Arsenal Skint

[Dipper]

Yeah The Millenium Stadium in Cardiff has virtually bankrupted the Welsh Rgby union, whilst the Welsh FA must be p1ssing their pants alughing.


I think clucas's brief point was spot on, the finances justa ren't there.

Today it's been revealed that the bank who are loaning Arsenal the money have a clasue that says if they can't offload some of the loan to other baks then they don't ahve to lend Arsenal the money.This flies in the face of what arsenal told us before, they said the laon was now guaranteed.

The bank in question has been trying to hawk some of the loan around to other banks whilst some originally expressed an interst they have now pulled out due to the risk(says it all doesn't it) & they are struggling to find new backers.


The thing that furthur swings it for me in regards to a wait & see approach is that the EU is gettign involved in the collective bargaining agreement by whcih the Premiership negotiates TV rights, bascially at the moment the elague negotiates for all the clubs & they get an equal share of the revenue.
The EU is against collective bargaining (monopolies) & have set in motion the wheels for outlawing this which will elad to clubs negotiating their own deals with TV companies for thei home games.This si what the big clubs have wanted for ages & I believe that it already happens in some countries (Italy?), basically the big clubs will be quids in if this happens.
I'm sure it will come in everntually as just lie the Bosman thing when the EU starts somehting it gets what it wants it just might take afew years, now when(if)it does a club like Man U will be laughing no matter what as the demand to watch them is huge but for everyone else (bar maybe Liverpool) they need to be doing well to secure a good deal.

Now if Arsenal go for the Stadium project & the team suffers due to lack of funds for players then we won't be able to negotiate a good deal & we'll fall furthur behind but if we keep investing in the team until this comes in then we'll be in a great position to strike a good deal & then use that money for the Stadium.

That's what I favour anyway.

 

[Dipper]

Yeah The Millenium Stadium in Cardiff has virtually bankrupted the Welsh Rugby union, whilst the Welsh FA must be p1ssing their pants laughing.


I think clucas's brief point was spot on, the finances just aren't there for arsenal.

Today it's been revealed that the bank who are loaning Arsenal the money have a clasue that says if they can't offload some of the loan to other banks then they don't have to lend Arsenal the money.This flies in the face of what Arsenal told us before, they said the laon was now guaranteed.

The bank in question has been trying to hawk some of the loan around to other banks whilst some originally expressed an interest they have now pulled out due to the risk(says it all doesn't it) & they are struggling to find new backers.


The thing that furthur swings it for me in regards to a wait & see approach is that the EU is gettign involved in the collective bargaining agreement by which the Premiership negotiates TV rights, bascially at the moment the league negotiates for all the clubs & they get an equal share of the revenue.

The EU is against collective bargaining (monopolies) & have set in motion the wheels for outlawing this which will lead to clubs negotiating their own deals with TV companies for their home games.This is what the big clubs have wanted for ages & I believe that it already happens in some countries (Italy?), basically the big clubs will be quids in if this happens.

I'm sure it will come in eventually as just like the Bosman thing when the EU starts somehting it gets what it wants it just might take a few years, now when(if)it does a club like Man U will be laughing no matter what as the demand to watch them is huge but for everyone else (bar maybe Liverpool) they need to be doing well to secure a good deal.

Now if Arsenal go for the Stadium project & the team suffers due to lack of funds for players then we won't be able to negotiate a good deal & we'll fall furthur behind but if we keep investing in the team until this comes in then we'll be in a great position to strike a good deal & then use that money for the Stadium.

That's what I favour anyway.

 

[Dipper]

Thanks for that TheBlues, I don't claim to know much about it but what I'd read wat that as Cloke Park's redevelopment was partially funded by the Government that they were honour bound to allow the football & rugby boys to use it.The article claimed that it was the anti English sports bias of the Gaelic Athletic Association (?).


From what you say it seems like the article was a bit one sided.

So I say let the Irish football & rugby teams flounder so that we can beat them more easily every year cos let's face it were not about to start playing you at Hurley are we.

 

[colin]

Originally posted by The Blues

One thing I will say is that the GAA owe nobody bar their members anything and are far more capable an organisation than I've ever come across in my country or yours. Honestly.

Spot on Blues, the GAA owe their members, nobody else.

