The Gooner Forum

g88ner wrote: The accounts do show that money is there.
- The board has said money is available.
- Wenger has said that money is available.

Who am I to argue with that? - if the evidence backs the theory that money is there, and the board/Wenger have consistency said that money is there, which they have, then it's difficult to argue.

So yes, I believe that there is money available if and when Wenger chooses to spend it. Not vast sums, but enough to bring in an important player in January, like we did with Arshavin. If an opportunity arises to spend £5-10m on a 'keeper, then I don't believe the board would protest. I really don't.

Just coincidental that they aren't protesting that he hasn't, or that they haven't protested him not spending where needed all the way back to 2005, eh? They aren't business geniuses just fools who abdicate every decision to someone else and are damned lucky at how its all worked out I guess

g88ner wrote:I also believe Wenger is reluctant to spend, because it would mean pushing his babies further away from the first team. I don't think he wants to do that, as he enjoys developing players and wants to see them progress into the first team.

And again its all sheer concidence how its worked to drive profits upward and upward and thus the share price and they have made millions selling shares all of the sudden after generations holding onto them for decades and decades. What jammy fellows, no?

No one disputes the money is there but that does not prove it is available to spend in any specific manner at this time on its own. The money's existance does not confirm the Board's desire to have it spent - on not spent for that matter. Doubt is raised simply because it continues to go unspent and other than their repeated unsubstantiated quotes there is no genuine indication of any desire from the Board to see it spent at this time. That dovetails into Quartz's explanations neatly which show given who they come from and his support of club and Board policies that is almost certain the money is not in fact available to be spent now.

BP obviously had the money to fix the blowout preventer, what would they said if they had to (stupid Republicans) - "Mr Wenger refused to spend it?" Knowing some of us there would be some here willing to accept that.

g88ner wrote:I've read that twice, and I can't say I understand the question. I get two thirds through your quesiton, and it's making sense, then the last bit confuses me. Perhaps if you phrased it differently, I could answer. Sorry, mate. Either that, or we just leave it unanswered.

Sorry if I was unclear - my point was Quartz gives to celar and specific - some would say unambiguous - dates as to when spending will be increased over the current levels that are clearly incosistent with claims that more money is genuinely available to spend now without first selling other and almost certainly more valuable - players first to ensure continued profits. My point was if we can expect this change as he envisions it then does that not confirm that the Board has mis-led supporters about how much is actually available to spend now all the way to 2005 or 2006 certainly?

USMartin wrote: Just coincidental that they aren't protesting that he hasn't, or that they haven't protested him not spending where needed all the way back to 2005, eh? They aren't business geniuses just fools who abdicate every decision to someone else and are damned lucky at how its all worked out I guess

They're not fools. Definately not! - Why would they protest? (now that would be foolish!)

They have a manager who is content to continue developing his unique vision, and the board are happy because they don't have to sweat about whether they can afford to give Wenger more money. The club yields a profit, and the manager keeps them in a Champions League position every season with limited investment. JACKPOT!

As Quartz said, they're probably happy to bide their time for the financial fair play regulations to kick in.

Am I happy with that? no, not really - but I think it's plausible to think they're not over eager to flash the cash until they feel they're in a better position to do so.

USMartin wrote: And again its all sheer concidence how its worked to drive profits upward and upward and thus the share price and they have made millions selling shares all of the sudden after generations holding onto them for decades and decades. What jammy fellows, no?

No one disputes the money is there but that does not prove it is available to spend in any specific manner at this time on its own. The money's existance does not confirm the Board's desire to have it spent - on not spent for that matter. Doubt is raised simply because it continues to go unspent and other than their repeated unsubstantiated quotes there is no genuine indication of any desire from the Board to see it spent at this time. That dovetails into Quartz's explanations neatly which show given who they come from and his support of club and Board policies that is almost certain the money is not in fact available to be spent now.

