The Long Term Future of our Club

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.
Its Up 4 Grabs Now
Posts: 4701
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 7:08 pm

Post by Its Up 4 Grabs Now »

richpye wrote:
Red Gunner wrote:
richpye wrote: But in other posts, people criticise him for saying he would be happy to finish second for the next 20 years!!!

If I was fighting against a team funded by a terrorist regime and another by the equivalent of the siberian mafia, I would be very happy finishing 2nd!!!
Have you got any proof linking Abu Dhabi or UAE to terrorism, or did you just make that remark because they're Arab?
Woah, there's not a racist bone in my body, so don't go playing that card with me.
It is well known that the Emirates is hardly up front in it's dealings. Yemen for example has recently been described as the current safe haven of Al-Qaeda. Just look at the way the Arab Spring was dealt with in the Emirates - complete clampdown and almost total media blackout - we've managed to get more coverage from Syria!!!
Are some of your best friends Arab? :lol:

:barscarf:

arseofacrow
Posts: 6173
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:06 pm
Location: Cologne

Post by arseofacrow »

Its Up 4 Grabs Now wrote:
richpye wrote:
Red Gunner wrote:
richpye wrote: But in other posts, people criticise him for saying he would be happy to finish second for the next 20 years!!!

If I was fighting against a team funded by a terrorist regime and another by the equivalent of the siberian mafia, I would be very happy finishing 2nd!!!
Have you got any proof linking Abu Dhabi or UAE to terrorism, or did you just make that remark because they're Arab?
Woah, there's not a racist bone in my body, so don't go playing that card with me.
It is well known that the Emirates is hardly up front in it's dealings. Yemen for example has recently been described as the current safe haven of Al-Qaeda. Just look at the way the Arab Spring was dealt with in the Emirates - complete clampdown and almost total media blackout - we've managed to get more coverage from Syria!!!
Are some of your best friends Arab? :lol:

:barscarf:
:lol: :lol:

User avatar
QuartzGooner
Posts: 14474
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 12:49 pm
Location: London

Post by QuartzGooner »

Difference between Terrorist regimes and countries where terrorists operate.

Yemen is a hotbed of Al-Queda, but their government is fighting back and allows UK and US Special forces to operate there.

As for the financial fair play rules, I am interested to see how they can be implemented.
Will there be a FIFA court of appeal where one team can ask another to be investigated?

User avatar
Red Gunner
Posts: 5778
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 6:25 pm
Location: London

Post by Red Gunner »

...
Last edited by Red Gunner on Fri Sep 16, 2011 3:48 am, edited 1 time in total.

Jumpers For Goalposts
Posts: 2245
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 12:42 pm

Post by Jumpers For Goalposts »

richpye wrote:
Red Gunner wrote:
richpye wrote:
rigsby wrote:He's deluded. City are basically funded by a country, and Abramovich has ploughed his money back into the club again recently.

Modern football has passed him by.
But in other posts, people criticise him for saying he would be happy to finish second for the next 20 years!!!

If I was fighting against a team funded by a terrorist regime and another by the equivalent of the siberian mafia, I would be very happy finishing 2nd!!!
Have you got any proof linking Abu Dhabi or UAE to terrorism, or did you just make that remark because they're Arab?
Woah, there's not a racist bone in my body, so don't go playing that card with me.
It is well known that the Emirates is hardly up front in it's dealings. Yemen for example has recently been described as the current safe haven of Al-Qaeda. Just look at the way the Arab Spring was dealt with in the Emirates - complete clampdown and almost total media blackout - we've managed to get more coverage from Syria!!!
:shock: Slightly off-topic but why are you now trying to link the UAE with Yemen?? That's like saying that someone from Amsterdam is a Spaniard - bizarre mate. You need a history (and geography) lesson my friend.

RoscommonGooner
Posts: 2182
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 11:01 pm
Location: Roscommon, Ireland

Post by RoscommonGooner »

Jumpers For Goalposts wrote: :shock: Slightly off-topic but why are you now trying to link the UAE with Yemen?? That's like saying that someone from Amsterdam is a Spaniard - bizarre mate. You need a history (and geography) lesson my friend.
Or like saying that someone in Morocco is not far from Iraq :shock:

:lol:

User avatar
the playing mantis
Posts: 4816
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:36 pm
Location: EX

Post by the playing mantis »

yemen isnt an emirate you dickhead. get an education or at least bother to do some research before you post crap....

typical akb using lies to excuse our own failure.