But don't they owe their members the right to have a say in this? I'm a member who supports opening up Croke Park to other sports but who listens to people like me (and there are MANY who feel the same way)

Croker is in serious debt, and the money from the FAI and IRFU would go a long way towards paying this off, as well as being distributed to the clubs.

The majority of GAA fans are also soccer and rugby fans, who don't care for the antiquated rules forbidding other sports.

Yeah the GAA built the stadium, but why not reap the benefits of their hard work. The pitch lies unused from after the International Rules until the follwing Summer. Surely it makes more sense to make money out of it rather than just let it sit there?

 

[The Blues]

Dipper, don't get me wrong, there is an old traditional view that that under no circumstances should other sports 'grace our holy soil' - especially soccer because its divided. Rugby would be more acceptable to these people because it’s an All Ireland sport. Now I don’t agree with this view either. I should add that this is the view of our current (GAA) president but not the view of his successor who takes over in a few weeks so I think we can expect a change in the short to medium term future in GAA policy. One thing I should mention is that rule changes don't come easily in the GAA because unfortunately we are to democratic.

My problem is that the GAA as an organisation seems to be being portrayed abroad very unfairly. We have people who want to live in the past. Name a sporting organisation that doesn’t? We feel like we have to defend ourselves when we shouldn’t have to. We aren’t the ones asking for anything!! That’s the gas thing about it.

The stick used to beat the GAA with is a Government grant. I’m pretty sure it’s the same situation in the UK, but I challenge anybody to name a sporting body in Ireland who hasn’t been given either Government grants or Lotto money in recent years.

Anyway Dipper, I don’t want to go on and on about it but just give the other side of the argument but remember at the end of the day, I’m all for Croke Park being opened!!!

As for taking us on in hurling: stick to your cricket boy, that’s all I’ll say

 

[The Dutchman!]

Dipper

Yep its RBS (Royal BAnk of Scotland) but I wouldn't fret just yet - I reckon they're just leveraging for slightly better terms from their counterparty in Arsenal - standard investment banking stuff.

As for the Sky/FA/EU deal sitn - Tony Ball (Sky CEO) is just doing similar = threatening all sorts of craopolla about the cash if the EU don't make it an exclusive deal - bottom line is SKY NEED the Footy to keep the set top box a must have at 40+ quid a month - if not they are going to have to drop the price and will still have problems retaining 6.2m subs. Reality is, this ain't going to happen because the FA and the clubs need the SKY cash just as much - ITV, C4, C5 and BBC combined are going to bid nowhere near 1.1bn quid for three years - especially with BBC licence fee review gearing up already for 2006...

The EU will make a noise = the champions league contract will be split - which will actually help Granada and Carlton who can't bloody afford it anyway without the prospect of a premium subscription service and this will actually help Murdock.

Bottom lines, the stadium will happen on top of the Ashburton Road tip (literally folks) and Sky will retain exclusivity on live games cos nobody other than Murdock can afford the live rights.

Cheers
Dutchy

 

[The Blues]

Sorry Colin, I missed your post Yesterday.

On the subject of opening Croke Park, your view is the same as mine. They should. The reasons they should though, as you point out, are financial and should not br due to political or media pressure.

One thing we have to realise when talking about the GAA though is that the system is way too democratic. Its funny but true. Things would work (in my opinion) alot better if the president could actually make changes. They can't though. Everything must be voted on.

I reckon Croker will be opened sooner rather than later though. Funny thing is though, I can never remember the IRFU asking to play there!

My ideal situation (and I don't know if its feasible) would be that: -- Landsdowne be redeveloped to seat around 50,000 with a pitch of large enough dimensions to hold hurling & football.
- Croke Park be opened for Ltd number of Rugby & Soccer matches. i.e. England in Rugby. The Holland/Spain/Portugal like games in Soccer. It would probably add to maybe a half dozen or so in total in the year.
- Lansdowne be opened for GAA use. I.e Leinster Hurling Final. Leinster Football Championship games. Possibly the odd qualifier.

All Happy

 

[Dipper]

Dutchman

On the TV rights thing I think we may be on different wavelengths it's got nothing to do with Sky as such it's to do with collective bargaining ie the rights for all clubs being sold as one block, it may well be 'illegal' under European law, if the clubs can broker individual deals then I guess the overall money paid by TV companies will remain the same it's just that Man U/Arsenal/Liverpool etc will get a bigger share whilst the WBA's of this world will get bugger all.