BP obviously had the money to fix the blowout preventer, what would they said if they had to (stupid Republicans) - "Mr Wenger refused to spend it?" Knowing some of us there would be some here willing to accept that.

I think my first answer is just as relevant to the bit above aswell.

I don't think the board are jammy fellows, at all. As I said, they have a plan that is proving profitable and has maintained the club at a reasonably high level, which they're happy with.

The manager is happy, and doesn't ask too much of the board - therefore, it's a happy marriage - which, of course, is why Wenger signed a contract extension and why the board were keen for him to sign it.

It may not suit the fans, but I genuinely believe the board and Wenger are fairly content with how project Arsenal is progressing.

So, no conspiracy and no power struggle - just a stable club, where the manager and board work in harmony. The only people grumbling are the fans, but they aren't going to listen to us.

USMartin wrote:
Just coincidental that they [the board] aren't protesting that he hasn't [spent money], or that they haven't protested him not spending where needed all the way back to 2005, eh?

If board members protest in public it is a direct attack on Wenger and no way will they do that.
Protests at executive level, if any do occur, are done behind closed doors.
i.e. The brevity of official public statements on the departures of David Dein, Keith Edelman and Lady Nina.

The board may or may not have asked him if he plans to spend, but basically Wenger is given a budget then left to get on with it.
If the board started interfering on anything more than an emergency basis Wenger would walk.

Wenger has been quite clear about all this in interviews.
He said he knew available cash would dip for a while because of the new stadium, so decided to focus on youth.
The cash available dipped, but never totally dried up, and is now back at a respectable level.

No conspiracy!

Nobody is suggesting a conspiracy here g88ner - simply that the Board have mis-led supporters about money being available to spend five years running.

Your own comments in this last post support this because they suggest that in fact when the Board all the way back in 2005 and through this year has sadi money is available to spend if the manager wants to they were clearly at the very least suggesting we could expect more money to be spent though they knew otherwise, whether it was because they knew they would not pressure the manager to spend it or because they kenew they would not allow him to spend it as he would have to to get the players he wanted and needed to get.

Do you accept that point at least? And if so is that not proof of them mis-leading supporters then?

USMartin wrote:Nobody is suggesting a conspiracy here g88ner - simply that the Board have mis-led supporters about money being available to spend five years running.

Your own comments in this last post support this because they suggest that in fact when the Board all the way back in 2005 and through this year has sadi money is available to spend if the manager wants to they were clearly at the very least suggesting we could expect more money to be spent though they knew otherwise, whether it was because they knew they would not pressure the manager to spend it or because they kenew they would not allow him to spend it as he would have to to get the players he wanted and needed to get.

Do you accept that point at least? And if so is that not proof of them mis-leading supporters then?

Oh, I agree Martin. I think they have told the fans one thing whilst knowing full well it wasn't the whole truth - but, like it or not, that's the way things are done in business.

I've listened to Gazidis, and others before him, and quite frankly, I take what they say with a huge pinch of salt.

But, I maintain, that in my opinion, Wenger and the board live in harmony (or at least tolerate each others ideas) as it benefits them both. The fans aren't all happy, but that counts for very little.

g88ner wrote:

USMartin wrote:Nobody is suggesting a conspiracy here g88ner - simply that the Board have mis-led supporters about money being available to spend five years running.

Your own comments in this last post support this because they suggest that in fact when the Board all the way back in 2005 and through this year has sadi money is available to spend if the manager wants to they were clearly at the very least suggesting we could expect more money to be spent though they knew otherwise, whether it was because they knew they would not pressure the manager to spend it or because they kenew they would not allow him to spend it as he would have to to get the players he wanted and needed to get.

Do you accept that point at least? And if so is that not proof of them mis-leading supporters then?

Oh, I agree Martin. I think they have told the fans one thing whilst knowing full well it wasn't the whole truth - but, like it or not, that's the way things are done in business.

