|
Post by Jayramfootball on Aug 5, 2012 20:01:37 GMT
So as an Arsenal fan would you be ok with Kroenke moving the team out of London to say, Glasgow, if the financial district in London collapsed? Well, I don't think the same parameters really exist to draw a parallel. Firstly, it's not uncommon for NFL teams to move city. Remember that the Rams used to play in Los Angeles and St Louis had another team, the Cardinals. It's happened plenty of times before, so culturally it's acceptable within the sport. Also, the same conditions that affect the operational budgets of towns, cities and states in the US are not governed in the same way that local town and city councils are in the UK. In the US you have have bankrupt 'zones' whilst others flourish. There are many 'unicorporated' area's in the US that sit outside of local governance. In the UK, our Govt have ultimate accountability for the operation of local councils. So, it's a hypothetical question. But if it meant the difference between Arsenal existing or becoming extinct. Then of course I would choose the option that ensured its survival. A US City going bankrupt does not mean that the sports stop - check the history of baseball in the great depression as an example. Solutions can be found. What it means is that owners won't be able to make as much money. If the whole of the UK went bankrupt football would continue - the stars would leave, the money would be gone and the game would CONTINUE, with players playing for fun or 'shirt buttons' and stadiums less than full - but it WOULD continue. I would want Arsenal to stay in London, and I would still love the club as much (maybe more) if I didn't get to see the stars. Kroenke is planning to leave St Louis for one reason and one reason only, because he wants to make more money. He doesn't give a stuff about the fans. This is why there have been franchise moves in America, more so than here, because the money has ruled the game there for a long time - money first, sponsors second, players third, agents fourth, fans a distant last. We are headed for that here across the country - and we already have it at Arsenal I am afraid.
|
|
sensi
Junior Member
Posts: 81
|
Post by sensi on Aug 5, 2012 20:13:44 GMT
I agree that US sports franchises operate less sentimentally than British football teams, but I'm not sure that you can apply the same cultural parameters and posit that the outcomes would be the same. The idea of Arsenal moving to Glasgow, or Man Utd moving to Surrey (although their fans would have to travel less ) is unlikely. If Kronke is just at Arsenal to make money, then he needs to ensure that the club are operating at growth. It's a bit pessamistic to suggest that he's just here to milk it's assets and then jump ship.
|
|
|
Post by ammaar on Aug 5, 2012 20:16:09 GMT
Look Piskie, there is enough evidence to suggest that Kroenke will pay dividends and start taking money out of the club. Kroenke claiming that he wouldn't invest in the club means that we have contract issues and it forces us to sell. How is that helping the club at all?
I have made no mistakes in my above post - you are the one with this misconception of Kroenke and how good an owner he is, when it is evident he is clearly a money grabbing scumbag. Revenue generation is what Gazidis does and he deserves credit for that, as it's one area he is strong in, but it just increases the stake that Kroenke has at Arsenal and will make us profitable, only for him to take money out of the club, which is more than a feasible possibility once we start generating hundreds of millions of pounds. The revenue generation and revenue streams are NOT solely dependent on Kroenke and he has done NOTHING to help promote the club worldwide. He doesn't need to invest, but he's taken no action to suggest he is trying to market worldwide.
He didn't even buy our shares with his own money, he used the Deutch bank. He has to now pay them back with fixed interest loans - hmmm, I wonder how he's going to get that money to pay them back?
Now - before I had mentioned that Glazers are taking money out of United to pay back their loans - Kroenke has praised the Glazers - which strongly suggests he will do the same.
Kroenke hasn't taken money out, but he hasn't put money in.
The point about his wage is that he is earning money for doing nothing. He is earning a lot of money and is not helping the club in any way, shape or form.
Arsenal spent £54m last season which wouldn't have happened had we not sold Nasri, Fabregas and Clichy. Their sales contributed to the fees of all the other players.
We have £200m in cash reserve and the club is getting more and more profits - of course we have money to spend, but we're not spending it properly or wisely enough. This season perhaps we have done better, but I'm not taking anything for granted yet and baring in mind the fan onslaught the board would get if they didn't invest shrewdly, I think they knew they had to stop faffing around or else the fans would protest.
We have identifed our transfer targets - but Gazidis has to agree with the selling club for personal terms and the transfer fee and he has been very stubborn in the past, so that remains to be seen.
