Arsenal Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2013/14

speedboatchase · 23-07-2013 01:01PM

gosplan wrote: »

This is kind of the way I see it. All speculation and assumption though so don't bother believing it or arguing with it.

1: Everyone agrees that Higuain is a very good player but that Suarez is slightly better.

2: Arsenal move to buy Higuain from Madrid for a reasonable enough asking price.

3: Real raise the asking price. Possibly to try and basically swap Higuain for Suarez.

4: Arsenal decide that if we're paying the price Suarez would command, then we may as well just try to sign him in the first place.

5: Arsenal begin persuit of Suarez. Everyone is relaxed because they know Higuain probably prefers a move to London and EPL over Serie A, a league which can't seem to retain stars anymore. So basically Arsenal are free to chase Suarez until Higuain is about to be sold because the only other potential club seem to be Napoli(worrying?) and we can probably gazump any deal if needs be.

6: Real begin to get nervous as Suarez deal looks more likely so Marca begin running stories about how close the Nspoli deal is and how Arsenal are due to increase their bid any day now.

7: Wenger sits back in office grinning. He knows that essentially Madrid are sh1t at doing business. Either we get Suarez or we get Higuain. We're chasing other targets privately - all is relaxed.

8: Arsenal fans are not a bit relaxed. We thought we were getting Higuain a month ago and we want a big name striker yesterday!!! We don't care about your private business - we want Rooney or Higuain or Suarez rumours confirmed - and until you deliver you're going to be considered either incompetent or miserly! Anything you do apart from sign one of those three players is part of a conspiracy that involves eternal 4th place finishes.

I'm glad you're relaxed but Higuain>Napoli and Suarez>Liverpool is a very distinct possibility. I don't think we hold the cards at all. Also, it's AS that has been reporting the Higuain deal to Napoli, not Marca.

farna_boy · 23-07-2013 01:01PM

Hyzepher wrote: »

I honestly think that with all the out-goings so far this window we should be seriously bidding for both Suarez and Higuain as well as Bernard and a backup CB. If we have €70m available we should be spending €90m. No use having €70m this year and €30m next year if you are serious contenders. Just put the cash up front - get the players that can do the job and make a statement of intent. I would be sure that it would make it easier for us to attract world class players in the future.

I'm all for balancing the accounts etc but you need to be able to make bold purchases - outside your normal policy - just to show you can and show people that you mean business and can live up to the legacy

I really don't think we need two new strikers. At most we need one and only if he is going to score ~30 goals per season. Giroud and Poldi will be in their second season this year and more familiar with the players around them so I would expect a lot more goals from both of them (if they are given the chance). Walcott and Cazorla will also heavily contribute and some of the younger players will probably chip in as well.

We do need a replacement CB with all the injuries but I expect a problem attracting someone to the club for that position more than others. We already have two very good CBs (Kos and Mert) so unless we sign someone who is exceptional, the new player will realise they will probably be on the bench if those two are fit. The alternative is that we sign a player who will be a 3rd choice CB, so the choices there are probably someone who is only ok (not ideal if we want to challenge), someone good but is old (is paid high wages to sit on the bench) or someone who is potentially good and young (if they only have potential, it could go either way and is probably not ideal). The best of those three choices may be the older player but do we really want to be paying someone 80k + a week to sit on the bench in case they are needed?

If we go down your route of just buying players for the sake of it (as in the case of the strikers) and not using them or our existing players, we will end up in much the same place we are now, paying high wages to players we don't use. This time though instead of paying Chamkh 60k for playing in the reserves, we would be paying the likes of Poldi 100k to do the same.

Paulegend · 23-07-2013 01:05PM

AdamD wrote: »

What in there has any relation to football manager? I've just done simple maths and come to the conclusion that we'll buy players.

What a horrid post.

ok ill stop the childish attack and instead give you an honest debate on this

i dont know where any of your figures are coming from though

Gervinho could be sold for 6 million
chamakh could be going for 1 million
mannone went for 2 million

the players that have been released have been taken off the wage bill but the ones that have been released early ie: denilson and by the looks of it park have cost ye money in termination fees

santos got a pay off to leave

so i can see 9 million brought in by the club.
wages no doubt a huge amount has been saved

but where did you get 15 million from??

and then there is the so called 70 million that everyone brands about. where is this so called 70 million??

