Arsenal football club announced today that despite the drop in revenue from losing out on the Champions League and rising wage costs, they made £25m in profits and they now have £160m cash on hand, £138m of which is available to spend on player transfers. I woke up this morning wondering if there would be anything new to write about Arsenal and sure enough there is not. Arsenal are the most profitable football club in the land and they have the largest cash reserves. Arsenal may be in 6th place in the Premier League table but they are top of the financial table.
The back story on how they made profit this season is a bit interesting. They sold some properties on Holloway Road and banked £5m. And despite lowered turnover from the loss of the Champions League and increased wage costs, Arsenal still managed a £15m profit on football activities. Those are activities not related to player sales and purchases. Wages are up, attendance is down, television revenue is down but regardless of all of those pressures, Arsenal still turned a profit of £15m on football activities.
Arsenal also turned a profit on player sales in the summer. What the club called “rationalisation”, which is amazing corporate speak for “firing people”, earned £15.5m this summer. There was another weird line item called “joint venture” which has something to do with player sales and that contributed £600k. This accounting does not include the deals for Aubameyang and Mkhitaryan. When we look at Transfermarkt’s accounting, the club, in total, only made about £3m in player sales this year. That’s close enough to call it break even but we will see a more accurate accounting in November when Arsenal release their full accounting for the year.
Arsenal get to the £25m in profits figure by removing amortization and finance charges on player sales.
Sir Chips Keswick said that the cash on hand was the main reason why Arsenal were able to get deals done for Auba, Mkhi, and others:
“The Group has maintained a robust cash position with balances as at 30 November 2017 of £160.7 million (2016 – £123.7m), inclusive of debt service reserves, which are not available for football purposes, of £23.0 million (2016 – £23.3 million). This allowed us to make significant player investments in terms of transfer fees and wage commitments during the January transfer window in respect of Aubameyang, Mkhitaryan and Ozil.”
However, as I point out above, according to the guestimates by Transfermarkt and other places, Arsenal made a profit on player sales this season. I have a hard time believing Chips here because Arsenal didn’t sign Auba until after they sold a number of players in a three way swap deal. That, plus the break even, means that Arsenal did NOT use the cash on hand position as leverage in their transfers.
There are a couple of other odd things in this accounting. The first is that Arsenal’s wage bill increased £13m. Arsenal got a break on wages when they failed to qualify for the Champions League and this increase does not include Mkhitaryan, Aubameyang, or Ozil’s new deal. So it’s bigger than just a £13m increase. And that money was spent almost entirely on Lacazette and Kolasinac. That makes me wonder how much of a one-time bonus Arsenal paid Kolasinac and/or how much they are paying him in wages? Remember he was a “free” transfer and typically those players demand a signing bonus and large wages.
The club also slipped in some language saying that the increase in wages was “principally player driven”. Meaning that at least half of it was spent on players. But Arsenal also signed two new management members and gave Arsene Wenger a new contract. So at least part of the wage increases went to more layers of management.
With a £25m profit and £160m in cash reserves (growing every year), Arsenal are in a strong position financially and have massive hoards of cash to spend on players – not PSG or Man City level but £130m buys a lot of quality. What remains unclear is how much longer Arsenal will give money to Arsene Wenger to buy players. Arsenal are in a terrific financial position to replace an ageing back line and plug holes in the midfield so that Arsenal can challenge for a top four place next season but will they give that money to Arsene Wenger or will they bring in a new manager to clear out the old players and set up his team they way that he wants it?
Direct source: https://www.arsenal.com/sites/default/files/documents/Arsenal%20Holdings%20plc%20Interim%20Results%2030-11-2017.pdf
Good news.
I’m still not convinced that Sir Chips Keswick isn’t a made-up name, or one stolen from a comic strip like Little Orphan Annie or Rex Morgan MD.
Man, just read the transcript of Wenger’s press conference today. His responses to questions about his future were examples of absurdist theatre. Manager Unravelling.
Alarming.
I wouldn’t want Arsenal to fire him, but he shouldn’t make them have to.
The great man is done. He’s past the point of “respecting” his contract.
Unfortunately the only way he is leaving this summer is if he is forced out.
Can’t believe that there’s any intention of spending that cash reserve.