I've listened to Gazidis, and others before him, and quite frankly, I take what they say with a huge pinch of salt.

But, I maintain, that in my opinion, Wenger and the board live in harmony (or at least tolerate each others ideas) as it benefits them both. The fans aren't all happy, but that counts for very little.

Yes but this isn't mere business to us and we don't have to just treat it like it is. They have lied to us over and over and no longer deserve the special place the Board has attained in supporters hearts and minds in the past. They are not the Board we think of throughout our great history and have dis-honored that history with this decitful selfishly driven conduct and no longer deserve to be treated as fans or supporters but are just investors in our club, using it and us for the personal gain first and foremost.

And that as I said in an older discussion we had on this would be fine if they would honest about that and stop hiding behind our history and heritage which they disrespect even as they use it to evade being questioned about this. When they lie they are liars, end of. No matter why.

QuartzGooner wrote: Wenger has been quite clear about all this in interviews.
He said he knew available cash would dip for a while because of the new stadium, so decided to focus on youth.
The cash available dipped, but never totally dried up, and is now back at a respectable level.

No conspiracy!

No just five years of deliberate public lies by the Board - lies the manager was aware of as you suggest yet when I ask did the Board lie to supporters you cite the existance of money without any evidence of its availability to the manager nbow as your proof they weren't then and up to now.

So I will ask again and hope for an improved level of integirty here based on your words above did the Board engage in repeated and deliberate decpetion of supporters about spending they could expect in the past five years? Yes or no?

And I will find proof that you in fact did say the things you have denied saying about spending in the past it will simply take some time as the search process on here does take time.

..........

BTW quartz found this nugget while tracking down some of your past whoppers and this is pectacularly cuious given what you have p

QuartzGooner wrote:ot;QuartzGooner"] That is a good point, but now that the Highbury redevelopment loan is paid off, we should see more transfer spending.

If not, then we do need to investigate.

So when exactly can we trust anyone on this issue then because yet again you offer thirty or forty contradictory answers and just seem to say whatever comes to mind.


I'll aswer your last reply I don't believe I said or suggested how Arsenal behaved in the past was impeccable though I would say past generations of the Board were far more geuine about their passion and support for Arsenal and their respect to the extent they could have it inthose days(class sytem and all of that) for the supporters. They certainly did not deliberately deceive them to make more money for themselves at any point, as appears all but certain has happened in recent times.

USMartin


The same board who in 1956 refused legendary Eddie Hapgood a testimonial when he hit financial difficulties, but sent him a cheque for £30?

The charitable and community activities of Arsenal are superb, but do not claim they have been impeccable in the past.



To answer your question:



Some board members said the new stadium would raise revenue (it has).

They also said the revenue would go towards new players.
It has not in any significant way in terms of transfers, but wages have risen.

Transfers are not purely down to the Board.
It is Wenger who decides to buy.
Right now he does not want to throw good money after bad chasing the mega rich clubs.

In these discussions a few of us have chewed the fat, taken it as far as public scrutiny is allowed, and found that spending on wages has risen, and that there is cash available if Wenger wants to buy etc etc as per many of my previous posts.

What's the big deal?


Personally I would be happy with a new goalkeeper and defensive midfielder, another striker and a defensive coach.
But I am not Arsene Wenger, and I can only hope that things come good.

If things get dire, I think there will be mass protest outside the ground, but right now things are not dire, they are just frustrating. We can only be patient.

As has been said many times, if you do not like how things are done at Arsenal, then take over the club and do it your way or carry on with your petition and membership of supporters' groups.




Enough of all this financial talk for now, it is just groundhog day, old ground gone over on many previous threads.

We geddit.

You don't like the board

USMartin wrote:Yes but this isn't mere business to us and we don't have to just treat it like it is. They have lied to us over and over and no longer deserve the special place the Board has attained in supporters hearts and minds in the past. They are not the Board we think of throughout our great history and have dis-honored that history with this decitful selfishly driven conduct and no longer deserve to be treated as fans or supporters but are just investors in our club, using it and us for the personal gain first and foremost.

