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.
There's no way you can consider Cesc, Clichy and Anelka as Arsenal youth products... no way!
Anyway, you missed out Bentley - even after he was long gone, he was raking in the money for us when Sp*rs wasted £17m on him and we got a large chuck of it!
Boomer wrote:
No its not!
This is what I've been saying for years. Unlike over here Arsenal are able to raid the youth clubs of the world picking out talant. Whether they make it or not is irrelevant. Some do, majority don't.
The big point is we'll sell the likes of Botelho & Wellington and Co. for a profit. We've been doing it for years.
Just a point in case apparently we're getting more money (Whoo-hoo!) (E1.3M) from the sell-on of Barazite to Monaco.
Do we make money out of these shit deals? For the pittence we receive I doesnt outweigh the money spent getting these player, housing these players, training them and coaching which all costs money. I would imagine there is very little profit, if any, at the end of it. All to satisfy the whim of hasbeen and his crazy project
Training and coaching doesn't cost much.
Wages will be the major cost but Arsenal has caps in place so players will be on youth capped wages before signing professional at 18.
What’s 18 year old gonna be on at Arsenal? £65k? Seriously probably 5K-10K?
We may make a profit on some, others simply recouping the money spent on wages over the years and others released.
So what are we an entrapeneurial dragons den type organisation? That buys and sells players to make a profit? It's a shit way to run a club we have less than 0.1 success rate making these players into first teamers and its a totally flawed system in my eyes
Not really Flash.
Look at how many of the current first team are youth products.
Those that didn't make it were mainly sold. Money for nothing in most cases.
Look at some of the (youth) players we have sold.
Cesc
Anelka
Clichy
Cole
Muamba
Connelly
to name a few.
As Hlebby said they arent good examples really but going back to Botelho we signed him in 2007, i cant find the transfer fee but lets say its £500,000. if we paid him £2,000 a week over the 5 years that 520,000 if we paid him £5,000 a week its £1,300,000 as i said earlier add the cost of training/coaching, housing etc etc etc Basically we need say £2.5 million just to break even and i doubt we would get that much and this is just one player in the squad!!! Its a totally flawed 'project' that relies on the luck of one of these players making it big which i said earlier is 0.1%, just to pay back the costs of the failed players. I just dont see the value of it to Arsenal, Arsene maybe but not Arsenal.
Sorry about this post but my wife is watching One born every minute and im trying to take my mind off the programme and hoping she gets no ideas
worthing_gooner wrote:It's not about a visa, it's about getting an EU passport.
You have to have lived in Spain for five years to apply for citizenship and so be given a Spanish passport, which makes them elegible to play in England without requiring a work permit or visa.
I don't know if that's the case with this kid, but certainly for Wellington and also previously Carlos Vela this was what we tried to do.
That is correct.5 years in Spain for an EU passport. What amazes me is that its 3 years in Belgium. Why don't we sign a partnership with a Belgian club instead of fluffing players around in the Spanish second division?
If the argument is we pay big money to get these young kids so we can grow them in Arsenal's mold, wasting this kids potential talent is a second division in Spain is questionable. Plus, he is now 22 and yet to train at Arsenal once .. as old as walcott.
Between 2001 and 2006, the [Belgian club Beveren] had a co-operation agreement with Arsenal Football Club. Several players were loaned between the teams and friendlies played. The agreement expired on 1 July 2006.
Subsequent to an investigation by BBC Television's Newsnight, FIFA requested the English Football Association investigate the relationship between the two clubs.
In 2001, Belgian police concluded that a loan of over €1.5 million had been made by Arsenal to the company Goal, which helped secure Beveren's financial position. Newsnight have alleged this may breach club ownership rules under FIFA regulations. The accusation is refuted by Arsenal, who state that the payment was an interest free loan and has no effect on the administration of the club.[1] The FA and FIFA cleared both clubs of any wrongdoing.[2]
g88ner wrote:As Hlebby said, not great examples there Boomer
There's no way you can consider Cesc, Clichy and Anelka as Arsenal youth products... no way!
Anyway, you missed out Bentley - even after he was long gone, he was raking in the money for us when Sp*rs wasted £17m on him and we got a large chuck of it!
I never mentioned youth product or youth system. What I meant was signing young players. The examples you give a part of that.
As I mentioned it was just a few names and another was Bentley.
You could even case doubt Jack as an Arsenal product seeing that he was with Luton Academy. However, seeing Jack's been at Arsenal since 9 you could!
Gibb's is a Wimbledon reject in the sense that when the Dons academy closed and moved to M Keynes (Only time I do need to mention that frigging Town and I can't! ) Arsenal moved in.
But it's what we do and have been doing for years Scouting young players even from early ages. Look at the first team for examples of this.
By them young then sell'em on.
the point is to provide players for the first team. all of the shit that goes round it just skews priorities, and allows the club to appear in a way that is untrue.
arseofacrow wrote:the point is to provide players for the first team. all of the shit that goes round it just skews priorities, and allows the club to appear in a way that is untrue.
no change there then.
Of course but Arsenal aren't going to put players in the first team that aren't good enough. You ain't going to get a 100% success rate with younger players.
arseofacrow wrote:the point is to provide players for the first team. all of the shit that goes round it just skews priorities, and allows the club to appear in a way that is untrue.
no change there then.
Of course but Arsenal aren't going to put players in the first team that aren't good enough. You ain't going to get a 100% success rate with younger players.
agree with boomer on this subject. this 'buying young players and selling them on their early twenties' stuff makes us some good profit (i remember an article from the swiss rambler about this, we do make profit) and there's obviously the odd decent player that can be later useful to the first team (cesc, djourou, clichy, song, walcott, rvp) and if not, can be later sold.
i think we must be careful not to become 'wenger haters' in the sense that we don't really consider which of his strategies are decent and which took us to where we are now. the youth project has massively failed, most things need to be changed, but i don't see a problem with this policy of recruiting youngsters and selling them later.
the problem is the fact that we don't use the money properly later. making money (and the odd decent player) every once in a while is no problem.
arseofacrow wrote:the point is to provide players for the first team. all of the shit that goes round it just skews priorities, and allows the club to appear in a way that is untrue.
no change there then.
Of course but Arsenal aren't going to put players in the first team that aren't good enough. You ain't going to get a 100% success rate with younger players.
That's not my point mate...but I don't have enough time to explain.
