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.
Babu wrote: The Club policy originated from the Board, with the blessing of Wenger. We wanted the new Stadium, so we had to be careful with the money - nothing unusual there. Everyone is like that - you get a mortgage for your house so you try and tighten the purse-strings. Sound business sense.
That would be perfectly true, except if we had just built the new stadium and sold Highbury there was no need for the extreme shift in financial policies we saw occur though we were told over and over there was no change. The redevelopment of Highbury added 120 million to our total debt and more importantly 120 million to the debt due by 2010. Had we sold Highbury instead we'd have had 60-80 million pounds with which to pay off the new stadium loan without impacting our spending capacity for the football team from 2005-2007. And so far the only beneficiaries have been those multi-millionaire shareholders. The stadium isn't penny closer to being paid with the profits from Highbury Square and the team hasn't been given a penny more from them.
Babu wrote:UNLESS - tightening the purse-strings affects what you can earn in the future, and obviously we are tightening in the wrong areas, as the team is getting worse and younger every year, and we will eventually lose our main money sources - them being Champions League money, sponsorship deals, and ( in the current climate ) the money we make from re-selling players, and money from the gate.
Agreed except that while the share price rose from 4000 in 2005n to 12000 this year and is still rising now though we won our last trophy in 2005 from 2002 to 2004 at our most successful since the Herbert Chapman Era our share price was never above 1700 and even dipped as low as 1400. Now if your investor what does that tell you? That pursuing less expensive non-footballing revenue streams can be if not certainly is more profitbale than investing in winning trophies. You think that Stan Kroenke hasn't noticed that as well? Let's hope not but I would hold my breath right now.
Babu wrote: Why does it have to be one or the other? It's all of them. Wenger and the Board. Fiszman and Lady BS proved it, as they sold out. FACT! PWH as well, the senile old codger.
Actually you basically answered this yourself
Babu wrote: The Club policy originated from the Board
In other words had the Board's priorities actually been what we wanted to believe then no matter what the Manager may or may not have been willing to do or actually wished to do, it would not have happened.
Why do you distinguish Wenger from the Board, for me he is part of the Board and has actively been involved in the current fiscal policy. It is not something that has been forced on him he is one of the main architects of it.
usb wrote:Why do you distinguish Wenger from the Board, for me he is part of the Board and has actively been involved in the current fiscal policy. It is not something that has been forced on him he is one of the main architects of it.
You are new on here but let me inform you now that you have asked that question you have let yourself in for a whole lot of pain.You are sometime in the near future going to get an answer from US MARTY which wont be short concise articulate posts but a diatribe of rubbish and waffle with nothing to back up what hes going to say.You have been warned
usb wrote:Why do you distinguish Wenger from the Board, for me he is part of the Board and has actively been involved in the current fiscal policy. It is not something that has been forced on him he is one of the main architects of it.
You are new on here but let me inform you now that you have asked that question you have let yourself in for a whole lot of pain.You are sometime in the near future going to get an answer from US MARTY which wont be short concise articulate posts but a diatribe of rubbish and waffle with nothing to back up what hes going to say.You have been warned
Don't forget to mention that USM reply will include certain words that are highlighted for no apparent reason.
usb wrote:Why do you distinguish Wenger from the Board, for me he is part of the Board and has actively been involved in the current fiscal policy. It is not something that has been forced on him he is one of the main architects of it.
You are new on here but let me inform you now that you have asked that question you have let yourself in for a whole lot of pain.You are sometime in the near future going to get an answer from US MARTY which wont be short concise articulate posts but a diatribe of rubbish and waffle with nothing to back up what hes going to say.You have been warned
Don't forget to mention that USM reply will include certain words that are highlighted for no apparent reason.
usb wrote:Why do you distinguish Wenger from the Board, for me he is part of the Board and has actively been involved in the current fiscal policy. It is not something that has been forced on him he is one of the main architects of it.
So you are saying Arsene Wenger was behind the decision to redevelop Highbury and borrow an exztra 120 million to do it which is the prime if not sole reasoon we could no longer afford to compete at the level we were fiscally? Yes or no will suffice
Are you also then saying he was behind the decision to hold out until share prices reached 12K, before selling even though the club's biggest investors still would have made back double what they had invested selling at 4K a share and could have made far more money available to be invested in the football team? Again yes or no will do.
I can guarantee you have not one bit of factual evidence backing what you say whereas I have presented plenty of such evidence and will be doing so again very soon(hol;iday weekend here - so you have been warned indeed)
I can name 10 or twelve people who challange my credibility personally as well as the validity of my views and the evidence I believe justifies them and between all of you frankly you haven't presented one factual piece of evidence that didn't come straight from the Arsenal Board and can be independently verified. I think you have more faith in the Arsenal Board frankly than you do that they didn't do exactly what I am suggesting they may we have done and may be doing still.
usb wrote:Why do you distinguish Wenger from the Board, for me he is part of the Board and has actively been involved in the current fiscal policy. It is not something that has been forced on him he is one of the main architects of it.
Told you so you are wrong marty is right yet hes hasnt presented any proof
usb wrote:Why do you distinguish Wenger from the Board, for me he is part of the Board and has actively been involved in the current fiscal policy. It is not something that has been forced on him he is one of the main architects of it.
So you are saying Arsene Wenger was behind the decision to redevelop Highbury and borrow an exztra 120 million to do it which is the prime if not sole reasoon we could no longer afford to compete at the level we were fiscally? Yes or no will suffice
Wenger certainly had alot of input on aspects of the design of the E*******, down to the type of grass that is on the pitch, so he must have been 100% behind the move.
mcdowell42 wrote:usb wrote: Why do you distinguish Wenger from the Board, for me he is part of the Board and has actively been involved in the current fiscal policy. It is not something that has been forced on him he is one of the main architects of it.
In fairness though neither has USB or anyone else proven esm wrong and he has a valid point, he is just a little long winded when expressing it.
Told you so you are wrong marty is right yet hes hasnt presented any proof
usb wrote:Why do you distinguish Wenger from the Board, for me he is part of the Board and has actively been involved in the current fiscal policy. It is not something that has been forced on him he is one of the main architects of it.
So you are saying Arsene Wenger was behind the decision to redevelop Highbury and borrow an exztra 120 million to do it which is the prime if not sole reasoon we could no longer afford to compete at the level we were fiscally? Yes or no will suffice
Wenger certainly had alot of input on aspects of the design of the E*******, down to the type of grass that is on the pitch, so he must have been 100% behind the move.
What does being involved in designing the Emirates have to do with re-developing Highbury?
That is the crux of the point. The Board chose not to sekll highbury and use the proceeeds from its sale up to 80 million GBP to cover the cost of repaying the loan for the cobnstuction of the new stadium. There is no doubt he was 100% behind that decision.
But again the Board did not have to borrow the additional 120 million pounds that so far has only help make the major shareholders on the Board much richer, has not led to any improvement in the club on the pitch or to our debt on the stadium being piad a day let alone a year off it., but clearly put us in a much more difficult financial position in 2005-2008 than selling Highbury could possibly have done, and almost certainly precipitated both the premature break-up of the invincibles and the implemntation of a purely savings-and-profitl-driven tyransfer and wage policy called a youth system.
So are you saying he was behind that decision, and by behind I mean that originated with him or that he eagerly supported in the same manner the Board itself did obviously?