Now, you're taking that huge leap again by suggesting it's for personal gain - that's certainly not my view, as it relies on Wenger keeping quiet on something that, if true, stinks to high heaven.

I still believe Wenger is much better placed that you or I to judge whether the board are working for the good of the club or for themselves. Now, as I believe that Wenger and the board are working in harmony (or at least tolerate each other) then I obviously believe that Wenger believes the board are not the source of evil that you seem to be suggesting, and are in fact working for the good of the clubs long term future.

In fact, I don't believe Wenger would have signed a new contract if he despised the boards intentions, as I believe Wenger cares deeply about the club and is a man of integrity.

I also believe you have an over romantic view of the past board members of this great club.

USMartin wrote:And that as I said in an older discussion we had on this would be fine if they would honest about that and stop hiding behind our history and heritage which they disrespect even as they use it to evade being questioned about this. When they lie they are liars, end of. No matter why.

You call it lying, whereas I call it bending the truth. You're never going to get the whole truth unless it benefits the board to speak it. They portay an image of financial stability and wealth, and they probably want to appear to be more powerful than they really are at the moment. It may not be the whole truth, but if they feel it reflects the club in a better light than speaking the whole truth, then that's what they'll do. Business and governments do the same.

You may not like it (I certainly don't) but that's the reality and the reason why I'm not against a petition. At the same time, I don't agree that the board are as crooked as you make out. I just don't have evidence to support that, neither are people close to the club (who DO care) shouting from the rooftops about the boards selfish, and dangerous, intentions. There's only silence.

So er, I've been busy recently, what have I missed?

QuartzGooner wrote:
To answer your question:

Some board members said the new stadium would raise revenue (it has).

They also said the revenue would go towards new players.
It has not in any significant way in terms of transfers, but wages have risen.

Transfers are not purely down to the Board.
It is Wenger who decides to buy.
Right now he does not want to throw good money after bad chasing the mega rich clubs.

Personally I would be happy with a new goalkeeper and defensive midfielder, another striker and a defensive coach.

As has been said many times, if you do not like how things are done at Arsenal, then take over the club and do it your way or carry on with your petition and membership of supporters' groups.

No you are lying if you call this answering my question. You have avoided answering it here beyond any doubt

The question was has the Board engaged in deciving supporters about how much money the club was ready and willing to send since 2010. You have not in fact answered that. God you just run from the truth and that's all you can do.

Even your point about wages rising is a bit mis-leading as the higehst wage-earners do not earn the same level as the highest wage-eaners before 2005 and it would be a lie to say otherwise. The increase in our wage billis entirely bottom-weighted with teenages and youngsters with a year or less of Premiership experinced significantly over paid relative to similar players at other clubs all the way up through those players we agree are underchievers and flops. It is only when we get to the players who have earned the better wages that we underpay regularly and even push out the players who demand and have earned better wages.

And odds-on this is down to the Board. We debated this earlier about Ashley Cole. That was when you said you trusted bloggers (who refer to him Cuntley or Cashley Cole) to be more objective than the Premier League relying upon the testimony and transcripts of those who partcipated in the negotiations. This is their wage structure - the best defence you can offer is they approved this wage structure without question, which is no defence at all.

That you trust bloggers is curious too because you don't seem to trust the media if they print a story you don't like as you should when I produced an ESPN story quoting Sol Campbell about leaving over wages this summer. Odd that.

AA23Northbank wrote:So er, I've been busy recently, what have I missed?

I gave my cat Bjork a bath and she got pissed and I bled a lot

QuartzGooner wrote:Enough of all this financial talk for now, it is just groundhog day, old ground gone over on many previous threads.

USMartin Quartz ended his last post with the above quote. Its a fair end to an endless discussion, cant you just leave it now?