:roll:

User avatar
QuartzGooner
Posts: 14474
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 12:49 pm
Location: London

Post by QuartzGooner »

Red Gunner

But the Yemen government is fighting a war versus separatists who attack their army.
Separatists who themselves have claimed to be pro-American.

Not saying that civilian deaths are a good thing, and not taking sides in the Yemini conflict, nor saying that either side in the civil war is more of an ally than the other, or one is right and one is wrong, but the government are not just bombing for the fun of it.

How can you compare them to Al-Queda, who export terror all across the world and revere violent death of themselves and innocents?

This is off thread topic so continue by PM if you like.

User avatar
Red Gunner
Posts: 5778
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 6:25 pm
Location: London

Post by Red Gunner »

...
Last edited by Red Gunner on Fri Sep 16, 2011 3:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
shu
Posts: 1611
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 2:47 pm
Location: Norwich

Post by shu »

Look we would not have been having this debate if Wenger had kept Cesc and bought Samba, Cahill and a midfielder / forward in June.

Crap delusional management , had we lost only 2 nil to manure how many players would he have bought ?

If i win £130 mill on the Euro millions can i spend it on players and wages ? so how does this differ if the Russian said the same.
In theory do you want my money , or is it not good enough for you? Remember i said i would cover the wages so what is the problem ?

User avatar
safcftm
Posts: 3423
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: Sunderland!

Post by safcftm »

shu wrote:Look we would not have been having this debate if Wenger had kept Cesc and bought Samba, Cahill and a midfielder / forward in June.

Crap delusional management , had we lost only 2 nil to manure how many players would he have bought ?

If i win £130 mill on the Euro millions can i spend it on players and wages ? so how does this differ if the Russian said the same.
In theory do you want my money , or is it not good enough for you? Remember i said i would cover the wages so what is the problem ?
The trouble with people bankrolling a club with their own money is twofold. Firstly, it puts the clubs at risk depending on how the deal is structured. Not many people (be they Russian, Asian or from Yeovil) will really want to throw hundreds of millions of quid at a football club with no prospect of ever getting a return, no matter how rich they are. Yes, some of them are rich enough to do it, but a lot of these people come into clubs and seem to be "injecting" hundreds of millions of quid into it when in reality its all set up as loans etc, often secured against the ground/ assets. So if the owner injects 300m but has set it all up as a loan from himself to his club secured against the stadium and various other assets then if he walks away and the revenue stream is thus removed, the club is fucked. It will have massive wage bills and a debt of 300m (no doubt with interest) and risks losing the stadium to part pay it and might be unable to ever pay the debt off. Yes, a lot of these people are rich enough to just want the status symbol that is owning a club, and want the cock extension that is making it successful, but they can do this by loaning the money rather than converting it into shares and this means they can get all the benefits and also get a return. It risks ruining the club but why would they give a fuck?

Some owners dont do this. Ellis Short has ploughed a fair bit of money into Sunderland (he's cutting back now since the sale of Bent, Henderson and Gyans loan has covered our transfer outgoings for the last couple of seasons so we're spening very little net but thats by the by) but he has done it by converting his capital into shares. This means the only way he can get his money back is by selling the club. The only way he can make profit is by selling it for more than he bought it, the only way he can guarantee doing that is by getting us well run and "successful". Thats the ideal set up and if Arsenal could attract a super rich person who is prepared to do this then fine, but most wont, and whats worse is that its very difficult (or impossible) to tell what tact the new owner will take until youve handed him the keys. You might win a lot for a few seasons and never recover, its a daft risk to take. Most of these guys despite having more money than you could spend didnt get there by being nice, or naive, they'd set a deal up to cover themselves

The other problem with saying "I can afford it, why can't I spend whatever money i want" is the fact that it stops football being a sport. Whats the point in competing if, however well ran you are, however good your academy is, however good your manager is, you can't compete because some rich club will always buy your best players and, if you refuse, the players will go in a huff and stop performing? It ends up being a competition about how rich your billionaire is and not how good your club is. When factors such as the quality of a youth academy, the success of a marketing strategy, the pricing of match tickets, the ability of a manager to get the best out of his players etc are the deciding factors in a title race, then you have a sport. Realistically a lot of clubs couldnt match Man United due to their revenue streams, but at least its possible- you could market your club better in Asia and try to get sales etc. But you cant match a club who simply have an owner who is many times richer and wants to spend all his money on a vanity project. Where's the sport in that? The days of the likes of Clough are finished at this rate- a great manager couldnt topple the giants nowadays and its all financial.

