proudly9ja:

I was going to say same thing o. I really don't get the reason for his loan at this point in time unless he asked to be loaned out. If our first team features Gervinho, Chamberlain and RVP upfront, who do we call on from the bench in dire situations?

What happened to Theo Danger? 
Is Debo giving up on him already? 
It seems we've given up on coming back against AC, there is really no need keeping Arshavin around if all we'll be in is the PL run in (Isn't Debo one of those saying the wage bill is already inefficient? ). Just more bench warming and time for idle talk as the Idle mind is the devil's workshop.
I hope 'Special Agent' Ryodinho does his bit tommorow at Stamford Bridge.

dayokanu:

Second leg vs Sunderland in the FA cup?

Na so your big head empty reach.  where you see that kain replay before for FA Cup? I was referring to the UCL. Miracles still happen you know. 

dayokanu:

Dudu,

I heard you guys are out of the FA cup your only realistic chance of silverware .

How many seasons trophyless now?

Wait, your body too dey hot. There is still a second leg to be played.

edoyad:

Just had to make a comeback for this one. For the first one, so Schweini is the soul eh? Just for reference purpose, Na who be yansh abeg? Gomez abi. Okay Mueller is definitely  the prick and Ribery the scrotum sack.
Just listen to the sad excuse, you're lucky it wasn't A C Milan you met last night.

DK go soon cover face for here again like last season.

coogar:

but arsenal never relegated once in their history. your history book missed that while trying to lie that arsenal were poor before wenger.
it's a white elephant lie. arsenal weren't poor. a poor club would not make a british transfer record of £7.5m to buy dennis bergkamp in 1995.

you idiotically stated united have started selling their legacy in recent times - what a disgraceful comment from the lips of duduface.
matter of fact, the last 5 seasons have been united's most successful era in their entire history.
4 league titles in 5 seasons + 3 champions league final in 4 seasons. do you know any other era better than the current one?
answers on a postcard, please!!!!

Irrelevant talk, make some sense and I'll answer you.

debosky:

You still don't get it do you? This fanshare has clouded your reasoning completely. It has nothing to do with share ownership - the performances on the pitch and the poor quality squad we have is testament to the problem we are suffering from.

You are pretty confused, it is the fact that I hold fanshares that has clouded your reasoning because that is really of no relevance in any discussion. The value of equity has no immediate direct correlation with anything that happens on the pitch. It only shows that the financial side of things in the club has been well managed in the past and has no bearing whatsoever on the future as tomorrow will only be determined by what happens today exactly as today was determined by what happened yesterday.

Arsenal as a club has 2 options:

1. Stay the course and stick to strategy while looking to optimize inefficiencies.
2. Join the bandwagon that clubs like Chelsea have shown is not always effective.

If you can't see that this is the challenge facing the club, then your blindness is worse than that of a mole and won't be solved by going to specsavers.

debosky:

1. Wenger refuses to spend  - plausible given his desire to 'grow' a team and not 'buy' one.

2. The board is holding back money from him - also plausible but less so given that people like Gazidis have publicly said all generated funds are available to be spent.

Even you with all your 0.9999 share profit mongering can explain which is the case.

You see now why I said there are no easy solutions to Arsenal's issues as most people think   
If I can't explain it with my 0.9999 share profit and you can't with your null shares, then maybe Biolabee can with his [(x^y * phi root Lambdha) ^{lin y}] shares? 

4llerbuntu:

This dudu likes being clever by half with all his big big grammer.
What answer is in which books?

Besides as debo rightly pointed out a page or two back u essentially said the club was poor in the eighties and early nighties and the point I made was how come it was not going 8 Years trophiless then! That's what prompted debo to bring that article.   Next thing u know you will bring out a dictionary and lexicon to supposedly analyse the words u used.

Anyway I'm not given to useless pointless arguments about wenger's idiocies. U can keep defending the indefensible.