HazDanz · 23-07-2013 01:08PM

Paulegend wrote: »

then there is the so called 70 million that everyone brands about. where is this so called 70 million??

It's in the war chest man! The war chest!! :P

gosplan · 23-07-2013 01:09PM

speedboatchase wrote: »

I'm glad you're relaxed but Higuain>Napoli and Suarez>Liverpool is a very distinct possibility. I don't think we hold the cards at all. Also, it's AS that has been reporting the Higuain deal to Napoli, not Marca.

We are light years ahead of Napoli in terms of the personal package we can put together for him.

If we want him, we'll get him.

Marty McFly · 23-07-2013 01:13PM

Nice to see Gary Neville once again talking sense and Pier Morgan looking like a twat as usual. Twitter for anyone that looking at the debate.

speedboatchase · 23-07-2013 01:13PM

gosplan wrote: »

We are light years ahead of Napoli in terms of the personal package we can put together for him.

If we want him, we'll get him.

I agree completely, but I don't think we want him anymore and we could find ourselves in limbo if the dreaded scenario I put forward comes to pass. I think we should come back in with another Higuain bid and keep our options open rather than let Napoli potentially wrap it up.

speedboatchase · 23-07-2013 01:15PM

On a positive note, apparently Sp*rs couldn't agree a fee for Soldado. There's a possible back-up option for us. http://es.pn/1bZnQlw

bad2dabone · 23-07-2013 01:18PM

speedboatchase wrote: »

On a positive note, apparently Sp*rs couldn't agree a fee for Soldado. There's a possible back-up option for us. http://es.pn/1bZnQlw

we should snatch him just to annoy the spuds.

Hyzepher · 23-07-2013 01:18PM

farna_boy wrote: »

I really don't think we need two new strikers. At most we need one and only if he is going to score ~30 goals per season. Giroud and Poldi will be in their second season this year and more familiar with the players around them so I would expect a lot more goals from both of them (if they are given the chance). Walcott and Cazorla will also heavily contribute and some of the younger players will probably chip in as well.

We do need a replacement CB with all the injuries but I expect a problem attracting someone to the club for that position more than others. We already have two very good CBs (Kos and Mert) so unless we sign someone who is exceptional, the new player will realise they will probably be on the bench if those two are fit. The alternative is that we sign a player who will be a 3rd choice CB, so the choices there are probably someone who is only ok (not ideal if we want to challenge), someone good but is old (is paid high wages to sit on the bench) or someone who is potentially good and young (if they only have potential, it could go either way and is probably not ideal). The best of those three choices may be the older player but do we really want to be paying someone 80k + a week to sit on the bench in case they are needed?

If we go down your route of just buying players for the sake of it (as in the case of the strikers) and not using them or our existing players, we will end up in much the same place we are now, paying high wages to players we don't use. This time though instead of paying Chamkh 60k for playing in the reserves, we would be paying the likes of Poldi 100k to do the same.

i still think that we need to buy the better players when they are available. If we buy proven players then the issue of rubbish taking up wages is a moot point.

At least we will have depth in the squad.

I'm not saying to go out every year and spend 90m+ but if ever there was a year to do it, this is it. Get rid of the deadwood (almost done), free up wages and start to build a team where anyone in the squad is practically a 1st team player

HazDanz · 23-07-2013 01:22PM

Marty McFly wrote: »

Nice to see Gary Neville once again talking sense and Pier Morgan looking like a twat as usual. Twitter for anyone that looking at the debate.

Morgan some man to talk out of his ass. Cretan.

gosplan · 23-07-2013 01:25PM

speedboatchase wrote: »

I agree completely, but I don't think we want him anymore and we could find ourselves in limbo if the dreaded scenario I put forward comes to pass. I think we should come back in with another Higuain bid and keep our options open rather than let Napoli potentially wrap it up.

To be honest though, if we don't want him then you have to trust the club.

I don't watch much Spanish football so you'd have to get opinions from elsewhere but it does worry me that City, PSG, Chelsea, Spurs, Monaco are all picking up strikers and not showing any interest and Real don't seem to want to keep him - not the president or the last two managers.

