arsenal finances thread: Page 13 - The Arsenal discussion forum and community: One More in the Tolly

arsenal finances thread

evoh1

Well this is by my estimates £25m going to find the leverage alone. Name me an industry that makes an infrequent profit, that often pays most of revenues to staff as an ideal investment to lesverage up. This is in no way a good thing for the club on the pitch but we will likely cover Stan's interest and let him drain the cash balances for next to nothing so he's won here.

Sad times a few days before the start of a season I was really looking forward to as a positive turning point. I see is going downhill with this financial burden to deal with

Mirth

awooga83 wrote:
Your right hehalready did take money out,3m over 2 previous seasons that was never explained and seemed to stop when scrutiny was applied at AGM.

He has never put his money into the club so we won't be seeing any financial benefit and most likely he'll be taking profit that won't be invested back into the club.

Guardian article highlights some of the concerns I have namely the claim that this won't incur any debt on Arsenal but we won't know because he won't need to disclose and won't be putting money in.

There's nothing that sinister about charging a management fee (which is pocket change for all parties concerned) for services rendered between two companies though, even if they are related. And the fact that it was stopped voluntarily because it caused negative publicity should been seen as a positive rather than a negative.

I don't get where the assumption that every privately owned company gets run to the ground comes from.

awooga83

Well he won't have to answer publically ever again so that's part of the worry at won't know what he is using Arsenal for in future because it will be subsumed into KSE. It isn't about being sinister they couldn't explain what exactly it was for.

I don't think it will be run into the ground either just won't get backing to become a big football force. Ultimately Arsenal has been a shareholder run club with fan input at senior levels that is part of the history and culture of Arsenal. This marks the end of that real connection the people who own the club/the custodians don't care about it's interests or have a connection with it beyond business and profit That is why I don't think this is good news for Arsenal football club.

awooga83

goon wrote:
Completely disagree, we’ve got the 5th or 6th largest revanue in the world. You think the Liverpool owners who everyone seems to fawn over invest any of their own money? And even if it were a requirement, I’ve never wanted a sugar daddie to help us win things anyway.

I've never spoken on whether the Liverpool owners are good or not. If you want to win big trophies in the modern business/money orientated premier league you have to spend decent money above what we're generating. If a rich owner isn't going to inject that what's the point or benefit to the club selling to him. Beyond making existing shareholders richer.

Kel Varnsen

Why would he run the club into the ground? He'd just destroy the club valuation. If he wants to make money, he'll make it when he sells the club.

I don't think this means much tbh. He'll mostly stay away, let the club carry on like we have in the last few years, and spend some real money if a good opportunity comes up.

Herbas

If anything, we're on the verge of losing quite a lot of commercial appeal if we do not manage to get back to top4 soon. So there is an incentive for Stan to allow bigger spending.

Ray

Key part being top 4, we aren’t going to be competing for league titles.

awooga83

Exactly, keep us in or around top 4 will be the objective with minimal spend. Also three main issue is Kroenke has had to take on around £600m debt and Arsenal are the big asset that he will likely be able to take massive multimillion-pound dividends to service this loan that we won't be able to see once we are a private company.

evoh1

This debt burden could be the equivalent of an ozil wage packet a year leaving the club for little reason other than to benefit Kroenke. I don't see a reason why Stan would inject money into players when he isn't even stumping he cash for his buyout stake. We'll be operating with a weight on our back when others, as said above, are spending more than they have available.

We need a mega outperformance to start competing for a league anytime soon.

GooneriC

Dangote not interested in Usmanovs shares? Where was that Nigerian when we needed him?

Anzac

GooneriC wrote:
Dangote not interested in Usmanovs shares? Where was that Nigerian when we needed him?

IIRC he said something recently about still not being in a position to do anything until the refinery project is completed. Also said that that he was not overly concerned about anything that may happen between now and then and that it wouldn't change his mind about making an offer to buy the club.

Meatwad

also he's interested in 100% of the club, so if kroenke ever has any intention of selling it doesn't make a difference if dankote is buying 70% later (after buying 30% now) or 100%. you just tie up your money and have no power.

