Squad Analysis 2013/14: Page 77 - The Arsenal discussion forum and community: One More in the Tolly

Squad Analysis 2013/14

Bosscielny

flobaba wrote:
speedy wrote:
Probably not the best idea. Because the intrest would be massive and being 200m in debt would mean we'd probably have to have a 0 spend for 4 years after. Or a less sever cut over 6-7years uncompetitive years. It would be like going back 5 years and reliving the stadium debt all over again. I didn't enjoy it that much the first time but each to their own. We have 25m repayments per year that's enough for the moment.
I wouldn't want you lot in charge of my finances living with huge chunks of debt is not ideal. Spending the money we have on one wc player a season and supplementing that with players with huge potential is the best way to go. A kos here a sanchez there and so on. Not spending half the transfer budget on servicing massive debts.

You refuse to consider that we might actually achieve the purpose of the huge investment, I.e. If we won the league, or Champions' League and some other trophies within that 4 year period, even though we might have reduced spending power, the investment would still have paid off massively in terms of TV/Prize money and global brand recognition and sales.

No risk, no reward.

I'm sure there would've been Leeds fans saying the same thing a few years ago.

Anzac

Bosscielny wrote:
flobaba wrote:
You refuse to consider that we might actually achieve the purpose of the huge investment, I.e. If we won the league, or Champions' League and some other trophies within that 4 year period, even though we might have reduced spending power, the investment would still have paid off massively in terms of TV/Prize money and global brand recognition and sales.

No risk, no reward.

I'm sure there would've been Leeds fans saying the same thing a few years ago.

LUFC were spending revenues they didn't have based upon speculation of gaining CL revenues they failed to achieve in 2 consecutive seasons.
Pompey were spending 80% of revenues on wages.

We don't spend what we don't have in our pocket, even when we know we have revenues yet to be received.

Biggus

Rex wrote:
Much as Anzac has spoken of, we are still very conservative with our spending; the summer before we renegotiated our major sponsorship deals we knew that we would have a massive boost financially starting the summer after. Despite that the decision was made to NOT spend a single pound more than we actually had at that point. We are doing the same thing now; every season is still within budget, despite every fan wanting to see the 3 or 4 top class players we need brought in right away. We COULD do that; we could easily drop £200m in one go to make us competitive NOW, and as a result have a couple of seasons with more moderate spending. That's not how we roll though, and I don't think that is a decision made by Wenger.

Exactly, thrift is a virtue, but when practised for long enough like everything first it becomes a habit and then hardens into a vice.
The reason for our thrift has long ago passed yet Wenger who- Make no mistake- Still control's the purse strings and wears profitability as some sort of badge of honour.
Mr Wenger I have a message for you- Dear Sir, none of us fans of the club give a flying fuck if we make a 100M or lose 100M it's not our money and not our problem it's a matter of supreme indifference to us- Thats the owner's problem- If he wants to own a PL team he'd better have deep fucking pocket's.
All we want is to know that every effort is being made to win this club trophies- Love Biggus.

PS Fuck you!

Anzac

You forgot to say every effort / no stone unturned & without any caveats or excuses regards to developing players etc.

Rex

😆 Dropping £200m in one window wouldn't put us in debt FFS! What it would do is that it would take about two seasons of more moderate spending, and that is all. If we spend £200m in the summer, then we would post losses for that year, as opposed to profits as we now have every year. I'd estimate it would take 2 seasons of moderate spending, which is NOT the same as no spending at all, to get that money back. The positive would be that we would be competitive NOW.
The current rate of doing things means that we will be in the same position in about 3 years. However, right about then Özil's contract is up, Alexis doesn't have long left on his, Koscielny will be 3 years older, and so forth. The risk with this approach is, then, that instead of adding top players to the squad we are looking to replace top players, and we are no closer than we are now to actually COMPETE for EVERY trophy.

--

Exactly, Rex.

I can see The argument for the careful conservative model, but we are not in danger of doing a Leeds or a Portsmouth or whichever worst case scenario example our spendthrifts here would like to point at.

speedy

flobaba wrote:
speedy wrote:
Probably not the best idea. Because the intrest would be massive and being 200m in debt would mean we'd probably have to have a 0 spend for 4 years after. Or a less sever cut over 6-7years uncompetitive years. It would be like going back 5 years and reliving the stadium debt all over again. I didn't enjoy it that much the first time but each to their own. We have 25m repayments per year that's enough for the moment.
I wouldn't want you lot in charge of my finances living with huge chunks of debt is not ideal. Spending the money we have on one wc player a season and supplementing that with players with huge potential is the best way to go. A kos here a sanchez there and so on. Not spending half the transfer budget on servicing massive debts.

You refuse to consider that we might actually achieve the purpose of the huge investment, I.e. If we won the league, or Champions' League and some other trophies within that 4 year period, even though we might have reduced spending power, the investment would still have paid off massively in terms of TV/Prize money and global brand recognition and sales.

No risk, no reward.

We could blow a ton money like liverpool and spurs and go the oppsite way down the table. But lets say we spend 3 x 50M players. And there all great over the few years (not the length of there entire contract) they'll get 9-10 per season each over then 3 years. 240m down.

We win the league like we did last time. Unbeaten again, glorious. We can't afford to match wages or buy new players because weve 240M to pay out, its about the price of stadium cost so we've started the long cycle all over again. This time we wouldn't have properly to sell although we'd have higher income. So it could even out. Groundhog years.

The league is tougher now, do you think we'd come out in the champions league next time? I'd say probably not.