People don't seem to care though. His profile is big and that's what we're interested in for the moment.

cson · 23-07-2013 01:33PM

Have a Google for yourself about Arsenal Transfer Funds and you'll see the £70m figure is widely bandied about. Its been acknowledged by the club that a significant amount of funds are ringfenced in an account for transfers. Naturally they won't put a figure on it as, well, that'd be just plain stupid putting figures in the public domain as to what you have to spend.

On a commercial level; the new shirt deal with Emirates will generate £30m per year, an increase of £20m per year. The new kit deal with Puma is also £30m per year which is an increase of £22m. So straight off the bat there's £42m extra revenue per year. Throw in various other commercial deals plus the fact we have huge matchday income and you can easily see where a £70m budget comes from. That goes without taking into account the massive profits from transfers over the past few years which undoubtedly are in reserves somewhere.

Estimated Per Week Wages
Mannone 20k = £1m
Squillaci 50k = £2.6m
Djourou 50k = £2.6m
Santos 50k = £2.6m
Coquelin 20k = £1m
Denilson 50k = £2.6m
Arshavin 70k = £3.6m
Gervinho 50k = £2.6m
Chamakh 50k = £2.6m
Bendtner 50k = £2.6m
Park 40k = £2m

Total is £25.8m

Fees from that amount to;

Gervinho £8m (Roma)
Mannone £2m (Sunderland)

Total = £10m

Assuming Denilson and Santos required some kind of payoff amounting to ~1/2 of their salaries we'll deduct £3m from the above.

Leaving us with £32.8m.

Potential sales of Bendtner (£5m was agreed with Eintracht Frankfurt) and Djouoru (who has yielded £1m in loan fees already) should add a conservative £5m to that. We'll no doubt have to pay Chamakh off for his final year so I think £1.8m is fair to deduct as we won't release him and pay him his full years salary.

Thus we have £36m yielded from the above. Add this to our £70m calculation from earlier and you can see that AdamD wasn't far off the mark. £106m potentially available.

Did I use football manager for that? Nope. I got a calculator, did some rudimentary research and came up with a figure thats quite plausible, possibly even conservative.

There's no 'honest debate' there, just reasoned figures. You came in here sniping, attempted to qualify it by pulling figures out of your arse and then throwing a straw man at the end of it. Grow up tbh.

Sources;
Transfer Prices: www.transfermarkt.com
Wages: http://arsenaltruth.squarespace.com/arsenal-truth/2012/11/4/arsenals-1434m-wage-bill-exposed.html
Emirates Deal: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/nov/23/arsenal-emirates-airline-sponsorship-deal
Puma Deal: http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/news/premier-league-arsenal-sign-biggest-kit-contract-britain-074924949.html
Emirates Revenues: http://swissramble.blogspot.ie/

TheGunns · 23-07-2013 01:36PM

The budget figure being used for transfers includes the cost of their wages over their contract I'm pretty sure. So 40m+10m or more in wages is actually quite a lot of money to go on one transfer

Fuzzy_Dunlop · 23-07-2013 01:39PM

tayto lover wrote: »

Maybe people see Spurs as having ambition and Arsenal as saving money.
Wonder where they'd get that idea from :rolleyes:

Do United lack ambition? Because they've done just as much as we have.

Gringo180 · 23-07-2013 01:42PM

Started up a Fantasy Football League for us Gooners, so if ye want to join the code is 371924-96395

http://fantasy.premierleague.com/

Gringo180 · 23-07-2013 01:44PM

Fuzzy_Dunlop wrote: »

Do United lack ambition? Because they've done just as much as we have.

If you look at the bigger picture ie the signings they have made over the past few years compared to us then you would know they don't lack any ambition. Just lets hope we can get some quality in rather than quantity so we can push for a well deserved trophy next season!!

Bounty Hunter · 23-07-2013 01:46PM

I think its poor to cast aside peoples opinions as football manager like but this war chest will most likely have to go towards wages too, its odd to see wages saved on outgoing players players being added into available funds otherwise as surely the 100k a week players you wont to sign will want to be payed.

