duduspace:

For anyone who wants a clear picture of our finances, I'd suggest the swiss rambler's recent post, I think its more objective than earlier ones. There are points of accuracy I'd dispute like the[b] so called renegotiation of deals by chelsea[/b] but his writing creates a better picture of things than I could.

we are currently losing up to 40m per annum compared to rivals due to the frontloading ofcontracts to fund the construction of the emirates.

debosky:

Why won't you dispute that with your slavish agreement with foolish decision making by the current board in hope of getting some dividend/share price appreciation?

debosky:

The Nike deal was due to expire this year and didn't have to be extended and we could've started getting an extra £15-20m NOW by signing a new deal. This particular decision has nothing to do with frontloading but is sheer stupidity by the board.

debosky:

Like I said, the board is largely made up of duplicitous two faced liars. Listen to Gazidis:

[i]“We deliberately kept some powder dry… There are funds available to invest in a significant way in January and [b]next summer.”[/[/b]i]

January has come and gone, and the only 'significant' investment was paying TH14's wage for a few weeks. The summer will come again and if we don't sell any big players, don't expect any purchases of note.

dipo+:

Its really scandalous that DjorouKanu earns $50k per week, leaves me wondering how much a certain Koscielny earns.
As an aside, among Hannie's predictions is that Koscielny won't come good. Fast forward 2010–11,  Arsenal fans voted Laurent Koscielny as Arsène Wenger’s most effective signing and everyone is now seeing what talent we have in him

Moodie:

^^^^ the quote read January and [/b]Summer. Since you are stressing on grammatical correctness, you should know there is a difference between ''[b]and'' & ''or''

debosky:

Are you minding Dudu?

The boy is blind to anything that doesn't support his view.

In contract law, what you have is right of first refusal - the intelligent thing would've been for the board to negotiate a higher deal with someone else and then approach Nike saying they should match the existing offer. That's how you maximise your revenue. However the daft board didn't even assess the market before meekly signing away 15m by tamely signing on with Nike.

duduspace:

True analysis of the right of first refusal as different from the right of first offer which would give us a way out, in this instance they have clearly chosen to exercise their right not to refuse. 

How exactly do you know that the above was not done?

If I'm not mistaken, Nike owned up to the fact that they were ripping us off and their justification was that we did profit by the initial front loading which looked wise at the time and did help us get the emirates.
Infact, did we even need to prove anything to them? are they not the same people paying Manure almost 3 times what they are paying us? The values of deals aren't exactly secret and everyone knows what the prevailing rates are. We were at their mercy and they chose not to show any mercy.

That is exactly why I said there was a difference between our deal and Chelsea's which allowed them get out of their deal with Umbro (with a penalty of a 25m fine which they had to pay by the way). We got most of our money upfront to pay for the emirates but they didn't as they had no major capex needs to necessitate tying themselves into such a deal.

Arsenal forcing a way out of the deal would be like a Government refusing to pay its bond creditors just because it was issued by an initial government or Rangers arguing that their 3 year pre-sold season tickets are no longer valid and asking those who have already paid for them to pay more cos they were sold by a previous board and general ticket prices have risen in the interim across the SPL. I'd like to see you argue that in any court. 

debosky:

How exactly do you know it was?

In contract law, what you have is right of first refusal - the intelligent thing would've been for the board to negotiate a higher deal with someone else and then approach Nike saying they should match the existing offer. That's how you maximise your revenue. However the daft board didn't even assess the market before meekly signing away 15m by tamely signing on with Nike.

debosky:

Rubbish - we are not at their mercy because contracts ALWAYS has a penalty clause for exiting a contract, it is never simply binding with no option of exit - the issue is whether you deem it worthwhile to take a hit to get out of the contract.

debosky:

You have not shown anything that indicates we were not allowed to get out of the deal if we wanted to. The difference is that Chelski had the balls to take the hit and gain the extra revenue they would be missing out on. Arsenal did not do that.

debosky:

You are quite naive to make a comparison with bonds or season tickets. The fact is that Chelski has already done so, making a precedent for us to do so if we wanted to. Unless you have proof that our contract even with front loading is different from that signed by other kit makers, there's nothing to suggest

4llerbuntu:

Accountant dudu, no go the law direction o.

Its not your forte and there are some who do that for a living who will be quick to put you out.

Besides u yarn tripe as usual.

There is no sense in that contract and it only goes to show that certain interests exist in that board to undermine the club. Prolly a case of brown envelopes.

Bes!des is this stadium worth this slavery and penury? It was built to earn us more money and make us competitive, that's not happening and won't happen anytime soon.