I’ll play devil’s advocate here – Why invest? Profit is going up in our current model. Spending the cash reserves on players would represent an investment with an uncertain return; all of the clubs above Arsenal have the same or more resources and thus it’s unlikely to improve our standing and ergo gain financial compensation from Champions League qualification or additional/better sponsorship deals. So why bother? That money is better left in the bank making interest.
The problem is that “winning” is not a primary concern with the current ownership. If it were there would be zero cash reserves right now. This is not the club keeping their powder dry for a new manager. A new manager will be told here’s the roster, you have +/-50m in funding for new transfers/salaries, anything beyond that needs to be funded with sales of existing players.
How much money are we going to earn leaving the cash in the bank? 1.0% at best? The current inflation rate in the UK is about 3%. Makes no financial sense to leave it in the bank. Investing in the right players and doing better in the league and Europe raises the profile of the club and makes it easier to get better commercial deals and that should be our top non-football priority. Hoarding cash is just foolish – unless we are keeping the powder dry for the next manager.
Bank should have been written as “bank”. Of course it’s not left in a bank; it’s invested in equities and other holdings that have a liquidity making it almost as good as “cash”. So no, leaving it in the “bank” gets you more than 1% per annum, it’s probably netting them 5-6% returns which is, accumulated over years, way way more than they would ever get blowing their wad to get back into the top 4 and a 40m payoff for Champions League group stage.
I’m just making the argument that unless an ownership has an overweening desire to win trophies and be successful on the field, there is zero incentive to use cash reserves to upgrade the team when the current model is making very good profit already.
Perhaps you can invest a small portion of your cash but there is no guarantee you will get 5-6% ROI in the equity or even debt markets. Markets go through corrections all the time and it’s not uncommon for the equity markets to go down 20-30% over a period of few months after a long rally. Football clubs can’t invest all their cash because you never really know when you will need it – players getting long-term injuries, players leaving, players aging – all of that means dipping into that cash balance and if that coincides with a market correction – you are well and truly f**ed. The risk vs. reward isn’t there. If you want to make more money, the better investment as a football club is buying better players. So even if the owners prioritize the balance sheet over on-field success, the better move is to invest in the team. You only need to look at the struggles of teams like Everton, Newcastle, Villa etc. who were constant mid-table teams but have suffered for not having invested enough in quality players. Mid-table is a slippery slope to bottom half and I’m pretty sure that’s not what the owners want even though it may not be so obvious.
Whoa – Everton. Full stop. There’s an example of the risk associated with investment in players. They actually did invest a significant sum of money in players and salaries this past summer and even in January and look what it got them. Nada. Sure you could argue that it was poorly invested… but then what trust do you have the Arsenal would be any better when evidence is to the contrary?
Another factor to consider is where are TV rights going? Sure everyone assumes that the next deal is going to be even bigger (I’ve read that went into United’s thinking on offering Sanchez what they did) but that bubble can’t go on forever.
I’m merely playing devil’s advocate. I would love to win and dominate. I would spend all that reserve on the very best 18-19 year olds out there and rebuild for the long haul. I’m just saying that is not in Kroenke’s thinking. That cash is not for investing in players because he won’t see the risk worth it.
Money really is such a terribly dull topic to me. But, of course it makes the world go ’round so I’m glad people like you are paying attention to it.
I’d rather talk about the upcoming Man City game today. We are going to lose, of course, but how fascinating to see two teams play after they just competed in a cup final three days ago. Will there be rotation? Will the game be flat? I kind of expect that it will be a ho-hum affair. I think Wenger will stick with the same basic tactical setup (which “worked” for the most part in the first half at least) but it will be interesting to see how the players respond. Let’s face it, the season is now the Europa cup or bust, but there are a lot of games to be played in the PL. Will they have an extra spring in their step, looking to avenge their humiliation, or will they go through the motions with the expectation of an inevitable defeat in what is now (for them) a fairly meaningless PL fixture? Is it fair to view their performance level (or lack thereof) as their vote of confidence in Arsene Wenger? That’s the only drama we really have left in Arsenal’s PL campaign, so we might as well watch and see it unfold.
You really want to talk about the Man City game? I’d rather pretend it wasn’t happening! In fact, I wish the season was over. Now. Yesterday. This is going to be a long run-in.