Soon and very soon this ur much touted economic magic will unravel and then we will see what the excuse will be then if now its money

Bros, the only person who speaks big big grammar here is Debo, I Duduspace can be understood by anyone, hence why I approve my messages.   
What I said was that the 'Value' of the club has risen with respect to its contemporaries at that time, that is not the same thing as saying the club was poor. For example, my telling you that I'm richer than you doesn't make you poor neither does it make me super rich as everything is relative (and please don't start assuming that I meant to say I'm richer than you, it was just an example so don't let us start any Forbes list grading wahala on this thread just yet) 
Would you care to bet on the bolded? 

biolabee:

good point debo,  but I dont get where you stand

You both make out to be a wengerphobe and a wengerlover at the same time

If I get you

1. The youth policy has failed
2. Arsenal need to buy to stay where they are if not at least move forward
3. We need to get rid of the chaff and buy quality

This is what everyone else has been saying but your won clonclusion seems to differ from everyone elses'

Debo and I are largely saying the same thing but with different opinions to what we think is happening.
I see it as a necessary evil, but Debo sees it as the board/Arsene trying to screw the fans and being penny wise but pound foolish in the process.
That's why he goes all green skinned like the Hulk anytime a tsunami hits us but remains passive like Bruce Banner when we're doing well.

biolabee:

@udu
Did you hear about that slowpoke Craig Whytes' sale of shares to Usmanov
I dont know why he did not sell to Fanshare.
Money there is just waiting,,  no share to buy

Don't mind the madman, I feel for Rangers fans but they did enjoy their 7 years of winning the SPL  

debosky:

There is no contradiction in my posts - I recognise what the manager has achieved throughout his time here, even in these ‘barren’ 7 years without a trophy. Looking at the available evidence, he has done par for the course considering the resources he has used. He could have done better or prioritised differently to win a lesser trophy in these 7 years, but overall it has been a competent performance.

However, my issue is why has Wenger not been able to spend more - especially since 2009? Is it because he’s chosen not to or because he’s been restrained by the club? That is the ultimate question for me - if he has simply refused to spend then he should leave as his ideology has become detrimental to Arsenal. If he has been denied funds then the funds need to be made available to him or another manager to spend, else getting a new manager will not achieve very different results if the same problems still exist.

The answer to that is very simple and can be found in the accounts if you cared enough to look. 
You can blame the board then for being too careful but I think they were smart to realise that UCL participation was the club's lifeblood for survival then and to focus on it above all things else.

debosky:

@ Dudu

So we were only behind 3 clubs in terms of revenue, same as we are now, yet we were winning trophies.

In those two lines you’ve confirmed all that I was trying to prove - even with our allegedly ‘small’ revenues then, we were only behind 3 other clubs and were still winning trophies.

How can the current Arsenal set up then be excused with regards to winning trophies when we still have the same position domestically when it comes to revenues?

The stadium debt does not count because it is a long term debt that cannot be swiftly repaid without repayment penalties and is well within our abilities to continue paying off.

The excessive hoarding of money by the club is the root cause of its failures - we don’t need to stockpile cash against future failure by denying the team of quality needed NOW to prevent that failure.

It’s like someone saving money for future hospital admission for falling ill but refusing to get immunised now to prevent that illness, or saving money to buy a new car instead of spending half that sum to ensure your brakes and steering work properly now.

If the AST are right in predicting a £45m loss for exiting the CL, it is absolute foolishness for Arsenal to have not wisely spent £30m of that money to ensure we remain in the CL in the first place.

Winning trophies bawo? 
In the 13 years preceeding Arsene, Arsenal won the following:

2 First Division Championships, 1 FA Cup, 2 Football League Cups, 1 UEFA Cup Winners' Cup, 1 Charity Shield

In the 16 years of Arsene's tenure, Arsenal have won the following:

3 Premier League titles, 4 FA Cups, 4 Charity Shields

Is there really much of a difference? and that is without factoring in the distortion caused by the handouts from people like Roman and the Oil Sheikhs.

edoyad:

I can't talk about the finances for now but you're definitely wrong about the titles won. Even Manchester United hadn't won as much league titles as we had back then, i believe we were only behind Liverpool. In fact, we actually dropped to third in league titles won during the Wenger era.