The fact that some people cant see whats wrong with this shows how far the game has fallen. Its nearly at the point where I dont know why we bother with the fucking games- the league and CL are all set up to keep the "elite" at the top generating high advertising revenue for the authorities and everyone else is here to make up the numbers. We might as well not bother playing- just write a massive cheque to the big clubs and we'll all stay in the house.

Edit: fucking hell, I can write a bit when it comes to this kind of subject like :lol: Oh well, its either that or do some work :?

stg
Posts: 1220
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 7:16 am
Location: Broxbourne

Post by stg »

I think the long term future of the club will come down to a few months in 2014 and the transfer windown in Jan 2012.

Having read shed loads of stuff on here, other forums and reports from Arsenal I think a flexable 10 year plan was put in place by the board and Wenger. A plan to keep the football club in a challeging position but to keep within financial boundary's.

Arsenal football club needed cash up top deals when the stadium was being built to help fund the building and so were in a limited bargining position and the Emirates and Nike got themselves great deals. These deals will be up in 2014.

The Arsenal board I think would of been happy with a continual top 3 position up against Manchester United and Chelsea, good runs in the CL and FA cups while still using the CC as a training cup for the younger players untill they could renegotiate in 2014. What I think has thrown a spanner in the works is the money at Manchester City. Now instead of fighting for at least 3rd or 4th against Liverpool & Spurs it is now just 4th against Liverpool & Spurs.

So now we are in theory fighting with 2 other clubs for one position and this is beginging to force the boards and Wengers hand sooner than they wanted.

I think that the board and Wenger have also come to a mutual understanding about 2014. 2014 the year Wengers contract finishes at The Arsenal, I think that the board and Wenger are palning to go their seperate ways at the end of his contract but Wenger and the board have agreed to try and leave the club with a solid player base and on a sound financial platform so that when the new manager comes into the club he has the money to spend on whoever he wants but also has an experienced squad with him.

As I said the problem The Arsenal now have is the Manchester City effect as some have said Jan 2012 could be the time to see if this has changed the view of the board & Wenger. Arsenal need to be competitive in 2014 they need the TV exposure, the far east tours to sell out etc to be able to pull in the money from Nike etc and to stay there they need to change thier plan a bit.

So Jan 2012 will they go out and buy to keep us competitive?
&
2014 will they be able to
a) get the manager they want?
b) get the deals they need to give the new manager the extra money he will want?

supergeorgegraham
Posts: 1297
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Northampton

Post by supergeorgegraham »

I think he means that Europe is going into meltdown due to Greece. It wont affect City or Chelsea but might hit loads of other clubs.
Personally I dont understand it but from last nights news it looks bad.
Still I think the boss lost it a while ago and agree with another poster on here who said it was around the time we signed Silvestre.

User avatar
Exiled-Gooner
Posts: 1089
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 3:26 pm
Location: the spirit of 69!

Post by Exiled-Gooner »

With the present regime(dictatorship) our financial future is fine and will prosper but our football future will continue as it is :cry: .In such a short length of time we have become also rans,now not even mentioned in challenging for titles or trophies but now part of the group which contests 4-7th spot but are praised for our sound finance plan and our self sustaining vision :banghead: :banghead: .

Of course this could have been avoided with the buying of 3 quality players after 2007/08 season and we could have had both football and increased financial success but we got Silvestre :shock:.It's no good banking on these '' UEFA financial rules'' as Shitty has already proved there worthless by their stadium deal and do you think that UEFA are going kick out there main financial attractions in Madrid,Barca,Manure etc in favour of fair play...Bollocks.

I see some are expecting mega deals via sponsorship in 2014....yeah right,do you really expect any big firm as Nike etc to pay us anywhere near much as Manure when we can't even challenge for anything(the Ladies yes...)we get not much more than we did last time UNLESS we start producing the goods now,which is unlikely.

The need is for a manager to be employed which regards WINNING as everything,won't tolerate the likes of Diarby etc,tactically astute,except nothing less than 110%,stop giving lucrative contracts to sub average crap,get rid of deadwood and injury prone liabilities and searches the world for quality not just France and be able to wheel old Pat rice out of the tunnel for games.This way we be able to attract the big sponsorship deals and increase our financial base in Asia etc.As the saying goes''you have to speculate to accumulate''.

Unless there is whole scale changes at board and footballing level it's business as usual. :cry:

Post Reply