I think I’ve come around to Tim’s thinking (and that of several others here) that the players know Wenger’s leaving in the summer, and they’ve just sort of given up. Too many flat performances to count this season, and that may explain it. I’m not necessarily saying that they’re purposefully downing tools, but subconsciously the knowledge of his departure and/or ineffectiveness is influencing performances.
Maybe they’ll be liberated by the lack of expectation.
I’m still excited to watch Arsenal, probably because I’m masochistic. I’ll probably wish I was somewhere else, doing something else, most of the time while I do it based on recent precedent. I am looking forward to seeing the new faces bed in, the evolving chemistry of Ozil and Auba, the old chemistry between Mkhi and Auba, and to see how the balance in midfield shakes out between Wilshere and Ramsey, if they can ever stay fit at the same time together. Mostly I’m interested to see if this bunch is going to care about the rest of their games this season or not. If they’ve checked out, likely I will too.
For once, totally agree with Doc, both about what interests me, and about (very modest) hopes of being entertained, or at least diverted, by our players’ performance against City tomorrow.
Let’s be honest: our season (such as it now is) was never going to hinge on the run of games that saw us play Spurs, City (twice), and a Europa tie that amounted to a formality against lower league opposition. I know the media and fans have only now gone into full meltdown (just like last season after the Bayern results), but in truth, we did much more damage to ourselves by dropping 12 points (12!) against Southampton, West Ham, West Brom, Bournemouth, and Swansea in December and January. If we’d gotten, say, 10 of those points–which was totally probable, even for this rotten side–we’d be in a very competitive position in the league. I’m not saying we deserved to do so, since obviously we didn’t, I’m just saying even this team can put a positive run together in our remaining games after tomorrow, and if we do, all will not have been lost just yet, regardless of what happens tomorrow night.
So I’m going into tomorrow’s game with no expectations except for maybe, just maybe, a slightly improved and more intense performance from our players.
The real run-in starts after that: EL plus PL, to see if, one way or the other, the players can get us into the CL next season and save Wenger’s job (or at least allow him to be moved aside with relative dignity in the summer, as opposed to it being ugly and humiliating). It was looking just as bleak if not bleaker 12 months ago, then the team went on a late season winning run that salvaged something from the season. It’s obviously not enough. We must do better, of course. We need change. I’m only saying there’s still just about enough games to save us from unmitigated disaster. The EL is still eminently doable if we find a little form, and, while I think finishing top 4 would be a minor miracle, that’s more because of how bad we’ve been, especially away from home, than down to the mathematics.
As a fan, I harbour hope. It’s more likely than not to be dashed, but part of being a fan is believing that you’re the blue collar bloke who can successfully chat up Scarlett Johansson at a bar. We are a manifestly better team than either Forest or Ostersund, but they both beat us. Hopefully the scorn poured on the players’ performance by Gary Neville will sting, and wounded pride will make them rise to the occasion.
Hey, we could be Scunthorpe United supporters. Now that’s a truly sucky experience.
“Hey, we could be Scunthorpe United supporters. Now that’s a truly sucky experience.”
I’ve thought a lot about that Claude, and I think the opposite may be true, though of course it’s impossible to generalize entirely. Here’s the theory: Football fandom at its core is basically an animalistic expression of tribalism. Fans go to games because there is a sense of community, an opportunity to leave the constraints of civilization behind, a venue where it’s socially acceptable to scream obscenities for 90 minutes while chugging beer and singing lewd songs with your mates. OK, I’m obviously generalizing here, I know full well 100% of match going fans are not like this, but maybe we can agree that the experience of shared community is very different than our own experience as “internet fans” like me. We internet fans do not go to games. Our sense of community comes from online fora like this one and from social media. We experience a similar albeit more inhibited version of the matchday experience, but we scream and shout from virtual rafters at faces we cannot see, and though we may go to bars to watch games and see some of the same faces there, I don’t think I am alone when I say I watch most matches by myself. This is, naturally, an isolating experience.
