HOUSEBOAT - Warning: tenuous links ahead!: Page 215 - The Arsenal discussion forum and community: One More in the Tolly

HOUSEBOAT - Warning: tenuous links ahead!

Captain

Why is that funny?

goon

General wrote:
Apparently we tried to pay the Lucas deal in two instalments and Depor told us to fuckoff 😆

And people still think we have something big up our sleeve 😆

We need to save the money for the madness.

Clrnc

Klaus wrote:
Yeah, I didn't take that tweet from Ornstein as him saying we're trying to pull off a big signing. He just says we've got room for one in the budget. If we get Perez and Mustafi our transfer business is pretty much done.

Technically, if there's even such a thing called transfer budget for transfer fees (where AST claimed it was 96m for us), we will have spent about 84m including Mustafi and Perez. There's only about 12m left so unless we sell someone we won't do a "madness".

QuincyAbeyie

Didn't you read his tweet? He said that we have 96m in our transfer budget, but if an opportunity of a so-called "madness" shows itself, we have more money on top of that. We wouldn't need ta sell someone.

goon

The point of the tweet was that if there's a chance to sign a world class player we have additional funds to do it but in terms of normal transfer business we are pretty much done.

I've maintained this all along anyway, if you have the chance to sign the type of player that only comes along every few years then the budget goes out the window. What makes a "madness" unlikely is the fact that it's very unlikely that sort of player will be available.

Rohit

Yeah, that's very plausible. Which is why those that contend getting Suarez in 2013 would mean no Ozil are probably off the mark.

Cannon

goon wrote:
The point of the tweet was that if there's a chance to sign a world class player we have additional funds to do it but in terms of normal transfer business we are pretty much done.

I've maintained this all along anyway, if you have the chance to sign the type of player that only comes along every few years then the budget goes out the window. What makes a "madness" unlikely is the fact that it's very unlikely that sort of player will be available.

Yeah i agree with this. Though if someone like say Morata or James becomes available now (assuming right price and willingness to come), IMO our existing business does decrease the possibility of going for it.

Clrnc

Quincy Abeyie wrote:
Didn't you read his tweet? He said that we have 96m in our transfer budget, but if an opportunity of a so-called "madness" shows itself, we have more money on top of that. We wouldn't need ta sell someone.

I saw that tweet, I am questioning the point of a transfer budget if there is even one? The 96m is nonsense is we have much more capabilities to sign top players since Wenger always maintained that when a top player is available we will go for him.

I am sure every Gooner and their dogs know we have loads of money in the bank from last year's inactivity.

goon

A budget is what you want to spend (i.e. to avoid making a substantial loss, to avoid having to raise finance, to avoid spending from next years budget, spending money allocated for other things). It's not the limit of what you can afford to spend.

General

And when was the last time we went beyond the limit of our budget?

Claudius

if i were Wenger... i'd sell Walcott and go all in on James Rodriguez. it would give us so much flexibility in our frontline. James can replace Ozil when he's tired, or play wide. would give us superstardust.

Clrnc

goon wrote:
A budget is what you want to spend (i.e. to avoid making a substantial loss, to avoid having to raise finance, to avoid spending from next years budget, spending money allocated for other things). It's not the limit of what you can afford to spend.

And what if it is none of that? We just have spare cash lying in the reserves and can spend it if we want. I certainly don't believe the 96m figure, it doesn't add up.

A fixed budget is a myth in all certainty. It is the work of the media, but this article on guardian puts it nicely.

Clubs do not have transfer budget, war chests and kitties
If anyone tries to tell you “big club x” has “y amount” to spend they are likely talking nonsense. Ask them to show their work on how they arrived at that number.

As we just discussed, there’s a lot more that goes into player costs than transfer fees. Unless the number being offered up clearly includes wages (which is more than half of the equation), and ideally at least a nod towards agent fees and image rights payments, you can safely disregard it as not reflective of that club’s available resources to bolster its squad.

goon

At a guess if we spent our entire cash reserves on player transfers we'd make a substantial loss in all likelihood. It being spare cash (which it isn't) is irrelevant.

Of course clubs have budgets, most organisations have budgets especially the ones the size of ours. You don't just blindly spend and see what the bottom line is at the year end.

The 96m figure has been calculated by taking into account wages and other costs (as your Guardian article suggests they need to do) rather than just looking at the bank balance, so it's likely to be much closer to the truth even if it isn't precise.

Ray

I think there's still another big deal to be had before deadline day. For the front three position.

Claudius

Clrnc wrote:

Clubs do not have transfer budget, war chests and kitties
If anyone tries to tell you “big club x” has “y amount” to spend they are likely talking nonsense. Ask them to show their work on how they arrived at that number.

As we just discussed, there’s a lot more that goes into player costs than transfer fees. Unless the number being offered up clearly includes wages (which is more than half of the equation), and ideally at least a nod towards agent fees and image rights payments, you can safely disregard it as not reflective of that club’s available resources to bolster its squad.

This is the biggest bull. How are you supposed to manage a 300 million pound annual spend without a budget? If you don't have a budget, how are you to be certain that your 600 employees will be paid each year? It's ridiculous. You start the year with a forecast of monies coming in from tickets, merchandise, sponsorships, etc., and subtract the salaries of players and non-playing staff, and other running costs. What's left over is your transfer budget, which you can then move up or down by playing with the other numbers.

Klaus

goon wrote:
A budget is what you want to spend (i.e. to avoid making a substantial loss, to avoid having to raise finance, to avoid spending from next years budget, spending money allocated for other things). It's not the limit of what you can afford to spend.

Pretty much. If the transfer funds had to come out of our cash reserve we would've run out a long time ago. We make new money every year, and we make a good deal of it too with the newish tv deal for Premier League.

Gazza M

our business is clearly done. wont stop idiots on twitter from pumping up some rumour that was pure invention from the start

Sicario

Got a funny feeling we will sign one more on deadline day.

lorddulaarsenal

Wenger talking about how he expects the market to explode in the coming days makes me think he's not done yet. He'll be sniffing out opportunities no doubt

Rex

We have a good squad, if the additions of Mustafi and Perez go through of course, but we still lack top class, difference making players. I'd be fine with Wenger being done for the summer, unless a top class attacking player becomes available because of some dominoes falling. If that's the case Wenger and the club need to go to great lengths to sign the player.

Overall, I think we have left things too late, and I feel we could have done more throughout the summer to get a top class player for the front line.

« Previous Page Next Page »