 

[colin]

Originally posted by The Blues

My ideal situation (and I don't know if its feasible) would be that: -- Landsdowne be redeveloped to seat around 50,000 with a pitch of large enough dimensions to hold hurling & football.
- Croke Park be opened for Ltd number of Rugby & Soccer matches. i.e. England in Rugby. The Holland/Spain/Portugal like games in Soccer. It would probably add to maybe a half dozen or so in total in the year.
- Lansdowne be opened for GAA use. I.e Leinster Hurling Final. Leinster Football Championship games. Possibly the odd qualifier.

All Happy

Now that's the best idea I've heard yet. They could redevelop Lansdowne if they turned the pitch 90 degrees and used the land in the back pitch. But of course the chaps in Lansdowne RFC would be none too happy about it

 

[Shinboners]

Originally posted by DIPPER
On the TV rights thing I think we may be on different wavelengths it's got nothing to do with Sky as such it's to do with collective bargaining ie the rights for all clubs being sold as one block, it may well be 'illegal' under European law, if the clubs can broker individual deals then I guess the overall money paid by TV companies will remain the same it's just that Man U/Arsenal/Liverpool etc will get a bigger share whilst the WBA's of this world will get bugger all.

I remember reading somewhere that there was some lobbying going on about the rights.

On one side are the G14 clubs who are pushing for the collective bargaining to be declared illegal under European law. If it goes through, then the likes of United, Arsenal, Liverpool etc. will be able to sell the rights to their home games on a PPV basis.

On the other side of the debate are UEFA and FIFA who are arguing that allowing the clubs to negotiate their own deals will destroy the fabric and culture of European soccer. Even though there is a gulf between the United/Arsenal/Liverpool and everyone else, to allow individual agreements will eventually turn most national competitions into Scottish style two horse races.

As it stands now, even under the collective agreement, the Uniteds, Arsenals, and Liverpools get the lions share of the money. Pre-Premiership, the money was divided between clubs in all four Divisions, now they've got it down to sharing within one division (plus the relegated clubs for one season), and now they want even more money.

 

[Dipper]

Originally posted by Shinboners
I remember reading somewhere that there was some lobbying going on about the rights.

On one side are the G14 clubs who are pushing for the collective bargaining to be declared illegal under European law. If it goes through, then the likes of United, Arsenal, Liverpool etc. will be able to sell the rights to their home games on a PPV basis.

On the other side of the debate are UEFA and FIFA who are arguing that allowing the clubs to negotiate their own deals will destroy the fabric and culture of European soccer. Even though there is a gulf between the United/Arsenal/Liverpool and everyone else, to allow individual agreements will eventually turn most national competitions into Scottish style two horse races.

As it stands now, even under the collective agreement, the Uniteds, Arsenals, and Liverpools get the lions share of the money. Pre-Premiership, the money was divided between clubs in all four Divisions, now they've got it down to sharing within one division (plus the relegated clubs for one season), and now they want even more money.

Well there's 2 things firstly the current system probably is illegal under European law or at least a restraint of trade for the individual clubs.

Secondly you infer that the big clubs are getting too greedy & many would agree with you, but it's the big clubs games that sell the satellite/cable systems not the likes of WBA & yet they all get the same share at the beggining of the season.

The English league isn't so far off the Scottish 2 horse race anyway, it's been Arsenal/<Man U as champions for the last 6 seasons.

 

[Shinboners]

Ken Bates, being a f*ckwit as usual......so stupid and on so many levels......

Speaking on Chelsea TV, Ken Bates said:

"Even if they (Arsenal) wanted Terry or Gallas they couldn't
afford them,

"I gather they are struggling to raise money for their new
stadium and Arsene Wenger has been told he has to sell
before he buys. So I rather thought that we'll be buying
from them than the other way round.

"Robert Pires, Patrick Vieira, and perhaps Thierry Henry
might just about scrape in the side. They'd give us a more
balanced team and help them start the foundations for their
new stadium."

 

[clucas91]

I cannot believe the greed of the big clubs, if that proposal about individually managed TV rights, that would no doubt bring football to its knees.

