Unai Emery


#4167

So Kroenke let Wenger spend whatever he wanted out of the 200m cash reserves and Wenger just thought fuck it I want to make it as hard for myself as possible and then Stan decided to stop Emery spending because he doesn’t like him as much as Arsene. All this that flies in the face of testimony from directors, Arsene and Gazidis. Yes very logical.


#4168

Arsenal are still an asset that continues to gain value whether we make Champion’s League or not. The goal is Champions League to maximise revenue but not at the expense of excessive investment.


#4169

I agree but Kroenke bought us knowing we had a 30k waiting list for season tickets, a manager getting us CL football on a small budget and making vast profits with a minimal outlay.

There was no way he could lose money and, in fact, was the easiest way to make a fortune with no risk involved.
That’s the reason he bought the club.

Kroenke is a parasite who feeds off the supporters hard earned money, and there is nothing we can do about it, apart from watch us get dragged further behind our rivals every season.

How people can’t see this is beyond belief.


#4170

He’s not a complete moron financially - it has negative valuation and revenue consequences if the team drops in results, falls out of top 4, achieves less than potential in terms of global brand growth… people act like rich people are f*ing morons with their money.

There is this notion of “risk” and it is both upside and downside relevant.

I’ll post the analysis of net spend and wages since Stan took over and we can see we aren’t the misers we are made out to be in comparison to just about anyone other than ManU (who have such substantially vastly greater wealth and potential), City (who are doped), and Chelsea (now to a lesser degree, who are doped).

Even Pool has been artificially boosted by a series of just phenomenal transfer business starting with Suarez and eventually Coutinho… if you just compare how we have handled and/or lost our stars in comparison, it is night and day and has given them reasonably conservatively an extra 100 million to spend over the last 5-10 years.


#4171

John Cross flip flops constantly, depending on what he thinks will get him the most attention in the moment.

I remember last season he was on the radio with Wrighty and was passionately defending Kroenke (who he had just been granted an interview with of course) and saying that he cared a lot about Arsenal and wanted to do what was necessary to win. Wright pushed back and Cross basically couldn’t contain giggles.

Within a few weeks of that, he then came out with some article about how we were going to not be given much money in the summer. People were hammering him on Twitter and he basically got all pissed off and Tweeted something to the effect of “Arsenal fans, don’t blame me when you’re only going to spend 50m this summer”. In the end, we spent about 70m.

These guys don’t actually know anything and they constantly change their tune for clicks.


#4172

That’s nowhere near what I said but as I said there’s no agreement to be had here.


#4173

I don’t understand your point here. When people say that there’s “no money”, they’re clearly referring to funds for transfers. If we could only do loan moves in January, that would surely signify that the money to complete permanent deals wasn’t there, otherwise we would’ve done those deals because we clearly need to rebuild this squad. All of us can see that there are deficiencies we have, and that not addressing them in the market could mean that we don’t get CL football next season.

If we are saving it for the summer, then I understand that. But it isn’t “media spin” because everyone knows what the “no money” phrase means and it was proven true. We only made a loan signing and if we are to sign him permanently, it will come out of the summer budget.


#4174

I think his point is that we are more/less “committing” money for the summer with the attempted loans - given that our only option in Jan (for whatever reason), it was the only way to “spend” for summer.

Regardless, saying we have no money is Jan after spending lots last couple of years (what did we spend total on Laca, Auba, Torry, Leno?) is just basically “sticking” to an annual budget (again, for whatever reason you believe) that is still a f*ing pretty high annual budget.


#4175

Yeah I understand that we’re saving it all for the summer which may not be the worst strategy, but I was just referring to the idea that it was “media spin” for gullible fans to say we had no money in January, when we essentially didn’t.


#4176

Is that sarcasm because if not I dunno what to say…daily mail is probably the worst out there might as well get your source from the sun. It’s not possible having only 45m in the summer the new deals will bring in more than that alone it is utter shit.


#4177

No it does not.

The capacity to do a permanent deal was clearly there. Afterall a loan fee was involved in the Denis deal and we’re currently paying his wages. The same would have applied to Carrasco and Perisic too.

Dont ignore the fact that sanllehi has been vocal against winter spending and hes totall right


#4178

The loan fee was 2m and the option to complete the deal will be 18m in the summer. That doesn’t mean that we ever had the funds to do any worthwhile permanent deal in January, the fact that we spent 2m on the loan fee.

I don’t think we ever intended to have a 40m option on Perisic either; that’s likely why we abandoned the deal. I wouldn’t have agreed with it anyway, that’s too much to spend on a 30 year old when we already have an expensive set of aging players.


#4179

Well we don’t actually know the real situation… some are saying it was FA rules, others saying we literally had zero budget… I think we were probably trying to be prudent with money given the calamity that spending has been over the last 5+ years primarily.


#4180

Also, to put “spending” in perspective, since 2015/2016 year, we spent in transfer fees alone on:

Mustafi - 37
Xhaka - 41
Leno - 23
Mikhi (according to transfermarkt) - 31
Perez - 18
El Neny - 11

161 million pounds in 4 years for 40+ million/year on absolute shambolic transfers (could argue Leno I suppose).

That is about 20 million more than Liverpool spent on Salah, VVD, Mane…

Combine this with mishandling Ramsey and Ozil (which we will get pittance for if anything) and the wages consumed by all of this nonsense and it is just a miracle we are anywhere near top 4.


#4181

No just the logic you’re following is actually far worse. You say Kroenke ‘maybe planning to take funds out of the club now he owns it 100%’. Has it not crossed your mind this is the long game Kroenke has been planing for years? Or perhaps that would come too close to admitting that you were wrong.


#4182

Definitely not, because he was traded with Sanchez there was no fee involved.

All of those fees are higher than I’ve seen reported elsewhere, with Perez being the closest to accurate/possibly spot on.


#4183

It’s true we spent on these players but we also got high earners like Sanchez, Cazorla, Mertesacker, Wilshere, Walcott, Chamberlain, Giroud etc, who were earning 100k a week or more and received more than 120m on the sales for some of these players, and others.
So if you compare the quality of players we have lost to the quality coming in, you have the reason we are being dragged down every season.

The investment needed just to get defenders that are even competent, rather than inadequate, will cost the best part of 80-90m, as for replacements for Ramsey and Ozil if he leaves, will be the same, and for a top quality winger and CM that would cost even more.

All this is just to get us back to a level to compete for a top four place and relying on all our rivals not strengthen further.

Emery must be wondering what he has to do to get us out of this mess.

Make no mistake, this lack of investment will see us out of the CL for several seasons, and this is what I believe will happen.

It will also lower the expectations of the supporters which is exactly what Kroenke and the board want.


#4184

Ummm he was traded, value for value… we could have/should have sold Sanchez for at least that… it is completely reasonable valuation under the circumstances and was terrible move.


#4185

I am using Transfermarkt so at least it is apples:apples with other teams, etc… It is pretty decent source, if imperfect.


#4186

I don’t think it was, Mkhitaryan on his day is a good player