Eddy, are you forgetting the 'Busby Babes' Manure don get history tay tay, they've only recently started selling their Papa's legacy, awon omo arungun olosi gbogbo
They've had 2 major eras of domination in the history of English football, the Busby era and the Fergie era.
We might have been at par in terms of First Division titles (not PL) but they were ahead in terms of European and world recognition having won the Champion's cup.

biolabee:

i like your post but unfortunately your point is not valid
The issue with arsenal is not money,  money or lack of it did not make us lose the Carling Cup final, did not cause indiscipline which made van P get himself sent off against Barca in the Nou Camp
Money did not make us play poorly against the da Silva and 7 defenders in the FA Cup.
Money did not account for the poor play at the San Siro,

So for those of us that are not happy with the state of things at the club, dont come here sounding so superior and telling we are not fans of the club

Erm Biola, every one has a right to be unhappy with things at Arsenal even if they aren't fans of Arsenal as the busybodies on this thread continue to show and remind us.   
They even have a right to be angry but there is sadness with anger and then there is throwing the baby out with the bath water and dashing its head on the ground to boot.
Some Arsenal fans speak like people who get off on self harm and self mutilation and I hereby mention no names. 
Never forget that its a strange world we're living in. The arsenal thread is just a microcosm of the world we live in.   

debosky:

For those that believe Arsenal was a 'poor club' before Arsene joined, an interesting article:

[img]http://afchistory.files./2012/02/21021995-editorial-on-his-dismissal.png?w=584[/img]

Erm, who said Arsenal was ever a poor club? another one of your oversimplifications abi?
stop being disingenuous here Debo, what clubs were Arsenal being compared to in that writeup? Hartlepool and Millwall, where were those clubs then and where are those clubs today? 
The fact is that in terms of revenue and league positions at the times that article was written, Arsenal was behind the following 3 clubs in terms of revenue and also most times in terms of final league placement at that time:

Manchester United, Liverpool and Newcastle

Arsenal at that time was at par with the likes of:

Tottenham and Aston Villa in terms of Revenue and was actually behind Villa in terms of trophies won in that era while lagging far behind both Manure and Liverpool in terms of silverware at that time.

Dispute issues like the intellectual you are and not use articles comparing Arsenal with Hartlepool and Millwall who have always been nobodies in English soccer abeg. That is serious 'Agbero' logic. 


By the way, you don't even need to think too far, which Forbes list would Arsenal have been on at that time?

First 10, 20, 100, 1000? 

And lest I forget, was one of the recent set of managers who have won things for Arsenal after the Great Herbert Chapman, he got results but was as boring as hell and he also took bungs.
who does that remind you of, boring football asides? 

Go boiz. Time to put things right. We are always behind you.

4llerbuntu:

So dudu believes a club on the decline is.magically going to negotiate deals that will earn as much or better than perennial champions.

I dont blame u sha, i guess you are havinv pipe dreams that your .9999999 share will magically earn u stupendous dividend.

How did Liverpool do it?
The only thing you need to know about my .999999999 shares is that not a dime of it came from your pocket so whatever happens to it or how much returns I get from it is no business of yours but if you're nice, I might be willing to share if I make a profit.   

4llerbuntu:

Why do u keep trumpeting thIsfallacy that arsenal is failingbecause of money?  Yet inanother breath coogar has rightly stated that in the 90s arsenal set transfer record you deny that the club was rich then.

therefore going by your position, there it's no difference between them and now, so why was the club winning then?

Shebi na money no make us win now, according to u. Then u said we didn't have money at those times, but that time we no go 7yrs trophiless na, so?,  . . . . . .