Now, let’s say for sake of example that I am a fan of Scunthorpe united living in Scunthorpe. Ok, my team plays in the third tier, their nickname rhymes with the pleural of a lewd term for female genitalia, and their best player is some guy named Josh Morris who is probably one of, like 10 Josh Morris’ playing in England at any given time. But, if I as a Scunthorpe fan actually go to games with people who are my friends and have a great time screaming at Josh for giving the ball away, inventing witty songs about the opposition, and then telling stories over a few pints afterward, I’d probably be pretty happy with that. If the Scunnies actually won, that’d be a cherry on top. Maybe I’m being romantic but I kind of think that’s what the soul of football is, but the game has fundamentally moved on from that, except maybe in the lower leagues. Maybe they still have an innocent enjoyment of a game that is too often about entitlement, self-loathing, oodles of money money money, scumbag agents and more money.
Just my theory from 6,000 km away from Scunthorpe and British football in general.
Thoughtful stuff, but not sure I agree. Lots of people leave their hometown and continue to support their local club. I know a very filthy rich banker who lives in Notting Hill and has remained devoted to Bolton, even though he almost never visits the Reebok.
Im just saying that supporting the 6th placed team in the EPL isn’t some kind of purgatory. That said, the doom and gloom is understandable, because of the standards we’ve usually set.
By the way, head (and most other body parts) says City will win. Heart says we will beat them.
And it’s incorrect to say that this is a meaningless tie for City. They haven’t sewn up the title yet. How can three points be meaningless, even given their lead?
If we win (and it’s huge if) it will not be nothing.
Ho w much more devastating will it be when Arsenal put in a performance and get a result in a meaningless League game?
That’s my prediction. We see Arsenal really going for it and taking points off City.
Agreed. We usually have a response to these periods of intense criticism with a valiant win over superior opponents. Would not surprise me one bit if we beat City tomorrow. The animus before the FA Cup final last year was pretty intense, we were expected to lose because of injuries and yet, there was Arsene, lifting the trophy.
Yep, just the kind of match to win and give fans some glimmer of hope. It will be meaningless for City, and they might even rest some players…
That’s true. We sometimes perform well in dead rubbers.
Sixth is sewn up, isn’t it?
100% sewn up. There is nothing left to play for except maybe the Europa League but since our only striker in that competition is Welbeck and since AC Milan is just going to press Arsenal I can’t see any way forward there.
Watch this video to see what Gattuso is going to do to Arsenal.
Bloody hell. Just what we need: a fired up Milan that has channelled all of Gattuso’s terrier-like determination. That pressing. We won’t handle that.
Going back to a discussion a few weeks ago about style, aesthetics, et al, there is beauty in watching a synchronized well drilled defense.
I’m pretty sure Gattuso played for both Sacchi and Capello, he would have picked up a few things along the way…
He played for neither. He only started his Milan career around the turn of the century, after Sacchi and Capello were long gone. Most of his time was spent under Ancelotti.
Yes, and Italian football is different. Much more tactical, less about pace, power and pashun. They are schooled from age 5 in tactics along with technique. I think Gattuso is going to obliterate Arsenal in that match. Especially since our main attacking threat is going to be Welbeck or late runs from Ramsey.
Ugh. Don’t remind me about Welbeck. Honestly, I would leave him out and go all Spain 2012? and play four defenders and six midfielders. Welbeck is, sadly, a liability.
On the basis of this video about Milan and Gattuso, how do you think Wenger should respond tactically?
Is it? Sometimes teams can go on a run when there isn’t much anything to play for and close down the 8 point difference with the team ahead of them. I guess what I’m saying is – Burnley could still catch us.
Burnley Brexited from the League in December.
My reading of the financials is this is a club preparing to make wholesale changes – including dumping the manager.
First, while a profit of 15m is not bad, the drop from 54m would be alarming to any organization. I assume it’s due to lack of CL TV money.
Second, selling real estate is often done to raise cash – it’s usually a one-time bump to profit, unless Arsenal have more properties to sell. Apparently there is only one left to develop.
They are keeping fewer players on the squad to keep wages lower, and stockpiling cash to replace them and overhaul the squad.
Kroenke won’t like the loss of CL money, and won’t stick with it much longer is my guess, even with bigger sponsorship deals – Emirates and possibly Adidas.
The club understands that they are going to spend more on players – wage inflation is the reality. And as you’ve pointed out many times, it’s not a lack of spending that’s the issue.
The spend isn’t generating the return they want/expect.
I’m with the doc on this one.