Again - you can have that view on Kroenke if you want, but I still stick by my posts above about Kroenke and that he is a slimeball.
The American fans of the enterprises he owns hate his guts for a reason and I am not fond of the man myself, for the aforementioned reasons in this thread.
|
|
|
Post by Jayramfootball on Aug 5, 2012 20:17:37 GMT
I agree that US sports franchises operate less sentimentally than British football teams, but I'm not sure that you can apply the same cultural parameters and posit that the outcomes would be the same. The idea of Arsenal moving to Glasgow, or Man Utd moving to Surrey (although their fans would have to travel less ) is unlikely. If Kronke is just at Arsenal to make money, then he needs to ensure that the club are operating at growth. It's a bit pessamistic to suggest that he's just here to milk it's assets and then jump ship. Pessimistic perhaps, but he has done nothing to suggest his interest is anything other than monetary. I don't think he would hesitate to move the team if the financial rewards were big enough. When he actually DOES something positive for the fans I might give him and the other members of the Arsenal board more credit, but as it stands I don't trust they have the clubs interests at heart. Note I separate the term 'club' from the business.
|
|
|
Post by Bergkamp a Dutch master on Aug 5, 2012 20:23:02 GMT
on a quick break from the Olympics -so can't stop long. Terrific debate - if only we could have that on Not606 - we'd all still be there. Well- sensi I look forward to reading what you have to say on not606. You say you haven't been on forums for months - long holiday?.
|
|
sensi
Junior Member
Posts: 81
|
Post by sensi on Aug 5, 2012 20:28:10 GMT
The 'club' is their business though. It needs to be successful, for their 'business' to follow suit.
As ammaar said. You can only judge him on what is actually happening at the club. So far during his short tenure, we've invested more in the squad, started to increase our revenue streams and our club seems to be moving in the right direction both on the field and at a business level. People might be suspicious of his intentions, but what we're actually seeing, makes me more inclined to suggest that both he, Gazidis and Wenger are on the right track.
|
|
|
Post by Jayramfootball on Aug 5, 2012 20:32:00 GMT
The 'club' is their business though. It needs to be successful, for their 'business' to follow suit. As ammaar said. You can only judge him on what is actually happening at the club. So far during his short tenure, we've invested more in the squad, started to increase our revenue streams and our club seems to be moving in the right direction both on the field and at a business level. People might be suspicious of his intentions, but what we're actually seeing, makes me more inclined to suggest that both he, Gazidis and Wenger are on the right track. Our revenue streams and profit are strong, however our points totals in the league have fallen away over the last 5 years, we have not invested more if you take inflation and net spending into account. I would say last season was our worst in 15 years. We were very lucky to get third and in many games were simply appalling.
|
|
sensi
Junior Member
Posts: 81
|
Post by sensi on Aug 5, 2012 20:38:47 GMT
I know you think that I'm Piskie from not606. I remember a few of your names from there, but to be honest, what is happening here is embarrassing. This is quite a good thread, and although you all seem a bit negative, I think if you drop the atttitude, we could all get along
|
|
|
Post by ALTBOULI on Aug 5, 2012 21:12:19 GMT
A pretty interesting debate going on here, Sensi while I completely disagree with your view on Kroenke and Gazidis I respect your view point. However I think what Ammaar has presented in terms of factual evidence highlights Stan's principle in making money for himself above everything else. One of the main reasons we dont have much funds for buying players is because those funds are being used to strengthen the value of the shares at Arsenal. Gazidis has said this publically, and in terms of rating Gazidis I dont judge him by what a newspaper says but rather by his actions in the transfer market and comparing him to his predecessor in David Dein. Dein in my opinion was far more successful and complimented Wenger much better and this is the reason I believe Gazidis has been a failure simply because he is not even close to being as good as Dein was.
|
|
|
Post by thehothead on Aug 5, 2012 21:30:32 GMT
Well bearing the things in mind that have been said, I remember quotes from Wenger saying he had to make £15-20m per season. Why is this ? Why is this necessary ? It makes no sense at all considering the profits we make.
Why does the chairman continually say there is money there for Wenger if he needs it if Wenger must make £15-20m.
I don't see any good for Arsenal with Kroenke at the helm, we need to spend to bring money in, lots of season ticket holders have given their's up, I know this because I have secured 2 of them for this season myself !!
