Arsenal

[carlito]

I definitely feel that there is going to be a fucking sharp correction in how clubs are run in the next few years and I think some big, big clubs are going to get burned.

Same shit as the housing market - at some point people are going to wake up to the differential between Market price and asset value and shit's going to go bats.

It can't continue like this.

[Rev]

The only people who will complain about things being expensive are the ones that can't afford it. As those have no money, therefore no power, I don't think there will be much of a change anytime soon. I mean, what is better value for money, Ashley Young or the English World Cup Bid?

It's not going to happen without a significant change, the sort that probably requires a guillotine.

[wev]

I'm not sure it will, player prices have never really ever dropped have they? Right from the likes of Trevor Francis onwards there was a steady increase in transfer values, admittedly in the past few years its gotten absolutely ridiculous, but I honestly can't see it changing one bit when clubs' income is generally increasing.

[SMD]

Don't agree with the talk that signing Sneijeder is craziness nor that it's impossible for a properly run club to win the league. United are the best run footballing business, something their balance sheet attests to.

The club run at wages being at 50% of turnover and signing him won't change that. The club has shed 5 players who will all be on very high wages in Brown, O'Shea, Hargreaves, Neville and Scholes. I bet they where each on 60/70/80/90K a week which gets you to 350K very easily.

The new players will be on the same amount but at the 50/60K end, with Young being higher. Jones is quite probably on less but there'll be scope for a renegotiation ala Smalling. Throw in the 200K for Sneijder and it's broadly the same amount as what has been saved from the departures. Gibson will almost certainly leave and I don't think he'll be the last with Kusack another almost certainly gone. Throw in the raise Chico got and I'd confidently bet that the three new signings+Sneijder+Smalling/Chico raise= broadly the same amount in wages as last year, which like I say, was 50% of turnover.

The actual transfer fee is covered by the amount the club published in it's accounts as sat in the bank, which is basically the Ronaldo money plus other profits. That amount stands in excess of £180M.

Personally I'm not so sure United will get the player despite all the talk, but there is easily enough to fund a move for somebody like him, Modric or Nasri.

Edit- and in the time I spent typing that Phresh got in and said the same. Doh.

I don't think they can spend that cash due to the terms of their bond issue.

Because why on earth would a football club of all businesses leave money sat in the bank?

[Daley]

I don't think they can spend that cash due to the terms of their bond issue.

Because why on earth would a football club of all businesses leave money sat in the bank?

It's not always just sat there. Football clubs probably have very irregular income. Large inflow in summer due to season tickets. Large outgoings in summer and January due to transfers. Not sure how the TV money gets paid but they probably have some of that cash just to deal with expenses for the whole year so it depends when the accounts were for.

[Rev]

In Football Manager Premiership TV money is paid in June.

No idea if that has any realism to it at all, obv.

[Daley]

In Football Manager Premiership TV money is paid in June.

No idea if that has any realism to it at all, obv.

It would make sense. After all it's dependent on where you finish in the league so would make sense if it was June. So if the accounts were to end of June they would show huge cash on the balance sheet but would be most of the cash to last the year.

EDIT: This bit from the Swiss Ramble on Arsenal.

Perhaps the best starting point for an analysis of Arsenal’s transfer fund is the actual cash balance, which was £110 million in the last published accounts (as at 30 November 2010). The club is keen to emphasise the seasonal nature of cash flows, e.g. money taken from season ticket renewals at the beginning of summer will be used to pay expenses over the next few months, with Gazidis stating, “We are not sitting on a cash balance of over £100 million. We need operating money over the course of the year.”

That’s absolutely correct, but if we look at Arsenal’s cash balances over the last few years, it is clear that the trend has been upwards, rising from £53 million in November 2006 to £110 million in November 2010. Furthermore, the cash balance every May has been around £25 million higher than the previous November, so the current figure should be even higher than the most recent accounts.

In other words, Arsenal’s executive hierarchy might be accused of being a little conservative here, though they do have to maintain £23 million as debt service reserves for the stadium financing, which would mean a net balance of £87 million.