 

[Dipper]

Last week there were a load of stories about the new Stadium, none of them good reading for Arsenal fans, basically the stadium won't be ready for the start of the 2005/6 season as had previously been anounced.
This is a major blow & contradicts all those that said that it was all proceeding in an ok manner, the finance isn't in place & they haven't fully commited themselves to it being ready for the next season, if it is built for the start of 2006/7 then they envisage this delay to have added about £25m to the cost & this is after they told us a couple of months ago that the final figure was 'ringfenced' & that costs couldn't go up anymore.

They're even half talking about switching to Wembley & I believe that if they had foreseen all, the problems then they would have gone for Wembley all along, it's probably too late now though as they have commitments with building companies & have already bought the and & commited to build a new waste recycling plant for Islington council.

It's grim alright, I don't expect us to be able to afford the sort of spending on players that a club like us would expect for a number of years now.

 

[Harvs29]

never mind buying players, it seems like it could have a real impact on retaining players. much like the criticism that gets levelled at our former coach in the afl, wenger may need to start delving into the reserves and giving the likes of chilvers, pennant, brown, aliadiere and or juan a game. not that that solves issues down back at all, the seeming weak point of the team.

 

[windyhill]

Originally posted by DIPPER


It's grim alright, I don't expect us to be able to afford the sort of spending on players that a club like us would expect for a number of years now.

Wouldn`t worry, Arsenal have never lashed out in their history in buying players. Why break a lifetimes habit ? Yes they have bought, but have never gone mental, like some other clubs.

 

[Dipper]

Originally posted by windyhill
Wouldn`t worry, Arsenal have never lashed out in their history in buying players. Why break a lifetimes habit ? Yes they have bought, but have never gone mental, like some other clubs.

Well that's not entirely true, during the 1930's we were spending money like it was going out of fashion, we constantly smashed the transfer record & inherited Sunderland's tag as the Bank of England club.

There have been furthur little attempts at breaking the bank like the time we made Ian Ure the world's most expensive defender in the early 60s at about £60k, this was on all accounts not money well spent.

But you're right in general we haven't been big spenders on the level of a big Euopran club but what I'm talking about is not being able to spend as much as the likes of Newcastle certainly Liverpool & perhaps even people like Man City.

Also the fact that we never splashed the cash that much might expalin why we only won 1 Championship between 1953 & 1988.

 

[Dipper]

Originally posted by Harvs29
never mind buying players, it seems like it could have a real impact on retaining players. much like the criticism that gets levelled at our former coach in the afl, wenger may need to start delving into the reserves and giving the likes of chilvers, pennant, brown, aliadiere and or juan a game. not that that solves issues down back at all, the seeming weak point of the team.

Well he hasn't shown much faith in the reserves but I agree with you he's going to have to, let's face it the lot that are about 19/20 are the ones that won consecutive youth cups & many of them do well on loan.

You say they don't solve the defensive issues but Juan plays left back & would have been handy this season ahead of Toure & GvB, I don't know what's happened to him & why he hasn't been picked.Also we've got the German u20 captain Moritz Volz who's a right back, he's currently on loan in division1 & they think he's great & wanted to keep him so that's both the full back positions with cover.We've signed some 17 year old prodigy from Switzerland called Senderos who Man U tried to sign, he's a centre back so in a couple of years hopefully he'll be ready.

You missed out the one that reckon will be the best of the lot, that's David Bentley he plays the Bergkamp role of being the withdrawn striker, he scores a few & sets a few up & from what I've read he could really be something special, but at our club you wonder whether he'll ever get a go.He's older than Rooney & yet I bet he plays a part in no more than 2/3 league next season maximum.

 

[fabulousphil]

Originally posted by DIPPER
Yeah well mate I'll maybe think about sharing with the Yids when the Gaelic sports' boys over there let the rugby team use the newly redevelped Croke Park.

And that may happen when England changes a ancient law which bans the monarch from adopting catholicism or marrying a catholic..............

 

[knuckles]

Quiet Arsenal fan here. Well I was a fan of Pat Jennings amny years ago, therefore Arsenal.
Any chance they might replace that 1980s advertising exec who stands in their goals? If they are tight on $, would Bosnich be worth a punt given clubs like Man City may chase him also?

 

[Slax]

Just a little something that I found and found it too good to even set a link too. For all you Arsenal fans saying your finances are fine read this.

From the BBC
Arsenal admit they may be forced to cut their wage bill after announcing pre-tax losses of £9.47m for the six months to 30 November.

