** Summer Transfer Window 2011/12 Season Rumours/Signings **

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rich_L said:
And Berbatov cost 30mill ...Utd still spent around £250 million more than Arsenal over the last 5 years in wages + transfers, that's hardly pocket change and if Arsenal had tried to match that then yes they might have won something but would be woefully worse off financially now than they are currently.
Click to expand...

If you look at the Utd team last season it was hardly a Man City situation. Rooney and Rio were pricey and Berbatov too if you include him in the first XI but they werent the norm. VDS wasnt expensive, neither was Vidic and Evra. The twins came in for very little. Scholes and Giggs were home grown as were the likes of O'Shea and Evans.

Yes, of course, you have to spend money. No-one could deny that but i think if you threw £30m at that Arsenal team last year you would have a title winning team. A decent midfielder, a workmanlike defender and another striker and suddenly its a different ball-game IMO.
 
sorry but Arsenal have standing cash reserves of over 120million a net debt of less than half of united's a slightly lower wage bill and a turnover which exceeded 370mill last season with football related turnover being c 240-250mill, only 40 mill less than Utd's 286.

I can't understand the point that people are trying to argue from, no one's saying United don't spend money (though even before Abramovich others spent more than us). We are willing to spend despite not being able to compete with Chelsea and Man City. The point is that Arsenals financial results and words from the directors etc seem to show that they've got money as well, yet they seem singularly unwilling to part with it.

This might keep them nice and stable but if with their turnover they can't afford to splash the cash even a little then there's something very wrong.
 
As a fan, being able to say 'well, our finances are better than yours' doesn't interest me at all.

Winning things is top priority, being average year after year must surely get pretty boring, even if you do make a profit?
 
Moses said:
WAT? The stadium's part of a long-term plan. They took out large loans to fund it... once those are paid back they'll be minted, but at the moment they can't afford to massively splash the cash without outside investment.
Click to expand...

As i said. Over £120mill in the bank and a net debt that's half United's, how long term are you thinking exactly? You made most of your property sales from the Highbury development last year so is there something else long term that's going to magically drive up your revenue?
 
right and with the flats what was your turnover? or are the flats for something entirely different now and not their to aid the football business?

'trololololol'

where's your long term plan?
 
DanH84 said:
right and with the flats what was your turnover? or are the flats for something entirely different now and not their to aid the football business?

'trololololol'

where's your long term plan?
Click to expand...

The flats don't make any revenue because they are all sold now. Nothing left to sell, no money coming in. Simples.
 
dante6491 said:
The flats don't make any revenue because they are all sold now. Nothing left to sell, no money coming in. Simples.
Click to expand...

it's Moses who talked about the long term plan not me. The income from the sales was received last year though.


* I think you've still got some left to sell though.
 
Plus Arsenal doing 'average' - eh? Competing in 4 competitions and regularly getting CL qualification is average how? There are plenty of teams *cough* Spurs *cough* who would kill to be as 'average' as Arsenal :p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom