Arsenal as an investment: Page 2 - The Arsenal discussion forum and community: One More in the Tolly

Arsenal as an investment

Bryant

@[deleted], he evicted people who lived on the ranch he bought in Texas. (http://fox2now.com/2016/10/27/residents-of-texas-ranch-kicked-to-the-curb-by-new-land-owner-stan-kroenke/)

@[deleted] wasn't hicks and gillette's sale of Liverpool due to huge debt they owed to the royal bank of scotland? I don't remember hicks even allowing the sale. Gillette got death threats from liverpool fans though.

I doubt that's going to happen with Kroenke though, when has he ever sold anything?

General

Yeah agreed re - Hicks and Gillette. They owed a lot of money. I was just saying that once things turn sour and you can't or refuse to pump cash into the club you end up on a collision course with the fans. 10years on and they still haven't managed to get their stadium off the ground so they had to redevelop Anfield.

Burnwinter

General wrote:
Burnwinter wrote:
I've always felt the long term strategy might be to hold the club fortunes steady waiting on a disruptive event that increased its value (eg a super league or a new and lucrative platform for media rights).

I wonder if things get worse on the pitch might Stan decide to cash in?

I'm not sure I agree with this waiting for a disruptive event theory. History has shown that owners get edgy when they suddenly have to dip into their own pockets to prop up the business.

Yeah, I'm not sure I agree with it either. Point is psychologising Kroenke as solely investment-oriented doesn't quite pan out either.

Could be a few things: he's really boring, and doesn't care ... he's obsessed with owning and investing in sports, and Arsenal does pretty well and is a pretty safe investment for a sports club, he only likes investing in things he can own that aren't publicly listed, he's waiting for some kind of sea change in the fortunes of football or the league more generally.

Unlike a Russian oligarch he doesn't need to use the club to clean up his profile or as an elaborate money-laundering operation.

We can be fairly sure at this point that he's not particularly passionate about us winning anything.

Question is how long will he stick around?

goon

I think it's just a prestige and image thing, just like buying that fucking ranch.

Ricky1985

http://metro.co.uk/2017/04/01/arsenal-reportedly-agree-180million-kit-deal-with-adidas-6547334/

Looks like we might be ending our deal with Puma a year early and signing a £90m/year for two years deal with Adidas from the start of the 2018/19 season.

For comparison we currently get £30m/year from Puma, whilst Spurs have signed a £25m/year contract with Nike from next season, United have been getting £75m/year from Adidas since 2015 (although they had to sign a 10 year deal to get that much) and Chelsea, who swap Adidas for Nike next season (also had to pay Adidas £67m to end the contract early and have signed a 15 year contract with Nike!), will earn £60m/year.

If it's accurate, it's a surprisingly good deal. The length of the deal - only two years - could be viewed as Adidas' uncertainty about where we'll be in two years or as Arsenal's reluctancy to get locked into long term deals that represent great value at first and then become less and less competitive as time goes by.

Qwiss

I'd be happy to have Adidas kits instead of Puma.

lorddulaarsenal

Nice deal that.

Adidas clobber is aiiiight

Ray

😆 That's got to be some sort of April fools prank.

Coombs

That'd be a pretty spectacular deal. Seems pretty implausible. If it's even close to true then people will have to lay off ol' Egg-head a bit for failing on the commercial side of things.

Anzac

Ray wrote:
😆 That's got to be some sort of April fools prank.

Most probably as I don't see anyone paying AFC more than what is currently being paid by them to ManU.
Likewise I'd imagine that there'd be some pretty stringent caveats attached like CL qualification, or regarding the level of investment into the team via players signed and/or wages.
IIRC the original deal with Emirates & Co to fund the stadium involved a caveat regarding funding into the team, as well as the prohibitive penalty rates if we tried to pay out early.

Anzac

Coombs wrote:
That'd be a pretty spectacular deal. Seems pretty implausible. If it's even close to true then people will have to lay off ol' Egg-head a bit for failing on the commercial side of things.

Has he taken over the hot seat since our initial people went to Villa?

Anzac

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2017/may/08/alexis-sanchez-arsenal-frustrations-could-leave-arsene-wenger

signs the season ticket sales are not being renewed as readily as hoped...

Perhaps not surprisingly, these executive seats went out for renewal early, giving the marketing team more time for the sales pitch if needed. The pack to sign up for the 2017-18 campaign landed a few weeks ago. Many – both ordinary supporters with a few bob and corporate customers – have thought long and hard about justifying their renewals and have let the deadline lapse. Why? Primarily because they do not know exactly what they are paying for. Will Arsène Wenger still be the manager next season? Will Mesut Özil be there? Will Alexis Sánchez? Will Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain? Might they still be able to experience Champions League nights or will it be Europa Thursdays?

Hey Stan, better sort your boys out before they stuff up your cash cow.

Claudius

Anzac, nobody is basing a ticket purchase decision on Ox's whereabouts next season. Except maybe his family. 😆 The rest makes sense though.

Anzac

Claudius wrote:
Anzac, nobody is basing a ticket purchase decision on Ox's whereabouts next season. Except maybe his family. 😆 The rest makes sense though.

Not my words - I'm only the messenger.
;D

Anzac

http://www.football.london/arsenal-fc/news/arsenal-finances-revealed-transfer-war-13024902

AST report.

« Previous Page