It would be interesting to see if Arsenal have any more Bernard (assuming Arsene wasn't telling the truth and it is happening) like signings. Wenger likes to keep em quiet but that is still a big outlay for a player they would hope can make an impact on the first team. He wasn't rumoured really then the story broke and compared to other stories could get settled quickly without shananigans like Madrid seem to have pulled. Get in a more Defensive signing like Bernard and then a player of the ilk of Suarez or Higuain while keeping together your squad for once and bringing through more talent and Arsenal are doing well in my opinion. No matter who Arsenal sign it will still be hard next year as all the top 5 teams could be even better.

Nuri Sahin · 23-07-2013 01:47PM

jester77 wrote: »

You could say the opposite about the Bayern game the following week. Bayern only lost 3 games all season and we cut them open.

I've heard the Bayern game referenced by a number of Gooner mates I know as some sort of measuring mark.

Bayern were cut open because of their poor mindset going into that 2nd leg. They clearly thought they could play play in first gear and play out the 90 mins doing that. Credit to Arsenal, they took advantage in that one game.

Fuzzy_Dunlop · 23-07-2013 01:48PM

Gringo180 wrote: »

If you look at the bigger picture ie the signings they have made over the past few years compared to us then you would know they don't lack any ambition. Just lets hope we can get some quality in rather than quantity so we can push for a well deserved trophy next season!!

Well what I'm getting it is I don't understand why people are ****ting their pants cos Spurs signed a player or two during this window. Most teams apart from the usual (City, Chelsea) haven't done much in terms of quality signings we are/should be looking at.

cson · 23-07-2013 01:55PM

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

I think its poor to cast aside peoples opinions as football manager like but this war chest will most likely have to go towards wages too, its odd to see wages saved on outgoing players players being added into available funds otherwise as surely the 100k a week players you wont to sign will want to be payed.

When I say transfer funds I'd include wages in that.

Gringo180 · 23-07-2013 01:56PM

Fuzzy_Dunlop wrote: »

Well what I'm getting it is I don't understand why people are ****ting their pants cos Spurs signed a player or two during this window. Most teams apart from the usual (City, Chelsea) haven't done much in terms of quality signings we are/should be looking at.

I think its more concern than anything, that our closest rivals seem to be strengthening each year and holding onto there best players while we have seemed to be doing the opposite. I think its the history of our transfer dealings or lack of, that has fans ****ting their pants and people are only now starting to show there frustrations as they have simply ran out of patience. Lets hope we can get somebody in in the next week or so and you will see the mood lift in here for the better.

.jacksparrow. · 23-07-2013 02:07PM

Gringo180 wrote: »

I think its more concern than anything, that our closest rivals seem to be strengthening each year and holding onto there best players while we have seemed to be doing the opposite. I think its the history of our transfer dealings or lack of, that has fans ****ting their pants and people are only now starting to show there frustrations as they have simply ran out of patience. Lets hope we can get somebody in in the next week or so and you will see the mood lift in here for the better.

City Chelsea united don't need to strengthen as much as us, that's why they finished ahead of us and why we need to strengthen.

Pepe LeFrits · 23-07-2013 02:16PM

cson wrote: »

Have a Google for yourself about Arsenal Transfer Funds and you'll see the £70m figure is widely bandied about. Its been acknowledged by the club that a significant amount of funds are ringfenced in an account for transfers. Naturally they won't put a figure on it as, well, that'd be just plain stupid putting figures in the public domain as to what you have to spend.

On a commercial level; the new shirt deal with Emirates will generate £30m per year, an increase of £20m per year. The new kit deal with Puma is also £30m per year which is an increase of £22m. So straight off the bat there's £42m extra revenue per year. Throw in various other commercial deals plus the fact we have huge matchday income and you can easily see where a £70m budget comes from. That goes without taking into account the massive profits from transfers over the past few years which undoubtedly are in reserves somewhere.

Estimated Per Week Wages
Mannone 20k = £1m
Squillaci 50k = £2.6m
Djourou 50k = £2.6m
Santos 50k = £2.6m
Coquelin 20k = £1m
Denilson 50k = £2.6m
Arshavin 70k = £3.6m
Gervinho 50k = £2.6m
Chamakh 50k = £2.6m
Bendtner 50k = £2.6m
Park 40k = £2m

Total is £25.8m

Fees from that amount to;

Gervinho £8m (Roma)
Mannone £2m (Sunderland)

Total = £10m

Assuming Denilson and Santos required some kind of payoff amounting to ~1/2 of their salaries we'll deduct £3m from the above.

