absolutely have been taken into account by the banks when reviewing our facilities with them.

Looking at this way too simplistically :lol: I would suggest that you are overcomplicating the issue of whether Ozil gets paid or not. I agree that the future for the club's finances is grim if this virus isn't dealt with successfully but we come back to Ozil and the here and now. The club's financial outlook really isn't his problem and in the same way that a sugar daddy owner can sink personal money into his club, Stan is also liable to ensure that Ozil's contract is paid. That is achieved firstly through cashflow or then its into the bank facility, if that's fully drawn then it's Stan's decision as to whether to extend the club's bank facility or even to cover it himself. If he fails to pay up then Ozil takes the club to court and wins. The resulting charging order would be against Arsenal but that is Stan whichever way you look at it.

Ozil knows he is finished with us so there is nothing we can do but meet his contracted salary for the final year. If by the end of next season the club is down to its final couple of quid of the bank facility then Ozil will still be entitled to stick his paw out to be paid and it will be Stan who ultimately decides whether to increase our borrowing to meet it or to sell a couple of players or the ground for flats or to sell the club to some other billionaire to deal with. Obviously it will never reach Stan because the club has enough working capital, credit and assets between Ozil and him and as long as that remains the case for another year then Ozil gets paid.

I get that you are pissed with Ozil and you are right that we could end up having to cash in on a player or two to help balance the books but that doesn't change anything. Perhaps the club would have been better served negotiating a position with the players a bit more cautiously than they did but it would appear that they believed that peer pressure would do the job for them - but it didn't work. From what I've heard in the news most clubs have agreed wage deferrements with their players and I still think that would have been a sensible way to go for the first 3 months of this saga with a review at expiry to then consider other options.
I think we will just have to agree to disagree here. You are looking at Stan as an individual rather than his company KSE, his personal wealth sits outside of KSE and Arsenal Holdings. Arsenal as a standalone business as we all know is set up to spend what it earns. I doubt very much there will be any cash in the bank once all this COVID stuff has washed through. By the time the next accounts are issued, Ozil will literally have a few months left on his contract. I just hope his stance doesn't hit us on the pitch. To lose either saka or martinelli would be a disaster.

That's fine we shall agree to disagree then. I am fully aware that SK's wealth sits aside from his businesses, all I have ever said is that if push came to shove and we were out of money then any additional funding is essentially going to stem from SK. Whichever legal entity that comes from, it still comes from the same source.

As for losing one of the new kids well only time will tell. Football has much bigger problems to sort out over the coming months. I am still struggling to see how the PL is going to be completed especially if the R number takes off as we all come out of lockdown....as for the CL, well that's an even bigger question mark.

User avatar
Nos89
Posts: 3419
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 3:44 am

Re: Arsenal players pay cut / club financial losses? Merged thread.

Post by Nos89 »

Enjoyed that discussion, could've used some of that for my masters case study :D

Unlike Abramovich, Kroenke is never gonna to use his own money to fund the club. He'll borrow on the club's assets, like the Glaziers do or liquidate them. I know which one I'd prefer him to do.

User avatar
Nos89
Posts: 3419
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 3:44 am

Re: Arsenal players pay cut / club financial losses? Merged thread.

Post by Nos89 »

With all this going on at the moment I have often considered how much would it cost to move back to Highbury?

Build the ground to the original design that was created back in 1990/91 with the two listed facias integrated to a modern "bowl" shaped ground. When I look at what Liverpool are doing with Anfield, I do wish the then board of Dein and Fiszmann had more foresight and stay at Highbury. With a capacity of 55,000 and of course still having the marble halls. Looking how the design the flats integrated onto the old east and west stands, it could've worked a treat.

nut flush gooner
Posts: 3113
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 10:23 am

Re: Arsenal players pay cut / club financial losses? Merged thread.

Post by nut flush gooner »

Nos89 wrote:
Mon May 04, 2020 9:16 pm
With all this going on at the moment I have often considered how much would it cost to move back to Highbury?

Build the ground to the original design that was created back in 1990/91 with the two listed facias integrated to a modern "bowl" shaped ground. When I look at what Liverpool are doing with Anfield, I do wish the then board of Dein and Fiszmann had more foresight and stay at Highbury. With a capacity of 55,000 and of course still having the marble halls. Looking how the design the flats integrated onto the old east and west stands, it could've worked a treat.
Highbury was tiny at all levels from having the smallest pitch in the PL to being hemmed in on three sides by housing.

The only way the capacity could have been increased to 50k plus would have been to have compulsory purchase orders put on the properties surrounding the ground. Not only would that have hit massive resistance in the local area, with Highbury being one of the fringes of one of most desirable areas in North London keeping the facade of the original listed buildings would have made the cost prohibitive, especially when you start to think of the cost of buying the property. It would have run into hundreds of millions before you even think about renovating the stadium.

User avatar
OneBardGooner
Posts: 28388
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 9:41 am
Location: Dark Side Of The Mood

Re: Arsenal players pay cut / club financial losses? Merged thread.

Post by OneBardGooner »

Has anyone seen my keys!!?? :?

Jock Gooner
Posts: 2594
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 7:53 am

Re: Arsenal players pay cut / club financial losses? Merged thread.

Post by Jock Gooner »

Nos89 wrote:
Mon May 04, 2020 9:06 pm
Enjoyed that discussion, could've used some of that for my masters case study :D

Unlike Abramovich, Kroenke is never gonna to use his own money to fund the club. He'll borrow on the club's assets, like the Glaziers do or liquidate them. I know which one I'd prefer him to do.

Too much spare time on our hands :lol:

User avatar
DB10GOONER
Posts: 47510
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 2:06 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland.
Contact:

Re: Arsenal players pay cut / club financial losses? Merged thread.

Post by DB10GOONER »

nut flush gooner wrote:
Tue May 05, 2020 5:19 am
Nos89 wrote:
Mon May 04, 2020 9:16 pm
With all this going on at the moment I have often considered how much would it cost to move back to Highbury?

Build the ground to the original design that was created back in 1990/91 with the two listed facias integrated to a modern "bowl" shaped ground. When I look at what Liverpool are doing with Anfield, I do wish the then board of Dein and Fiszmann had more foresight and stay at Highbury. With a capacity of 55,000 and of course still having the marble halls. Looking how the design the flats integrated onto the old east and west stands, it could've worked a treat.
Highbury was tiny at all levels from having the smallest pitch in the PL to being hemmed in on three sides by housing.

The only way the capacity could have been increased to 50k plus would have been to have compulsory purchase orders put on the properties surrounding the ground. Not only would that have hit massive resistance in the local area, with Highbury being one of the fringes of one of most desirable areas in North London keeping the facade of the original listed buildings would have made the cost prohibitive, especially when you start to think of the cost of buying the property. It would have run into hundreds of millions before you even think about renovating the stadium.
Also add in the fact we could never fill in the corners to make a proper bowl because of strictly enforced natural light laws. The cost of integrating the sides and ends, even as a lower level "wedge" structure, would have been mental as the west and east stands have protection orders on them because of their art deco design. All of this was looked into by the club long before the move to the Conglomerates was thought of. We literally could go no further with capacity at Highbury. I still wish we'd stayed there though. :|

Post Reply