Bros, if you don't realise by now that how much a club is worth has nothing to do with how much it has to spend in buying players I suggest you read up the reasons why FFP came into being.

There is a big difference between:

1. How much a club is worth
2. How much cash it generates periodically
3. How much of that cash is available to spend.

I apologise that this forum is not adequate to impart such knowledge as to allow you differentiate between the three. 

And if you think I'm the only one trumpeting this 'fallacy' as you say, see what Bruce Rioch (the manager Arsene took over from who bought the same Dennis Bergkamp you mentioned to Arsenal) has to say here:

http://www.goal.com/en/news/9/england/2012/02/17/2911207/arsene-wenger-has-done-a-magnificent-job-and-its-not-time

I'll quote a juicy snippet for you here with an important part in bold:

[Quote]Wenger has been criticised for not spending lavish sums on new players but Rioch argued that he should not be held solely responsible for the transfer strategy at the Emirates.

“In the broader sense, he has been criticised for not spending money regularly over the last season or two and because of that people are saying that he has not won a trophy for six years,” Rioch added.

“But we have to get lot of things in perspective. There is a balance between spending an awful lot of money and putting yourself in a situation that Rangers have just done and being a viable, solid football club.

“I know from my own experience at Middlesbrough the pain and the difficulties the club suffered when the club went into provisional liquidation in 1986.

“It was extremely damaging and hurtful to an awful lot of people. I get the feeling that a lot of other clubs up and down the country are on the brink as well but I do not think Arsenal are.”
[/quote]

Here is another quote from Jamie Redknapp of Skysports which you can see here:

[url]http://www.skysports.com/opinion/story/0,,18932_7525870,00.html[/url]

[Quote]Arsenal fans sound pretty angry right now because they're desperate to see their club win trophies and it's not happening.

A lot of the blame is falling at the feet of the manager, but I don't think it's as simple as that. In the last few years Arsenal simply haven't been able to compete in the transfer market with Manchester United, Manchester City, Chelsea or even Tottenham for that matter.

Instead, Arsene Wenger has had to try and keep things tight to balance the books, so you can't be too critical in that respect. If you want to compete at the top level, you have to have top players, not just coaches, and they cost a lot of money. Money that Arsenal haven't been willing to spend.

I can understand the fans' frustrations, though, because I played against unbelievable Arsenal teams like the 'Invincibles' and they were absolute monsters.
[/quote]

debosky:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/aug/15/barcelona-cesc-fabregas-arsenal-tears

Cesc took a pay cut. End of story.

This type of silly denial exemplifies your warped view of things

You might consider it silly but I assure you its not. I've evaluated your views, you do mine.
The point in dispute is not if he took a 'pay cut or not'. The point in dispute is if he earns less at Barcelona than he earned at Arsenal.
That assertion remains unproven as he can take a paycut from the amount his agent negotiated at Barcelona yet still earn more than he did at Arsenal. Those details have not been made clear to anyone. You are assuming that the deal he negotiated with Barcelona was for the exact amount he was paid at Arsenal and that is not necessarily true.

By the way, Cesc's case is a very unique one with his well known attachments to Barca.
So many things can make a player leave a club as is the case of Carlos Tevez wanting to leave Manchester City or Ravel Morrison leaving Manure for West Ham, and while the primary motivation behind players choice of clubs is remuneration and glory, it is gross oversimplification to assume that it always has to do with trophies.

debosky:

Is Cesc earning less or not? Yes or No?

What kind of question is this? 
At this point in time I do not know as I do not have access to Barca's payroll, I do know he has to pay 5m spread out over the lifetime of his contract with Barca towards his transfer fee.
If you're stating that this means he is earning less than he earned at Arsenal then please supply the relevant amounts and quote your sources.

naijababe:

Dudu! Dudu!! Dudu!!! Na how many times i don call you so?! How the feck will the commercial income improve when the club is on its way to rock bottom and none of the foggies see it? I hope Arsenal wont be the reason why I'll start following the Conference league a few years from now  Undecided

My luv, the foggies might not be lookin in the same direction as you or lets just say the cash is blocking their view.  
You won't need to start following the conference anytime soon, not while there is truly 160m burning a hole in our pockets according to Debo.
If the pundits are to be believed Arsenal should have dropped out of the top 4 ages ago but then we all know how much they delight in Arsenal's misery.

debosky:

It is true. Cesc is earning less now than he did at Arsenal. He did anything required to leave so he could win elsewhere.

The details are irrelevant - he left for lack of trophies to earn less.

The details are very relevant. Your assertion is unproven.

coogar:

the stupidity platelets in your blood keeps multiplying.
this tool is comparing papis cisse transfer window to dennis bergkamp that was a british transfer record in 1995.
if there's a place called heaven, you wouldn't be in it. even the angels despise dunderheads like yourself.

arsenal were poor and yet they broke a transfer record set by andy cole(£7m) by signing bergkamp(£7.5m).
it's the equivalent of chelsea signing nando torres(£50m).
if you don't even know the history of your beloved club then you are not fit to be discussing football on these pages, you inscrutable neophyte!

A lobotomized babboon can construct a more cogent argument. Are you for once implying that 7.5 million in 1995 adjusted for inflation in 2012 = 50m?
Seriously, Its not worth discussing, got better things to do at present than to educate a recalcitrant doofus.

debosky:

Dudu

One example? The biggest and worst - the signpost of Arsenal's decline:

Cesc Fabregas left to Barca for less money just so he can win trophies.

Debo this is not strictly true, the fact that part of the cost of his transfer would be deducted from his wages does not mean he will earn less than he did at Arsenal.
I will believe this if you show me how much he earns per month currently at Barcelona and then deduct how much 5m comes to per week spread out over his 4 year contract.

coogar:

you wouldn't put arsenal in the top 4 in terms of financial value and yet they were able to pay the wages of seaman(england's number 1 goalkeeper). they were able to sign dennis bergkamp(the highest transfer fee in 95), etc. must you lie to make idiotic points? arsenal were as rich as the top clubs dominating.

Crass idiocy on display, I leave the lying to you amigo. If I'm not mistaken Newcastle had the highest transfer fee on Papis Cisse in the last January window. Does that put them into the current top 4 in terms of financial value? and when Robert Green and Paul Robinson were England's number 1, did they play for top 4 clubs?  

coogar:

why do you continue to compare arsenal to chelsea? why not compare arsenal to tottenham or to man utd?
why is the gulf between man utd and arsenal so obscene these days that it's pretty much certain united would finish 15+ points ahead of arsenal? what happened to the glory days when it used to be strictly ferguson vs wenger?

What happened to the glory days when City used to be behind Manure in the PL?

tkb417:

Dudu, i dont know anything oh
are you a shareholder?

A shareholder of a shareholder is the apt description.  

coogar:

oxdale chose arsenal over man utd?
fergie wanted to keep morrison?

what won't you say you this deluded man?

No, he chose Arsenal over Dag & Red against his father's advice and yes Fergie didn't want to keep Morrison, infact he so much wanted to get rid of him that he paid West Ham 1m to take him off his hands and told Rio Ferdinand to 'not' publicly express his displeasure at the boy's choice to leave Manure.
Also he is not the best youth talent to come out of Manure's academy since Paul Scholes and didn't win the FA Youth cup for Manure and isn't better than Gibbs and Wilshere combined into the same player and so on and so forth.

How far back do you want to go in your lunatic attempt at changing the past and eating your own vomit? 

debosky:

The final impact of the failure of these naive assumptions is that Arsenal supporters will become disenchanted with a club charging the highest fees in the land but with a highly inferior squad and start staying away from the games, further worsening the financial situation and consequently limiting the club’s ability to compete.

The real question is whether Arsenal will respond soon enough to stop the rot and prevent a precipitous decline. They seem to be in denial and the laid back ownership style of Kroenke doesn’t help either. The board is too afraid to change  - either the manager himself for fear that they’ll actually need to find one (something none controlling the board now have actually done) or set him targets and take responsibility if he fails.

Arsenal is a great club with lots of potential, but cowardice, over reliance on a manager who has become idealistic and more out of touch with reality and lack of leadership at the highest level is eroding this potential.

To be clear Arsenal are doing a lot of things right - they’ve built a stadium, they’ve managed debts prudently in a financial crisis and promoted stability while others have lost their heads.

But there is so much more that can be done and that remains the challenge. If you attempt to stand still you end up going backwards. Arsenal has been standing still for too long and the effects are becoming more apparent and may soon reach a tipping point,  

This is an appraisal not backed up by any fact, evidence or history, just some kinda eloquent mumbojumbo of a fan who wants his club to win at all costs and while that is not necessarily a bad thing it doesn't make it right either.  

Before the arrival of this now idealistic manager Arsenal was a club you wouldn't put in the top 4 in terms of financial value in the UK, it has since grown to become the 2nd most valuable club in the land under the stewardship of a board that found the right manager for the club. Yes, with time the competitive environment has changed and there has been an influx of money leading to a season of drought but through all these Arsenal the club has kept its head above water grown its earnings, built a stadium, developed a productive youth system and stayed competitive while sticking to its principles of sustainability.

Let us critically examine the evidence free of emotional pain at not winning trophies, you say we have money but did this money just fall into our lap from some Benefactor like Chelsea? or did it come about by prudent and sustainable management? would such an amount of money have been available if for example we bought Fernando Torres for 50m last year or Andy Carroll for 35m? I am proud that this club has been well managed to such an extent that we can even talk of the availability of money when others are going cap in hand to Abu Dhabi and Russia to fund expenditure on players.

There is a lot I am not happy about at Arsenal and you're right that there is still so much more to do but while we always seek for excellence and are quite entitled to build our castles in the air, let us not forget that we live in a real world governed by the laws of economics. Human needs are unlimited but our resources limited. I am quite satisfied that Arsene has managed the resources he has to generate as close to optimal returns as you could have in this present time. Obviously, the board shares that same view which is why he hasn't been sacked yet. That is why I've put my money into Arsenal both as a fan and as an investor and will continue to do so in the near future. I love and believe in this club and its future and I see no reason at present to change my opinion.

debosky:

Finally, Dudu’s ‘trumpcard’ - FFP

Assumption 4: FFP will force other clubs to reduce spending such that Arsenal’s low level of spending becomes competitive to win trophies.

This is probably the most ridiculous of the assumptions. As recent calculations by the likes of swiss rambler show, clubs like Chelski can easily carry the 30m of debt required by FFP and STILL outspend Arsenal significantly.

More worrying is that clubs like Citeh are signing massive deals to help them continue to spend far more than Arsenal, while also building up academies to negate any advantage Arsenal had from grooming young players. Clearly not everyone who builds an academy produced talent (see Chelski’s recent failings) but in the same vein, Arsenal’s academy expenditure hasn’t been as prolific as others with less funds (Aston Villa).

If accountants at Citeh are confident of meeting FFP requirements with such massive debts, then clearly other clubs will also be able to do so.

UEFA will not have the cojones to ban any big club, especially when the big clubs are still threatening to form a breakaway league. FFP will be a damp squib and Arsenal will simply fade into a lower tier when Europe’s elite is considered.

If FFP fails, then the options for Arsenal become very clear:

1. Kroenke keeps the club and runs it sustainably but you then have to choose to be an Arsenal fan cos you love the club or not cos you can as well say goodbye to trophies until the bubble bursts.
2. Kroenke has a change of mind and becomes the benefactor if he's willing to be a Roman.
3. Kroenke sells out to the highest bidder and pockets his cash.

Note: If any of 2 or 3 happens then I will vote that the fanshare scheme sells its shares while pocketing my 50% appreciation so far while hoping and praying that Arsenal won't be the first of the clubs to go bust. It is a fact that Arsenal cannot afford to spend like the Manchester Cities of this world whether you fail to appreciate that fact or not.
But I'll sound this note of warning that if FFP fails, I can assure you that Arsenal aint the only ones who will suffer.

debosky:

Let’s agree for a moment that commercial incomes do improve in 2013/14.

Assumption 2: That the anticipated improvements will improve Arsenal’s ability to compete in the transfer market.

This assumption is even worse than the first because we ALREADY have evidence that improved revenue does not lead to improved transfer market performance by Arsenal.

Over the past 3 financial years, we’ve made significant profits from player sales and the building developments. The results soon to be announced will confirm that this year was the same. However, even with those improvements, we have NOT been able to compete for transfers - I’ll give a few examples

1. Juan Mata - gazumped by Chelski
2. Alvarez - virtually agreed but edged out by Inter
3. Smalling - Arsenal supporter but stolen away by United
4. Phil Jones - offered more cash by Arsenal but still went to United

Now some of those cases are related to inability or unwillingness to pay the transfer fees, while others relate to our poor competitive position making players go elsewhere to WIN, even if on less pay.

Arsenal is becoming less and less attractive to players (except you’re young and French) and even our young player attractiveness is eroding as Smalling and Jones exemplify.

Arsenal has extra cash NOW, but refuses to spend - why will they decide to spend next year unless something changes at the club? Even if they decide to spend, will anyone of quality want to come? On current evidence, not many will.

Firstly, please give an example of the bolded.
And supply evidence on all this pub/beer parlour talk. You can accuse me of many things but you can't say I don't give evidence of what I say.
You mention Smalling and Jones but quietly omit Oxlade Chamberlain who chose us over Manure.
You also conveniently omit Coogar's favorite son who Manure wanted to keep but now wears West Ham colours.
I have also always said that Arsenal have cash and IMO will spend in the summer. However, I will still sound a note of caution that I still don't see us spending anything beyond say 35 - 40m and it will not be because we were beaten 4 - 0 at the San Siro rather it will be the normally expected financial expenditure to make improvements in playing staff that the club has been unable to make in the recent past due to financial constraints.

debosky:

Let me expose some of the flaws in Dudu's fanshare warped thinking.

Assumption 1: that commercial revenues WILL improve in 2013/14 even with our worsening performances

It is overly optimistic to think this will happen, especially as sponsors are obviously heavily biased towards trophy winning clubs. Dudu misses the point by making glib references to the likes of the Brummies or Portsmouth (which have little global appeal anyways) to wave away any concerns about performances requiring trophies.

If my thinking is warped, then you haven't even taken the giant leap to thinking at all.
Arsenal is a club that has guaranteed global coverage in the UCL for the past 14 seasons. The best predictor of future performance is past history.
Arsenal has a track record of growing revenues, building a stadium which no other club has. Its future financial viability is not under any threat whatsoever at this point in time.

debosky:

Instead he should be looking at the likes of Utd in England and Bayern in Germany to highlight how winning ensures you get the biggest deals. I[b]n addition, the likes of Chelski have been able to negotiate higher shirt/kit deals on the back of success.[/b]

True that winning does you no harm and improves your negotiating ability, only an  would deny that. The question from an investors perspective in Arsenal is ROI. How much do you put in and what comes out at the end of the day? It is a fact that a lot of these clubs are not run sustainably. Take the time to analyse their books.

Answer this simple question, has Abramovic gained back all he has put into Chelsea? Has Chelsea itself moved forward with that large injection of money?  if so why is Abramovic writing off debts and why is Chelsea still making losses year on year? to exercise your brain cells further ask yourself the question What would happen to Chelsea today if Roman stops putting in money? and finally bring the Roman model to Arsenal who have never depended on any benefactor's largesse what would happen to it if it started out on the same path.