In fact, Arsenal’s ability to generate free cash flow has been very impressive, considering that: (1) most of the cash for the commercial deals with Nike and Emirates was paid upfront; (2) they have also managed to repay all the property debt incurred for the Highbury Square property development (just under £140 million).

Given all these factors, it is virtually impossible to work out how much cash is available without making a few assumptions, so that’s exactly what we are going to do. First, let’s assume that the club requires £42 million for expenses in the second half of the financial year (net of receipts), which is based on the £35 million estimate made a year ago by the good folk at the AST, who are closer to Arsenal’s accounts than anyone else, which I have increased by a prudent 20% primarily to reflect the cost of higher wages. That would leave us with net cash of £45 million.

We should also deduct transfer fees still owed to other clubs, which are listed in the accounts as £13 million, though Arsenal are also owed £1 million. Given that these other creditors cover both the amounts owed within a year and beyond, it’s safe to estimate a net payable of £10 million in the next 12 months. The club also has contingent liabilities of £14 million, where payments are made based on certain conditions being met, such as number of appearances for the first team or a player’s country, but these are considered less likely, so I have excluded them from our calculation.

So, deducting the £10 million for transfer fees still owed would reduce the net cash to £35 million. Maybe the gentlemen of the press do know something after all, as that is not too far away from the estimates I discovered earlier.

So £100m cash is actually £35m after expenses. Not quite time for a money fight round at Wenger's.

[SMD]

It's not always just sat there. Football clubs probably have very irregular income. Large inflow in summer due to season tickets. Large outgoings in summer and January due to transfers. Not sure how the TV money gets paid but they probably have some of that cash just to deal with expenses for the whole year so it depends when the accounts were for.

Would any business rely on £120m in the bank to budget for irregular cashflow?

Clubs have credit lines, that's what they use. For tax purposes and for business practices.

[Daley]

Would any business rely on £120m in the bank to budget for irregular cashflow?

Clubs have credit lines, that's what they use. For tax purposes and for business practices.

See above. While it's not all for expenses some is used for the general running of the business. At Arsenal anyway.

[carlito]

Swiss Ramble's interesting speculative piece should not be used as the gospel of Arsenal finances.

[hauk]

Let's face it if Sneijder goes to Man U we are not going to be winning the Premier League any time soon. Modric to Chelsea wouldn't be too bad, at least we won't have to compete with Spurs anymore for 4th place!

[Daley]

Swiss Ramble's interesting speculative piece should not be used as the gospel of Arsenal finances.

I'm not taking it as gospel. I'm just trying to explain that because a football club has £100m in the bank doesn't mean they have £100m to spend on transfers.

[humdrum]

Lets get one thing straight, we didn't lose out on the title (or for that matter 2nd and 3rd) because we failed to spend 100m last summer, we lost out cos we bottled it at the end of the season.

yeah a couple of players would have maybe made a difference, but so would have learning to defend corners, if we can keep the squad together and get in 1 or 2 players, and with player improvements of some of the squad(it was djourou's first season back in what 2 years? kocinelys(sp?) first season in the premiership, wilshere and Szcenzy first full seasons) that's not even counting ramsey coming back and (the hope) that walcott can stay fit as before his injury he was on fire and seemed to be on the scoresheet every week.

With that I really don't get the panic about us not splashing out 50m/100m to overhaul the squad.

[Art Vandelay]

then I really don't get the panic about us not splashing out 50m/100m to overhaul the squad.

My comment wasn't one of panic, more just the observation that an already impressive squad had been complimented by some quality signings that cost a lot of money. It would be very difficult to suggest however that the incremental improvement that you may see from some of our younger players could compare to the impact of signing of someone like Sneijder.

It's also a very big 'if' to say that all we need to do is not collapse spectacularly in the last third of the season and not concede from every set piece.

[humdrum]

My comment wasn't one of panic, more just the observation that an already impressive squad had been complimented by some quality signings that cost a lot of money. It would be very difficult to suggest however that the incremental improvement that you may see from some of our younger players could compare to the impact of signing of someone like Sneijder.

It's also a very big 'if' to say that all we need to do is not collapse spectacularly in the last third of the season and not concede from every set piece.