Ok, so we’re not going to get 4th, the Europa is our one remaining (and slim) shot at glory, and the ‘is you is or is you ain’t’ question will increasingly dominate our news, but hope springs eternal and I also want to see how our new boys shape up – will Mikhi come good under AW’s encouragement, how will he interact with Ozil and Auba, and with Laca when he’s back, will Jack and Rambo be given a shot in place of Xhaka, will Kolisenac show us his Shalke form of yesteryear?
All tantalising questions, though possibly not best answered in a second successive game against City.
However, as I’ve got tickets, here’s hoping they will be.
Enjoy the game! Hope you have a great time.
I enjoyed your post above, Doc. It’s the romantic in all of us that helps keep us from being vile and soulless muckrakers.
Please try and remind your fellow citizens about that at the next presidential election and as always….COYG!!!
Thanks 1Nil, I’m already on the bandwagon to secede from the union, since Massachusetts is basically like a different country in many respects: we have universal health care, pot is legal, and the Patriots win every other superbowl. Unfortunately, although we can aspire to be Canadian, it’s unlikely to happen for us.
@Jack Action.
Dude, you are talking about one summer, taken in isolation, when Everton did spend some money and they didn’t buy anyone who could replace Lukaku’s goals. Remember when Moyes fought with the Everton board because he wasn’t “given the money” and then a couple of summers later he actually did leave when there was a vacancy at United? Theirs and others’ situation is a culmination of their inability to compete in the transfer market for a number of years which can’t be undone by one summer of heavy spending (and as you said, they didn’t even do that properly). The problem with not spending money is that you will eventually end up killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.
I know you are only playing devil’s advocate but my point was that even prioritizing the balance sheet over titles means you need to spend money on good players. I think the Kroenkes get that.
The cash in hand has been a major gripe for many years, and it has only grown. I don’t know what it’s about but given the length of time, surely it’s not all about giving it to the new manager.
The only indication that your assertion might be true is that despite basically ending up even on wages and transfers after the January business, Wenger said we couldn’t ‘afford’ Evans. Maybe he only meant that we weren’t prepared to pay 20-25m for him when he could be available for 3m in the summer. But afford makes it sound like Arsenal didn’t have the money for Wenger to spend.
Didn’t David Ornstein sort of establish this in the fallout from the summer? Wenger was given a 60m transfer fund. Anything beyond that needed to be funded by sales and salary dumps of existing players. Why would it change going forward.
60m gets you one good player in the current market.
I can see us selling Bellerin, Mustafi, Perez, Chambers, Welbeck and Elneny, possibly another one or two (Cech?). That gets us maybe another 70-80m to spend.
So, we might spend 130-140m on players, but it will end up maybe being only 60m net.
The club would also be budgeting for a wage bill increase with new contracts for Ramsey and Wilshere (though reportedly this is based around bonuses), so it might be less than that.
So yeah, I don’t think the cash holdings are linked with the manager’s future. If we really really need to, we could dip into them, but I think the trend of increasing cash reserves will continue regardless of Wenger’s future. I’m not sure why this is because it doesn’t make sense to just keep cash, unless it helps Arsenal or Kroenke in some other way (keeping net debt low, increased valuation, loans drawn against Arsenal shareholding?)
Also, a couple of years ago we spent around 100m in transfer fees. Apparently it was 60m now. Is that 40m difference due to the loss of CL? Do we not budget for being out of the CL 1 year out of every 4 any more?
You have to consider that 100m spend came after a year where we only bought Cech and then later Elneny. Averaged over two seasons it’s probably closer to the 60m mark.
We are just not a big spending club. Period. Any hopes of overhauling our roster with a City-esque outlay in the 200-250m region and burning our cash reserves in the hope of some payoff is fantasy.
Sigh.
We’re on to 2018/19, lads.
If you thought Sunday was bad I don’t know what you’d make of this. 0-3 down at half time. Disastrous defending as usual, and nothing in attack. Ramsey’s giving it some, but nobody else is.
ManCity are very good.
I don’t think there’s too much more in this team. We’re playing well enough, but City just have players who can open up spaces (and finish chances). Is this what it felt like to play against the Invincibles?
Not watching the match, obviously, but just saw the score at half time. Wow! I’m reminded of the last panel of David Squires’ cartoon this week, of the crying child saying, “but they’re already dead!” in response to someone telling him Arsenal play Man City again in a few days!
Anyway, this could end up 5-0 or worse. I think we’re relying on Guardiola’s pity at this point.
Perhaps I’m being a bit uncharitable. We have had some chances,but City keeper is having a great game. City could have scored two more.
Chin up, lads. City being a very, very good team (or the best to ever suit up, depending on your perspective), means that we are getting the hiding the gulf in class suggests that we should, no?
Thing is, their scoring to chance ratio is ridiculous. When the first goal went in, it was 7 against us from 9 chances, according Orbinho
I actually think there was a response from the players for this game, it just didn’t matter. I thought our pressing in the early minutes in particular was really good. They were just too good, Sane in particular.
Agreed. Though he should never have been allowed to slalom through like that for the first goal (tackle or foul, guys), and Bernardo Silva was far too easily allowed to cut in on his left.
Our defense is just not good enough for this league, period. Not even close. Our attack is (more or less) good enough (or could be), but entirely disorganized and dispirited at this point in the season.
But in spite of the humbling half time score, I don’t think even this was a particular low point of the season (that itself says a lot).
Can I say this though? City may be wonderful to watch, but we are talking about a club assembled by the financial power of an entire nation, not a rich individual like Abramovitch or some corporate entity like the Glazers. An undemocratic nation that has an appalling human rights record that includes slave labor and a place where citizens have no property rights. For me that taints everything they do on the field. Imagine if Kim Jong Un bought a team and injected billions of dollars into buying the best players as a public relations move to endear himself and North Korea to western peoples. Same thing.
Preach it brother. Completely agree. It’s not a mark against Pep, but let’s be real: in 2009 City were nobodies (even more nobodies a few years before that); the richest guys in the world buy your team and surprise surprise, you have the best team in the world a decade later. Surely this must feel a bit hollow to someone, or is it just me?
It’s true, but it’s so much harder to hate them with Pep as their coach and the way they play, the players they have. I could gladly hate Mourinho’s Chelsea with all my being, they were so hatable!
With respect to the bigger point, while I do support the notion that there should be limits to financial investments and penalties for spending too much, and I absolutely recognize the absurdity of the UAE bankrolling an entire PL side from dubious financial sources, the fundamental premise of what City are doing now is just the same thing Arsenal did in the late 1920’s. They were the rich city club of London bankers, fat from the exploitation of the colonies, and they brought in Herbert Chapman, who had just won three straight titles with Huddersfield, and then recruited Alex James (craftily bypassing the maximum wage rules along the way to squeeze him in) and proceeded to win their first ever first division title in 1930. Chapman, like Guardiola, was an innovator who favored a high tempo counter-attacking game that demanded a high level of fitness and concentration, and James was the piece that made it all tick. Arsenal’s then owner, Henry Norris, was an unscrupulous speculator who was suspected of under the table payments to lure Charlie Buchan (then top scorer for Sunderland) to Arsenal, and of rigging the vote to promote Arsenal from the 2nd to the 1st division, hilariously at the expense of Tottenham, even though Arsenal finished only 6th in the 2nd division the year prior.
All of this is to say: by complaining of financial doping, we are calling the kettle black. Other clubs are doing so because they can, just like we did when we could.
Great comment.
Sure, but (a) while the two may be analogous, clearly what City and PSG are doing is on a whole different scale, and (b) to say “we” are “calling the kettle black” is a bit humorous when the episodes of which you speak are from the 1920’s for crying out loud, when (I’m assuming) none of us, and almost no one even remotely associated with Arsenal today were even alive!
I cannot express how repugnant this attempt to compare Arsenal to City is for me. This is a desperate attempt at false equivalency. There is no comparison of rich bankers in 1920’s England to a regime that regularly is amongst the worst nations on earth for human rights violations. None. No comparison. Unless you are Marxist that mistakes hyperbole for fact, you cannot argue that those bankers were enslaving or murdering people.
https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2017/country-chapters/qatar
ManCity is owned via Abu Dhabi, not Qatar.
Also, the human rights violations under modern states is not just similar to, but often a legacy or consequence of, colonial and neo-colonial actions. Sure, the bankers didn’t kill anyone. Just like arms companies don’t kill anyone.
However, I don’t think I agree with the Doc about equating the Arsenal of the 20s with the current funding model. The economics of a club at the time were different, and league set up and procedures were still being established. All run and controlled by ‘gentlemen’. Norris was unlikely to be more ‘unscrupulous’ than others. I don’t think he ever outright owned the club anyway. Arsenal of the 20s and 30s seem to me to be closer to the ManU of the 80s and 90s than the Chelsea and ManCity model. They knew London offered more marketing opportunities, and Arsenal specifically as the first southern Football League club. And they used TV, radio, and European matches to draw more publicity, revenues, and talent. A more detailed look at the history of Arsenal and Norris can be found in the link below. I haven’t read most of it but it’s very interesting,
http://www.blog.woolwicharsenal.co.uk/henry-norris-at-the-arsenal
From what I’ve observed, most of these “moral preachers” happen to come from amongst rival fans. While I agree with the general opinion about UAE and Qatar bankrolling teams, I believe there’s also an element of bitterness due to the nature of the change that has made these “nobodies” into champions in a relatively short period of time. Yes, the wealth comes from “dubious” sources, and the aforementioned nation states are far from being morally clean, but do Man city fans accept that? I think they do, in the same way most Britons come to terms with the fact that the wealth of modern Britain was largely built on the exploitation of the colonies, support of puppet-dictators, and so on.
Again, I find your comment pretty offensive. I’m not bitter about City or PSG because I still believe in football as a sport where intelligent management and development can overcome big money, hence why PSG still suck for all the money they’ve blown. But I think it needs to be flagged that their squads have been built with money squeezed from countries where people are enslaved, suppressed and subjugated.
Why do you put dubious in quotes? There’s nothing dubious about Qatar.
Sure, sure. Britain is rich because of a history of exploitation. This is a lazy analysis of why some countries are more economically successful than others. One country exploiting another, one set of people exploiting another set of people – this is human history. Europeans do not have a monopoly on exploiting others. It may be a factor but one of possible a hundred different factors that explains the disparity in the wealth of nations, not the only reason. I would argue that rule of law, separation of state and church, property rights, democratic government, free markets, cultures of civic participation… these are more responsible than “exploitation” to explain the wealth of modern Britain and comparing the acceptance of that to the acceptance of a repressive regime funding your football club is a pretty gross and morally disgusting comparison.
What is democracy? Apparently it is easily hackable these days and hence not really democracy. Not that that is the only example of democracy being only a sham at true popular representation, or in more recent times being used as an excuse to launch wars and grab resources. (Loot is very much not a thing of the past)
What if the people of Abu Dhabi and Qatar are happy living under a feudal system? What if people don’t trust the feedback mechanisms that some democratic countries offer over the traditional feedback mechanisms that exist and have evolved in their own societies? What if the people are willing to accept the tradeoff between living under a dictatorship or threat to human rights vs what they see as a greater existential threat?
I’m not saying Qatar or Abu Dhabi are awesome. But it is a more complex issue than the moralising stance that is basically only an attempt to impose a system that aligns with one’s own. It often also favours outside forces rather than deliver true power to the people.
I don’t have a problem with PSG getting Qatari funds because Qatar are apparently terrible. That is a larger issue than sport. I have a problem with them funding PSG because it ruins sport as a fair competition.
I’m sorry that you found my comment offensive, but could that be because you’re entrenched too deep in a specific worldview, as some might construe from the choice of your profile picture?