I think if we stay signing a WC player a season bring through very top talents and developing players like ramsey, ox, kos ect. Were more likely to move forward as a club.

Sending half the budget on interest repayments is a great way to limit the potential of the club. Especially when you add debt repayments.

speedy

Rex wrote:
😆 Dropping £200m in one window wouldn't put us in debt FFS! What it would do is that it would take about two seasons of more moderate spending, and that is all. If we spend £200m in the summer, then we would post losses for that year, as opposed to profits as we now have every year. I'd estimate it would take 2 seasons of moderate spending, which is NOT the same as no spending at all, to get that money back. The positive would be that we would be competitive NOW.
The current rate of doing things means that we will be in the same position in about 3 years. However, right about then Özil's contract is up, Alexis doesn't have long left on his, Koscielny will be 3 years older, and so forth. The risk with this approach is, then, that instead of adding top players to the squad we are looking to replace top players, and we are no closer than we are now to actually COMPETE for EVERY trophy.

The latest figure show we made a £7m profit you'd do well to stretch it to cover 200m in 2 seasons. Aswell as moderate spending over the same time.
That included 38 mill from properly but lower commercial deals. We should be -38M properly and +55-60ish million from increases in tv and puma above previous deals.
So you probably looking at 40M profit before buying any players. Its gonna take more than 2 years with moderate spending to pay 200m back.

Biggus

Football clubs never have nor never will be money making operations Speedy, theres plenty of easier ways to make a lot of money, football has traditionally been an inexpensive pastime for the people now its become the expensive pastime for a elite few.
Theres hardly a football club in the world that makes a lot of money without extensive cash injections from external sources, twas always ever so.

Kroenke has got his talons into a very well run club and by eking out a modest profit has traded our competitiveness this is only possible with a bean counter in charge of the team, when Bean goes Kroenke will see the real cost of maintaining a top class PL club and will hopefully fuck off.

Rex

Speedy, your numbers simply don't add up. Especially so if you consider we would also get 4 or 5 players off the existing wage bill, and that neither wages or fees are paid up front.

Hummels, Reus, Javi Martinez - let's for argument's sake say that adds up to £100m in fees, with half of it paid up front. Then we get rid of the wages of Rosicky, Podolski, Campbell, Diaby and Cazorla. Would instantly make us contenders for every trophy, perhaps even with Wenger. If you think that would put us into massive debt, then I can't help you.

lorddulaarsenal

Can't wait to see

-----------------Ospina
Bellerin-Gabby-Koscielny-Monreal
----------Ramsey--Coquelin
----Walcott-----Ozil-----Alexis
----------------Giroud

Starting to get an athletic team again

Bold Tone

If Gabby is like the Kos signing, won't he take a couple of years to grow into the role?

Anzac

Here's a slightly different question re spending - based upon the player investment of teams on the fringe to challenge, break into and retain top4 - how much do you think it will cost to improve the squad to be able to regain top4 us if we drop out?

Spuds, LFC & ManU have all spent over 100m net these past 2 seasons,
let alone what CFC & Citeh spent in their efforts.

Rex

With this squad, I'd say nothing. Us missing out would be a massive underachievement. I'd say we already have the third best squad in the country; Man U may overtake us there if they have a good summer, but we will still comfortably have one of the 4 best squads in the country despite what everyone else may do.

Anzac

Rex wrote:
With this squad, I'd say nothing. Us missing out would be a massive underachievement. I'd say we already have the third best squad in the country; Man U may overtake us there if they have a good summer, but we will still comfortably have one of the 4 best squads in the country despite what everyone else may do.

Isn't that similar to AW's current approach = we are already good enough?
You'd also be suggesting that the issues of this season are now resolved?

Problem being that the supposed gap in quality to those below us is closing.
IMO the squad still lacks balance in both roles/patterns and player types in general,
and the spine can be improved upon.

Klaus

United have a better squad than we do, Rex. They just have a worse manager.

Claudius

I think we have a better thought out squad than United, for all the grief we give Wenger. But then again, van Gaal has had only 8 months to formulate a plan while Wenger's on his 3rd or 4th post invincible team.

Klaus

We have a little better balance maybe but they have the firepower.

I think it's moot anyway. We will pick up one great signing this summer again; they will pick up four or five. Next season we will be well behind them.

Claudius

yeah, after this summer, there won't even be a conversation. they have assets they can sell (e.g., Mata, Fellaini, etc.), and still have more than 100m pounds more than us in revenue. they can essentially match us in the transfer market, and still go out and buy a Pogba or Bale on top of that.

Anzac

Claudius wrote:
yeah, after this summer, there won't even be a conversation. they have assets they can sell (e.g., Mata, Fellaini, etc.), and still have more than 100m pounds more than us in revenue. they can essentially match us in the transfer market, and still go out and buy a Pogba or Bale on top of that.

IMO our awareness of market opportunities v our transfer policy is shite.
We'd rather sink or swim based upon those policies on principle than take advantage of our position,
even if that did not entail us breaking either FFP or debt, let alone our self funding policy.

IMO only Bayern and ManU can currently outspend us, & ManU are paying OTT fees and wages as badly as CFC & Citeh did to gain top4.
Most of the Elite clubs are pretty well established re their squads whilst we still have potentially the greatest room for improvement in terms of starting, match day & 25 man squads.

For example Reus is available for 20m in the summer. The only reason we should 'miss out' is if he decides he wants to go elsewhere, NOT because we didn't bid to match his release clause or because we didn't agree player terms because of our frakking wage structure & policy.
If Hummels IS available for 35m then likewise we have the capability to sign him and meet his wages.

« Previous Page Next Page »