Sorry that post wasn't aimed at you art, it was more of a vent as it seems every football blog/newspaper/magazine I see at the moment is basic saying if we don't spend big we are dead and buried.(pretty much what everyone said last season that we had no chance of holding onto 4th before the season kicked off) and apart from a collapse at the end of the season and a sending off against barcelona, we could all be here now talking about a good season,

and I know I know, a good start to the season doesn't make us champions unless we finish the season well, but by the same right losing some game at the end of the season doesn't me we will get relegated.

[Art Vandelay]

No worries, I know what you mean. Rather than signings our chances next year hinge entirely on Fabregas I think. Without him we are absolutely hopeless and couldn't make a chance if our lives depended on it. Unless he stays or we replace him with someone else as creative (who I'm not sure is either available or actually exists) then we're a dead rubber for a fifth place finish at best. Frankly it's never been more important to keep him.

[Rev]

Ramsey and Wilshere can do it. They'll be fine.

[FATEone]

No worries, I know what you mean. Rather than signings our chances next year hinge entirely on Fabregas I think. Without him we are absolutely hopeless and couldn't make a chance if our lives depended on it. Unless he stays or we replace him with someone else as creative (who I'm not sure is either available or actually exists) then we're a dead rubber for a fifth place finish at best. Frankly it's never been more important to keep him.

You can have Taraabt for £25 million. We'll pay you £10 million to keep Eboue, and you can let us have Vela on a free and Chamakh on a 6 month loan? How does that sound?

[JDubYes]

Patrick Vieira has retired. He hasn't played for us in years, but he remains probably my personal favourite ever Arsenal player (with strong competition from Henry, Bergkamp, Pires, etc), and on that basis I'm somewhat saddened.

Still, thanks for the memories Paddy, including (but not limited to) his debut against Wednesday, the goal in the 3-2 against Utd, the time he covered in central defence only to stride out with the ball and play a perfect through-ball for Wrighty to score (I forget who against), the goal against Newcastle at St James', his run-ins and rivalry with Roy Keane (there was never a rivalry with Gerrard, as far as I was concerned), his scoring the winner against Leicester to cement the 'Invincibles' season, his final kick for us (the penalty to win the 2005 FA Cup), and, of course, that period in the early noughties where he was just utterly imperious, and probably the best at what he did in the world.

Honestly, if we could clone him and have a 23-year-old Vieira back in the team, then I'd take him over pretty much any other player alive. We miss him, and players of his ilk, and could really do with him now.

[Dude Ranch]

that period in the early noughties where he was just utterly imperious, and probably the best at what he did in the world.

Correct, IMO. Vieira really was the best central midfielder I've ever seen. He dominated week in week out and the Keane rivalry was brilliant.

[toythatkills]

It's a shame he's taking a coaching role at Man City, he could probably work wonders with some of the players at Arsenal.

[Rev]

It's a shame he's taking a coaching role at Man City, he could probably work wonders with some of the players at Arsenal.

I think it's safe to say he's taken a coaching role with Mancini, rather than Man City and is likely to move on with him (in 6 months or so, since it's City). But it is a shame, he's definitely something Arsenal are missing.

[BlinkyBear]

I think it's safe to say he's taken a coaching role with Mancini, rather than Man City and is likely to move on with him (in 6 months or so, since it's City). But it is a shame, he's definitely something Arsenal are missing.

I think it's safe to say he's taken a coaching role for a fuck-load of oil-money.

[JDubYes]

Actually, while I'm online, I might as well add my two-penneth on some of the more current issues...

Fabregas - as much as it saddens me to say it, I'd let him go for an offer that seemed reasonable. Much as I respect his game, and his ability to unlock a defence, we're at the point now where his departure is a case of when, not if, and his injury record is increasingly concerning. His value is only likely to decrease in coming years if this trend continues, and he isn't irreplaceable in the same way that some of our other departures have been (or seemed at the time).

Look at what happened with Juventus and Zidane - they sold him to Real Madrid, and promptly became a better (and more well-rounded) team by using the money to strengthen in other areas. We've reached the point now where I feel we'd be better served by bringing in 2-3 good to very good players (people of Samba and/or Tiote's ilk, perhaps) to strengthen the defence and solidity of our spine while letting Ramsey, Wilshere, Arshavin and (possibly) Nasri try and make up the creative difference than we would of getting 20-25 games a season of a wantaway Fabregas.