Arrant nonsense

Arsenal finalising Nigeria tour plans

Posted: 2012-02-29 10:53

English Premier League side Arsenal are finalising plans for a pre-season visit to Nigeria this summer.

Officials from the London club are in Nigeria to inspect more facilities across the country for the tour, scheduled for August.

Organisers DanJan Sports and Arsenal officials also met with some fans of the North London side.

"It's been a lovely time here, the energy level is absolutely unbelievable," Arsenal's marketing director Angus Kinnear.

"We are still inspecting potential facilities in different states and the fans are excited about the tour.

"Essentially, the connection with the fans has been amazing.

"Arsenal went to Asia last year and what we've seen on the ground here is encouraging.

"Like we've emphasised, there is a strong desire to connect with our fans in Africa and the first step starts in Nigeria."

The club traditionally hosts an annual pre-season tournament at the Emirates Stadium, but they opted to postpone the event for a year because of the 2012 London Olympics.

As part of their preparation for the 2012/13 season, the club have opted to connect with their huge fan base in Africa, by visiting the continent.

John Okusi of DanJan Sports said: "Arsenal has got a huge fan base in Nigeria, the most populous country in Africa, so far everything is going well."

"They've been to several states and officials are excited about the prospect of hosting the club here.

"There are only few things to be sorted out."

On a lighter note, Angus Kinnear revealed how the fans stunned him with their reaction to the North London derby victory against Tottenham Hotspur.

"The celebration and mood of the fans was shocking." Kinnear said.

"They celebrated that victory more than what I've ever experienced in London.

"It's amazing and I'm touched. The passion is incredible"

Interestingly in July 2008, DanJan Sports brought two other English clubs, Manchester United and Portsmouth, to the Nigerian capital Abuja for pre-season friendly.

Manchester United took on Portsmouth before Pompey then played against Nigeria Premier League (NPL) side Kano Pillars.

The English Premier League is hugely popular in football-mad Nigeria, with millions of fans following the league on both terrestrial and satellite television

duduspace:

This is a ridiculous question. The basic principle of law is that you're innocent until proven guilty but it seems you've turned this on its head.  Is this an attempt at inventing law too? 
You're the one who made an assertion here not me and the burden of proof lies with you. In case you've forgotten, this is the assertion I disputed:

Your question is akin to someone asking How exactly do you know that you are not stoopid?   

Seriously Debo, you need to change your meds if you're trying to convince me that Arsenal would recruit an entirely new commercial department to drive up revenue in the company and then stupidly sign such a deal if they had a way to get out of the contract and still end up with more money in their pockets and be totally ignorant of what you and I know even as laymen.

Exactly my point. Until you've ascertained that this penalty is one worth paying i.e. one that would be an improvement over what we have already then the question of getting out of the contract with a penalty doesn't even arise particularly when the club's reputation for keeping to the terms of previous agreements will also take a hit and consequently become a factor in future negotiations.

This is a ridiculous standpoint to start arguing from. I think any rational investor would watch out for their own pockets first of all and then the interest of the company next, there isn't much of a decision to be made here. If it pays Arsenal to terminate the contract, the board would have done so. Like you always say, no fan would share the extra revenue with the board after all.

Except you're hell bent on proving that all the members of the board that delivered the emirates have gone bonkers overnight and are now acting against their own interests along with the interests of the majority Owner of the club.

Chelsea breaking their contract has nothing to do with balls, it has to do with either them getting a much better deal, a deal so good they were even willing to pay a 25m penalty to break it or just sheer stupidity

There is a very valid comparison there that currently eludes you, Arsenal took a lot of the money for the contract upfront (frontloading), they must have made certain concessions to be able to get the money upfront which included the option clause for an extension by Nike.
If you're arguing that we can break it because Chelsea broke theirs (a point I don't dispute) then you've also got to prove that its profitable for the club to break it but how can you prove that when you don't even have the full details of either this contract or chelsea's contract?
What is in the public domain is that Nike had an option to extend the contract which they took and Arsenal didn't dispute or consider worthy of litigation

debosky:

I don't have to have the details of the contract to prove we've been incompetent financially. We've had this new commercial team since 2009 and we can count the number of additional deals Utd has signed in that period compared to what we've done.

Be it on this deal or the general commercial side of things, yeye dey smell.

debosky:

Dudu doesn't look at things like that - as with the footballing side of things, he is very satisfied with mediocrity.

Benchmarking yourself against the best is foreign to him.

As for DK, long may your absence continue.

dayokanu:

Bayern kill them all in commercials

The cost of matchday ticket which is low is what is hindering us from breaking the upper echelon, Also the undue advantage from TV rights

if we are allowed individually negotiate TV deals Bayern would be tops in Europe