The relationship between trophies and income from endorsements and commercial activity is not as direct as you make it out to be particularly when trophies are not exactly rated the same. It boils down to that same old question, which one does it actually pay Arsenal to attain, the FA cup or a top 4 finish guaranteeing UCL money and the global coverage the UCL brings? Arsenal is actually the best example of this that you fail to see, how come its still rated top 5 in the world after 7 seasons of trophy famine? why isn't Chelsea above Arsenal after winning 2 PLs and a good number of FA Cups and Carling Cups since 2005 when Arsenal won its last trophy?
 
I hate to give DK any reason to gloat but Bayern is a good example of a club that is well managed and that is due to the pragmatism of the German people and the sort of environment it finds itself. How many clubs exactly have failed in Germany? how many in England? How many in Spain? I think there is a very good reason why the German economy is the strongest in Europe. People can live in a bubble for so long but someday it will come home to roost. A good question to ask yourself in line with that theme is when last a club from Germany won the UCL. If I'm not mistaken its pre 2005.

debosky:

However, the ability of non trophy winners like Liverpool to sign massive kit/shirt deals gives Dudu comfort. Unfortunately he fails to realise that those two deals are as a result of 1 - an engaged, vocal owner with history of leveraging commercial deals (Fenway) and 2 - Liverpool’s overwhelming popularity in Asia that was solidified in the 80’s and continues till today. Arsenal lack both those two elements and can hardly expect better deals if performances continue to slide.

Yes, it gives comfort in the sense that if History, Global coverage and performance is the metric for sponsorship deals, I don't see Arsenal getting anything less than Liverpool or Tottenham in the value of our sponsorship deals.
You make a lot of assertions here that are unvalidated and stem from your own assumptions. The reason why Arsenal has not been able to negotiate better deals is already well discussed and has little to do with a history of leveraging commercial deals.
At the time the Emirates stadium deal was made, it was a first of its kind but time has since overtaken it. I assure you that time will also overtake Manure's deals as Liverpool's deal already shows.

Happy Birthday Alhaji, Chief, Pastor, General Slim. More follicles to your biabia, long life and prosperity.
I hope the boys make ammends for wednesday by giving you a belated present against Sunderland.

coogar:

this boy is gracelessly deluded.
do the empty seats at the emirates mean anything to you?

what business of yours is it? how exactly does it prevent you from brushing your stinking mouth in the morning?

tkb417:

@Dudu

u still talking about balancing the books?

u guys wont qualify for ucl next season in a bid to balance the books ehn?

that is what we call 'fin policy conflict' cos in the long term, those revenues will dwindle fast!

We don't have a choice right now, Arsenal went long when everyone else decided to go short and have ridden out the storm so far, it would be waving a white flag to suddenly change now. I also don't see it changing now since Kroenke was always part of the board he was in on it and must have given assurances he would pursue the same policy to get Fitzman's shares.
Even if the revenues dwindle in the short term we'll make up for it at some point when income from commercial sources improves or until Kroenke decides he's had enough of penny pinching (whichever comes first).
By the way,  I back that policy (as you know, I now have vested interests and can't be totally impartial  ). If Arsenal's position is going to improve in the long term, its either

a. We give up on self sustainability and go down the Sugar daddy route.
or
b. FFP changes the competition landscape and brings wages under control so we can keep our talents long enough to reap what we've sown.

I'd personally prefer B. to A. for obvious selfish reasons and for the soul of football itself as well.

dayokanu:

Dudu lets have the Financial statement analysis of the game last night

Detailing the Income and Expenditure as well as the Balance Sheet

The varions captions like Inventory, Account Payable, Account receivable, Accruals, Prepayment, Cash/bank all this has to be in accordance to GAAP

Oya roll

Yesterday's loss had nothing to do with the accounts. The team was pants and deserved the result they got.
Even if the team was packed full of paraplegics, arsenal should never be beaten 4-0 anywhere by anybody but worse things have already happened this season.