I agree that “The rule of law, separation of state and church, property rights, democratic government, free markets, cultures of civic participation and”…are all values that lead to social and political advancement and improve the lives of the citizens, but they are not directly responsible for economic wealth, by which I mean the real input to the economy, which in the case of Britain was generated in large part by colonialism. It was colonialism that led to capitalism- the ‘joint stock company’ being an early innovation inspired by overseas trade and conquest- out of which came about The East India Company, a company with an army of its own that quickly set about conquering and brutally exploiting overseas lands, like when they looted an entire treasury of the Mughal emperor and shipped it to London. Capitalism in turn led to the industrial revolution, which put economic incentives into scientific discovery and technological research. These in turn led to military expansion and the expansion of the empire, which generated even more wealth to feed this cycle. From the East India Company to the opium wars to the ‘scramble for Africa’, Britain’s wealth was generated from colonialism, so, while I agree that there were a number of admirable factors responsible for Britain’s success, I don’t think it is a lazy analysis to say that Britain wouldn’t be a wealthy superpower without this morally questionable past. Now, if you bring up this issue with a modern Brit, they will deny it, dismiss it as irrelevant or will ruefully accept it while trying to focus on the positive aspects of their nation’s past. There is in my view a good analogy between that and how a Man city fan would react if asked about the wealth of their football club. It’s a perfectly valid comparison in my opinion, albeit on a much smaller scale. As regards the funding of football clubs by repressive Gulf States, I agree with SHARD that it is worthy of resentment because of what it does to football in a sporting sense, by gaining an unfair advantage over what you described as “intelligent management and development”, eclipsing it and forcing it into an uphill struggle. But that is something that happens with any sort ‘bankrolling’, irrespective of where it originates from. So focusing on the larger socio-political picture is partisan and partial in my view.
We only lost 3 nil after being down 3 nil at half-time? Dare I say we have turned a corner?
Depressing.
Sad that Wenger is probably going to go out this way but probably should not be surprising. I can see how rather than pack it in at the first sign of trouble, he would want incontrovertible proof that he didnt still have it. I can see how the confidence that made him great would help him he maintain the belief that somehow he could turn it around.
Part of me believes that if we could create Coqzorla 2.0 with a dribbling press breaking creator who can also defend along side a midfield destroyer who can make something happen with the ball at his feet, that Wenger could be successful again. And he probably could be successful at making the top 4, getting to the round of 16 in the CL, winning a cup final and maybe winning the league if everyone else self destructs.
But we won’t win the PL or the CL against the nation state teams unless we have a special sauce, something like Simeone’s defense.
On a certain level winning may require a change in identity, killing our football father, shifting from attacking to defensive football or perhaps prostituting our club to a more generous foreign sugar daddy.
It’s not going to be fun.
For me an AC Milan supporter, watching them now is a joy after Montella’s dross. When we last played AC Milan in the CL, I rooted for Arsenal. That was a bitter sweet victory at the time. I will be rooting for AC Milan this time because I am not a masochist and I want Gattuso to succeed with this team.
I root for the NY Rangers and those of you who follow hockey know that the Rangers told their fans in a letter that since they trailing behind the playoff spots, they would jettison star players in order to get draft picks and get younger and faster . That was management saying we’re are going to blow up a team that made the playoffs and the Stanley Cup final a couple of years ago and start all over in 2019.
Kroenke needs to do the same thing at Arsenal. Starting with Wenger, he needs to bring a new manager straight away who can make a decisions about who at Arsenal he can use in his system and who needs to be replaced. We all have ideas on what players are piss poor but they maybe world class in a better setup from the new manager. That’s what Gattuso showed at AC Milan with likes of Calhanoglu who was dreadful under Montella and now looks a revelation. The young FB Calabria under Gattuso had a MOTM performance a few games back and he will keep getting better and better.
Last week I wondered to myself what would happen if Arsenal fail to win another game this season. What if Trump gets a second term. ‘Comparable’ worse case scenarios that would be painful but we would survive. Unless there is a zombie apocalypse thrown in then all bets are off.
We have 45 pts now and that should see us avoid the mythical 40 pt relegation cutoff. The reality is if teams below us start winning, then we could be in harms way and wouldn’t that be a peach.
You know what? I’ve been quite apathetic towards Arsenal’s actuall football and now after the misery of the last weeks, I’m actually starting to feel a little excited about the next season. Maybe because it’s truly turned into the endtimes, there’s no way there isn’t a change coming. It’s going to be a transitional season and probably not a very successful one in terms of winning stuff, but it’s going to be a jump into the great unknwon. One of the exciting things about sports as entertainment is about the unpredictability and I’ll gladly embrace it. I just hope they put their foot down and keep Bellerin, it seems his agent is testing the waters with the story about Juve interest in the Guardian today.
*queue the official statement of the club that in fact nothing is changing*
This e.g. gets me excited about the possibilities ahead: http://outsideoftheboot.com/2017/09/19/tactical-philosophy-leonardo-jardim/