One of my closest buddies is a Rams fan. I tease him all the time that Goff probably can’t even read their playbook. :giroud3:
1 Like
Mark Cuban is widely considered to be an idiot that got lucky with Dirk.
Hedge funds aren’t doing 14-15% per annum in nearly “guaranteed” fashion like a club of Arsenal’s stature (especially with the increasing TV money, huge matchday revenue, merchandise sales, etc. that are much more immune to an economic downturn). We can disagree on this, but I think that the “growth” of such an asset is more predictable than producing absolute returns that a hedge fund is mandated to do in all market conditions.
I don’t want him to operate at a loss just to put an All-Star team out there. I think that any fan realizes that Arsenal don’t have the silly money of a PSG/Real/Citeh/Man U/Chelsea to throw out there. What I would like to see is better operation within the framework of the club. Either Gazdis was full of it with his comments about being on Bayern’s level or the club (read AW) refuses to use the resources at his disposal.
The other issue I’d like to see is a coherent plan for the window. Laca and Sead–excellent business to start. Since then? Not so much and turns the window into a clown show again with the Sanchez and Ox debacles. Sanchez wanting away or being sold this late is poor business when he could have been shipped out in July and new players brought in to improve the team. I don’t understand why the club doesn’t get business done PRIOR to the first game of the season.
Arsenal are quite poor at moving players on, have a disastrous contract situation over the next two summers and now an image issue of clubs previously below them (Liverpool, Spurs, Everton) making moves to improve their squad while Arsenal are doing the deadline day dash again.
As for AW, I wish he would have left after the FA Cup win over Chelsea. The renewal should have been offered with the stipulations outlined above that he change and if not, move onto a manager with fresh ideas and a better grasp of what the transfer market is now with the TV money and the realization that FFP is easily gamed.
1 Like
It makes them potentially more desirable from a free agency standpoint. McVay is better than the previous coaching staff and should improve them in a tough division. Goff was bad last season as a rookie (not a big deal as it takes new QBs a few seasons to get used to the faster speed of play vis a vi college). Watkins gives them a legit threat at WR and Gurley should be better not seeing the box stacked all of the time with defenders. I don’t know if Goff is the answer, but they are rightfully letting him play this season to see if he can progress and be the long-term answer. Their defense isn’t that bad. I can see them being more competitive this season, but still a few pieces away from being a legit playoff contender.
1 Like
Clubs aren’t doing it in guaranteed fashion LOL… that is why Arsenal is a Home Run… FFS it is more a vanity asset than anything else…
14-15% is nothing special… our companies investors are looking for 20+% growth or F*ck off.
The issue is with AW…
The big clubs are damn close to doing that and I would put Arsenal somewhere in the top 15 in Europe.
Sure, bigger returns are there, but you are taking on much more risk to get to that 20% than a top sports team/club does.
I agree with the last part which is why I thought he should be conditionally offered an extension (if at all).
But they don’t get that return without operating at a loss… football clubs are NOT a good investment compared to other options… and it isn’t like Kroenke was gifted the ownership… he purchased it… .in a market… he had the guts to offer what was requisite at a time when we were struggling with cashflow… more power to him… seriously, the issue are simple - either want him to operate at a loss or get rid of management that isn’t performing… the rest is BS.
He wouldn’t be operating at loss–just using the resources that are available better. Either Arsenal has more money in the bank and increased revenue deals or Gazdis is lying.
It wasn’t a gutsy purchase. Guy was buying into a club that had a great balance sheet and he probably understood what the upcoming TV contracts could do to profitability. I’m sure that you know who his wife is, right? He could buy a team like Arsenal and it was low risk if it didn’t work out.
I’ll just disagree with you on the growth of the asset part.
He doesn’t buy players though - AW does… if it wasn’t a gutsy purchase, then why wasn’t there more competition? Or if there was, wasn’t the purchase price reflected in this? Did he have some special knowledge and connections that the rest of the market ignored? Were shareholders idiots and said “hmmm, let’s just go with this guy so we get less money?”
Seriously, it is market FFS.
He paid market price. I’m suggesting that his previous experience with TV deals for his other sports franchises/clubs suggested that he was making a wise (market) investment due to its long term growth potential, in particular with increased revenue from TV deals and popularity of the EPL.
I know that he doesn’t buy players. I’m saying that he hasn’t put the best people in place to use the resources that the club does have (without operating at a loss) and his misplaced confidence in a manager that seems to have let the game pass him by.
I totally agree he should have removed AW earlier… .my theory on this is simply that AW was legend here, revolutionized football in England, and Kroenke has erred (on the wrong side) with trusting this guy to run this club pretty much unfettered… atm I am worried that we will honor the full length of his contract, which I am not sure I can take.
1 Like
I’m pretty sure the Rams are going to suck for awhile. Total money play moving the team to LA.
1 Like
It’s a diversification asset and a hedge asset against his American franchises. The Emirates will always be full, American franchises outside of the historic ones (like NY Yankees, Chicago Bears, Pittsburgh Penguins, LA Lakers) can be more hit or miss and you can’t just buy your way out of a bad spell due to salary caps and the complexity of the contracts and the trade system.
Plus Kroenke could never buy one the historic American franchises but he could buy Arsenal. Thanks David Dein.
2 Likes
Yeah but others could too… this wasn’t some sweetheart deal behind the scenes… Kroenke was smarter or luckier, just like Buffet…
1 Like
It wasn’t a sweetheart deal but Kroenke was effectively the chosen one when it came to who the shares were going to be sold to. When the takeover happened almost 60% of the club was owned by either himself or Usmanov and Fiszmans 18% or whatever it was the deal had probably realistically been done on for some time previous. And this all happened after various lockdown agreements between shareholders. Why others weren’t involved is easily enough explained tbh.
Not that I disagree generally with what you’ve been saying mind.
I read on another forum today that Kroenke has secured loans against our cash reserves…is this true?
as much as we hate the twat it is highly unlikely, i dont think people would allow it on the board! Especially for his own use when he is a billionaire and we are running a club that needs more funding.
Fucking greed yankee! Bastardddddddddddddddddd!
its a windup no way does that happen with a billionaire owner and our board when we are trying to get more money not fuck us up even further
No. Its not his money unless he decides to pay it to himself as a dividend. Which is massively unlikely.