Fergie claimed that the Glazers have allowed him to spend what he needs to be able to keep winning and winning in turn makes the club more money. Why can't Arsenal see this as the way to go, rather than eroding the quality of the club and losing fans in the process !!
|
|
|
Post by Robin van Bergkamp on Aug 6, 2012 7:29:09 GMT
I know you think that I'm Piskie from not606. I remember a few of your names from there, but to be honest, what is happening here is embarrassing. This is quite a good thread, and although you all seem a bit negative, I think if you drop the atttitude, we could all get along Hello Sensi Welcome to Arsenal Talk. I hope you'll enjoy our forum and participate in the manner we would prefer our home to grow. Thank you for starting this thread which from what I can see, is encouraging a lot of discussion. I am aware some here hold a belief that you may be someone else from their past. I know of no one called ' Sensi ' from another board but then again I do not go on many forums. A word of advice if I may. It was given to me quite some time back on a forum of a different kind and which catered for a vastly different pursuit. One of the members asked if I was someone else on another forum. His reasoning being that if one chose different names then how would anyone know who one was. I wasn't pleased at his remark since I was indeed who I was but can now see his reasoning for it. Why hide an identity unless of course one is embarrassed by it or wishing to deceive? Not saying of course that either applies here. Welcome again and enjoy the talk
|
|
sensi
Junior Member
Posts: 81
|
Post by sensi on Aug 6, 2012 7:44:38 GMT
A pretty interesting debate going on here, Sensi while I completely disagree with your view on Kroenke and Gazidis I respect your view point. However I think what Ammaar has presented in terms of factual evidence highlights Stan's principle in making money for himself above everything else. One of the main reasons we dont have much funds for buying players is because those funds are being used to strengthen the value of the shares at Arsenal. Gazidis has said this publically, and in terms of rating Gazidis I dont judge him by what a newspaper says but rather by his actions in the transfer market and comparing him to his predecessor in David Dein. Dein in my opinion was far more successful and complimented Wenger much better and this is the reason I believe Gazidis has been a failure simply because he is not even close to being as good as Dein was. The factual evidence with regard to his involvement at Arsenal suggests that he is willing to sanction investment in the squad. We spent 54m last summer, we've just spent another 24m so far this one and we look likely to strengthen further. As much as you all seem to detest the man, it is unjustified. He is currently taking Arsenal in the direction that we've all been calling for over the last 6 or 7 years.
|
|
|
Post by Bergkamp a Dutch master on Aug 6, 2012 8:28:28 GMT
you state what we spent- but not what we received in selling! Balance the books please!
|
|
|
Post by Jayramfootball on Aug 6, 2012 10:22:17 GMT
A pretty interesting debate going on here, Sensi while I completely disagree with your view on Kroenke and Gazidis I respect your view point. However I think what Ammaar has presented in terms of factual evidence highlights Stan's principle in making money for himself above everything else. One of the main reasons we dont have much funds for buying players is because those funds are being used to strengthen the value of the shares at Arsenal. Gazidis has said this publically, and in terms of rating Gazidis I dont judge him by what a newspaper says but rather by his actions in the transfer market and comparing him to his predecessor in David Dein. Dein in my opinion was far more successful and complimented Wenger much better and this is the reason I believe Gazidis has been a failure simply because he is not even close to being as good as Dein was. The factual evidence with regard to his involvement at Arsenal suggests that he is willing to sanction investment in the squad. We spent 54m last summer, we've just spent another 24m so far this one and we look likely to strengthen further. As much as you all seem to detest the man, it is unjustified. He is currently taking Arsenal in the direction that we've all been calling for over the last 6 or 7 years. I did mention that I was talking about net spend - as BADM says you need to look at both sides here! You are correct though that the current window looks different. Indeed I would agree that many have been calling for change over the last 6/7 years and it looks like finally the board are listening. I hope we round off this summer in the right way - bringing in Cazorla and Sahin and keeping RVP and Walcott would show me and many others that the club will not make the mistakes of the past and are at least serious about challenging. The bad feeling towards Gazidis and Kroenke is for a reason - it's not just that many people took a disliking to them for nothing. You will find that opinions will change if the situation changes.
|
|
sensi
Junior Member
Posts: 81
|
Post by sensi on Aug 6, 2012 10:55:25 GMT
What have they done wrong though ? As far as I can see, they have come in, steadied a very rocky ship, especially at board level and developed a sound business plan which we're now starting to see the fruits of.
|
|