Leaving us with £32.8m.

Potential sales of Bendtner (£5m was agreed with Eintracht Frankfurt) and Djouoru (who has yielded £1m in loan fees already) should add a conservative £5m to that. We'll no doubt have to pay Chamakh off for his final year so I think £1.8m is fair to deduct as we won't release him and pay him his full years salary.

Thus we have £36m yielded from the above. Add this to our £70m calculation from earlier and you can see that AdamD wasn't far off the mark. £106m potentially available.

Did I use football manager for that? Nope. I got a calculator, did some rudimentary research and came up with a figure thats quite plausible, possibly even conservative.

There's no 'honest debate' there, just reasoned figures. You came in here sniping, attempted to qualify it by pulling figures out of your arse and then throwing a straw man at the end of it. Grow up tbh.

Sources;
Transfer Prices: www.transfermarkt.com
Wages: http://arsenaltruth.squarespace.com/arsenal-truth/2012/11/4/arsenals-1434m-wage-bill-exposed.html
Emirates Deal: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/nov/23/arsenal-emirates-airline-sponsorship-deal
Puma Deal: http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/news/premier-league-arsenal-sign-biggest-kit-contract-britain-074924949.html
Emirates Revenues: http://swissramble.blogspot.ie/

The Puma deal doesn't kick in until next year, but you've left out the rather massive increase from the new PL TV deal, that is available now.

Minor thing but our old Emirates deal is commonly said to be £6.8m a year, so it's more like a £23m a year increase there.

One other thing is that not I'm not sure how player sales are accounted for, but I expect they're probably written down against the remainder of the player's remaining contract, as they're a one off item and would give a false sense of your potential spending power if accounted for all at once.

Finally I don't think there's a great deal of relevance regarding how much the club has ring fenced away. It's good that we've got a large cash surplus as it means we don't need to borrow to buy and can also pay up front if we like, but it's not our cash balance that dictates how much we can spend, it's how much we earn. You could have £10bn in the bank but unless you have a huge income, you can't spend it or you'll come unstuck with FFP.

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

I think its poor to cast aside peoples opinions as football manager like but this war chest will most likely have to go towards wages too, its odd to see wages saved on outgoing players players being added into available funds otherwise as surely the 100k a week players you wont to sign will want to be payed.

It's not odd really. Wages and transfer fees all come out of the same pot.

Gringo180 · 23-07-2013 02:22PM

.jacksparrow. wrote: »

City Chelsea united don't need to strengthen as much as us, that's why they finished ahead of us and why we need to strengthen.

Yeah that's what I am saying all along mate.

.jacksparrow. · 23-07-2013 02:32PM

Gringo180 wrote: »

Yeah that's what I am saying all along mate.

Sorry that was in response to the post you were also responding too!

tayto lover · 23-07-2013 02:43PM

Fuzzy_Dunlop wrote: »

Do United lack ambition? Because they've done just as much as we have.

FFS United finished 19 (NINETEEN) points ahead of us last season AFTER buying our best player. Nuff said :rolleyes:

Marty McFly · 23-07-2013 02:50PM

tayto lover wrote: »

FFS United finished 19 (NINETEEN) points ahead of us last season AFTER buying our best player. Nuff said :rolleyes:

Not really Ferguson is gone and he was a master at getting the best from some average players he's gone now. Be interesting to see what Moyes does with that squad as he is clearly struggling to get players in at the moment.

The man formerly known as AFCcamden just tweeted Suarez11 the cryptic bastard :pac:.

Fuzzy_Dunlop · 23-07-2013 02:55PM

tayto lover wrote: »

FFS United finished 19 (NINETEEN) points ahead of us last season AFTER buying our best player. Nuff said :rolleyes:

Jesus enough of the roll eyes crap already. Despite that, United ARE in need of some signings with the new manager and even they haven't managed to get anyone in yet.

And then you keep going on about spurs who yes have made a couple of decent signings but still face the real possibility of losing their best player.

Marty McFly · 23-07-2013 02:57PM

Shiit maybe we can start believing just a little bit?

DC ‏@DLDN22 3m Reason for my excitement is I've just had it from a top source that Suarez is "9/10 joining Arsenal" #afc

Arsenal Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2013/14

Comments