Anzac

awooga83 wrote:
Well he won't have to answer publically ever again so that's part of the worry at won't know what he is using Arsenal for in future because it will be subsumed into KSE. It isn't about being sinister they couldn't explain what exactly it was for.

I don't think it will be run into the ground either just won't get backing to become a big football force. Ultimately Arsenal has been a shareholder run club with fan input at senior levels that is part of the history and culture of Arsenal. This marks the end of that real connection the people who own the club/the custodians don't care about it's interests or have a connection with it beyond business and profit That is why I don't think this is good news for Arsenal football club.

Another part to this is the question as to whether US sports franchise owners are emotionally attached to their franchises at all, or are the franchises primarily seen as being a business in the field of sport, and does it matter?

I don't particularly care if our owner invests their own money into the club or not, so long as they actively support the club's ambition and help to grow the club both as a football team and business through commercial deals.

Likewise I don't care if the owners take dividends as shareholders so long as they are either accountable (as was suggested by Usmanov), or that they are growing the club on and off the pitch as seen with the Glazers and MU (and we remember what a shit fight that started out as being).

EDIT: IMO if Kroenke wants to smooth things with the supporters then a good show of faith would be to:

Firstly allow the club to invest the 100m we have sitting in the Cash Reserves as a 1 off transfer kitty so as to get the squad right;
Secondly he can re-structure our financial strategies to allow our revenues to actually work for us and to be useful when we need it - atm our restraints speak more about generating profits than they do about enabling the club to be as good as it can be on ore off the pitch,
Lastly he can tell the club to go hard at improving the commercial deals and diversify our revenues as befits out potential to be a super club on and off the pitch.

The selling point to all 3 actions is that he's not spending anything we don't already have or generate, and yet in doing so it should further increase the value of the club.

Burnwinter

I honestly don't care if Kroenke buys out Usmanov. Usmanov is a posturing criminal who's also irrelevant to us.

I think the main hope of energetic leadership (or to put it your way, Anzac, emotional attachment) at Board level at the moment is probably Josh Kroenke stepping out of his father's shadow.

If he wants to make a mark with Arsenal things might get interesting.

At the moment though I'm happy with the regime. I'm just glad that since Mislintat came in, we've been signing players other than the classic Wenger targets. The situation with Wenger was unusual and put the brakes on change. Unless Emery enjoys great success—and you wouldn't be complaining—we're going to be on a more regular cycle of renewal in terms of management and players now, with all that that entails.

Anzac

Burnwinter wrote:
I honestly don't care if Kroenke buys out Usmanov. Usmanov is a posturing criminal who's also irrelevant to us.

I think the main hope of energetic leadership (or to put it your way, Anzac, emotional attachment) at Board level at the moment is probably Josh Kroenke stepping out of his father's shadow.

If he wants to make a mark with Arsenal things might get interesting.

At the moment though I'm happy with the regime. I'm just glad that since Mislintat came in, we've been signing players other than the classic Wenger targets. The situation with Wenger was unusual and put the brakes on change. Unless Emery enjoys great success—and you wouldn't be complaining—we're going to be on a more regular cycle of renewal in terms of management and players now, with all that that entails.

And so long as the club has a clear vision in terms of identity (style, ambition etc) then there should be no reason to fear any cycle of change, provided that it is done with the clear purpose to improve.
Whereas under AW we perhaps became more about being a philosophy and moral / socialist compass,
with AW being our own Don Quixote.

Meatwad

all the legal documents for the kroenke offer.

https://www.arsenal.com/the-club/corporate-info/key-documents

that's some serious transparency.

BWoolley

Assume it’s mandatory given that it is a public tender.

Burnwinter

Anzac wrote:
Whereas under AW we perhaps became more about being a philosophy and moral / socialist compass,
with AW being our own Don Quixote.

I will never understand the "socialist" thing when it comes to Wenger, "smug and profit-focused" would be more accurate. A relatively flat wage structure is not socialist, it's just a sign of an organisation focused on recruitment and potential.

goon

New 5 year Adidas deal worth 60m p/a according to The Mail.

--

Is that good value? I’m tired of hearing us do kit sponsorship deals that sound good, only to hear it isn’t up to half what the other top clubs are getting with their new deals barely a month later

« Previous Page Next Page »