Another analogy - Tottenham's best defender for years has been Ledley King, but his inability to train and/or play two games in a row lead to their defence lacking in cohesion. It's not at that stage yet with Fabregas, but I'd rather give Wilshere, Ramsey and Song a chance to familiarise and grow up/get better together now with surrounded by some more balanced reinforcements than have Fabregas keep breaking them up before breaking down again and then leaving anyway.

Nasri - a tricky one. If we did get a ridiculous offer for him, and know he isn't going to sign a new contract, then I'd let him go too, though I accept that the departure of both him and Fabregas would necessitate not only some creative reinforcements, but also lead to a bigger turnover of personnel than Wenger seems to normally like. The difference between him and myself (besides considerable success (and gainful employment) in football) seems to be that I'd actually welcome that, and would like a big clearout and recruitment drive, assuming suitable replacements were available (and believe me, I'm aware of the size of that "if.")

Failing that, I say keep him, especially if we lose Fabregas. He's a good player, but he's only had one truly effective spell for us, and with any luck he'll perform as though auditioning for a new contract (somewhere), in which case we'll be reaping the benefits in the meantime.

The squad's "deadwood" - I'm oddly indifferent. Seriously. I won't be sorry to see the back of Almunia, but wish him well, and I'd say the same about Vela, Denilson, Diaby and a few others, but I'm not clamouring for their exit either. Most are useful players when fit and played in the right position, and shouldn't start for us much anyway, so I'm happy if we keep them or let them go for a decent price. I don't rate Squillaci (but then, who does?!), and doubt Vela has the physical strength or killer instinct to perform in the Premiership consistently, but most of these players have performed well at one time or another, and can be useful squad players if fit and played in the right places.

New signings - again, I'm strangely cool on this. I like the Gervinho signing for several reasons (seems good value), and would ideally like a left back, defensive central midfielder and striker, amongst a few other less pressing concerns, but find that I'm not panicking either way.

Gibbs has had a run in the team before and played admirably, and Traore isn't a bad backup (yes, I am being ridiculously optimistic about injuries - sue me). I like Vermaelen and Djourou, and Koscelney is improving. Also, we were some setpiece marking practice away from having the best defence in the league last year (pre-capitulation) without Tommy V. We may still need more bite in the middle of the field, but Frimpong will add at least a nibble. A year with less injury issues for RVP and Walcott, a revitalised Chamakh and the rest of our attacking options playing anywhere near their best and we won't be short a few goals, either.

Basically, at the moment, I'm quite optimistic. I don't know that we can challenge for the title, but I think with a bit more luck than we've had in recent years we might be in with a shout. Maybe that's all our finances will allow now, but we've been spoilt by years at or around the top table. This year looks like it might be the year where we learn who we really are, but then I wonder if we don't already know. Can we win the title? Or will we only come 5th (or worse)? In all honesty, after typing all this, I can't wait to find out...

tl;dr - uninformed idiot spouts often overly-optimistic opinions largely based on conjecture and media bullshit, makes self excited for new season.

[Art Vandelay]

I remember watching Vieira on his debut against Wednesday when he caught a ball square on into his garbage and I thought to myself 'this bloke must be pretty hard'. And he was. The end.

[Rev]

I'd just like to point out Wednesday were good then. Before people get carried away.

[Dude Ranch]

I remember watching Vieira on his debut against Wednesday when he caught a ball square on into his garbage and I thought to myself 'this bloke must be pretty hard'. And he was. The end.

It took one majestic pass with the outside of his foot that night and you just knew.

[The Grand Pursuivant]

It took one majestic pass with the outside of his foot that night and you just knew.

And how much did he cost? Around £3 million or so?

[wev]

I'll always remember how he ran like a new born foal back then

[FATEone]

Someone should punch Nasri in his fucking head and remind him who he is. That being said, he's a quality player who will only get better and better, and I knew this before he came over here to Arsenal. If Fabregas is worth £35million he's easily worth the same and you lot would be mental to let him go.