The Premiership champions are already involved in or about to start contract negotiations with key players such as Thierry Henry, Robert Pires, Patrick Vieira and Dennis Bergkamp.

But they stressed their determination to keep a tight grip on the wage bill as they attempt to fund their delayed new stadium project at the same time as challenging Manchester United on the field.

Pires ponders future Gunners chairman Peter Hill-Wood said: "In our 2002 annual report, I referred to the control and potential future reduction of our player wage bill and this remains an objective.

"However, it is one we can only progress, in the light of market conditions, as new players arrive or existing contracts come up for renewal."

We have experienced a number of delays in the arrangements for our new stadium project Arsenal chairman Peter Hill-Wood
In the latest six-month interim results for Arsenal Holdings plc they announced an increase in group turnover of 28.5% to £43.6m and a slight rise in group operating profits to £1m.

However, net borrowing was significantly up at £28.3m as a result of a £9.4m deficit on transfer dealings and significant investment in the proposed new stadium.

Arsenal recently announced their new £400m stadium at Ashburton Grove would not be ready for the start of the 2005-06 season as planned, but Hill-Wood said it remains a vital part of their future.

"We have experienced a number of delays in the arrangements for our new stadium project in recent months across a range of issues," he added.

"This has not been entirely unexpected given the complexity of the project.

"But we are actively progressing all aspects of the project and continue to be fully committed to Ashburton Grove, with the objective of delivering a stadium opening at the earliest possible date."

 

[Dipper]

Originally posted by knuckles
Quiet Arsenal fan here. Well I was a fan of Pat Jennings amny years ago, therefore Arsenal.
Any chance they might replace that 1980s advertising exec who stands in their goals? If they are tight on $, would Bosnich be worth a punt given clubs like Man City may chase him also?

I dunno about Bosnich, for a start he's still banned until about 2 months into next season, but he never really lived up to his early promise.
He can't kick the ball properly, he got fat & obviously had a taste for the old Colombian marching powder so I doubt he's the type that we'd want.

Hopefully we'll get the Turkish keeper Rustu, he's anaother long haired type so he should fit in well.
We're also being linked with the Leeds goalie Robinson but his people seem to be putting out a lot of 'come & get me' messages to Man U.

 

[Dipper]

Originally posted by Slax
Just a little something that I found and found it too good to even set a link too. For all you Arsenal fans saying your finances are fine read this.

Well it's clear that they aren't, IMO the satdium project has (probably) already cost us one Championship, at the end of last season our prefered transfer targerts were central defender Kevin Hofland, & central midfielder Marc Van Bommel both of PSV.We brought them both over to have a look around & they were both very keen to sign but we couldn't afford the relatively modest fees of approx £8 for Van Bommel & £10m for Hofland.

So we shopped at the bargain basement dept & got in Cygan at £2.5m & Gilberto at £4.5m.

Cyagn was terrible & Gilberto was at best uninspiring, he never showed enough authority to allow us to rest Vieira more, which I'm sure was part of the plan so we ran Vieira into the ground & the results are there for all to see.

At the time they said that the transfer budget was not lesened by the Stadium project but it clearly was otherwise there was no reason why we couldn't afford the sort of fees mentioned.

Pires has already come out this week & said that he won't sign a new contract unless the club shows clear evidence that it's going to strengthen the squad, but how can they?There's no money, so we may lose him & Vieira as well as not being able to re-enforce.

The whole project has been ill concieved & the board ahve backed themeselves into a corner, if we go ahead with it not only will it stop what should ahve been the greatest ever Arsenal side from reaching it's potential but there is a very real risk that it could bankrupt the club-I'm not scare mongering here just talking common sense.Leeds are there as a warning to us all.

 

[Slax]

Originally posted by DIPPER

Pires has already come out this week & said that he won't sign a new contract unless the club shows clear evidence that it's going to strengthen the squad, but how can they?There's no money, so we may lose him & Vieira as well as not being able to re-enforce.

I think this shows the whole problem with football clubs becoming plc's. The clubs then get directors who care about the bottom line only and dividends which should never be paid anyway. The great advantage of being privately owned was that rich bastards like Al Fiyad (Harrods bloke) could buy the club to feed their ego and pump a few millon pounds in. Unfortunately that has gone and clubs must balance their books, Arsenal will suffer for year because of this stuff up.

 

[Dipper]

Arsenal aren't a PLC they're a privately owned club.