Why sit on the floor when you have a sofa?

Time for our owners to dip into their pockets



Why sit on the floor when you have a sofa?

Stan: Invest in your investment!


As I sat down with a cup of tea to reduce the gloom that Monday mornings bring, Sky Sports News announced that Chelsea had signed a player who Arsenal had been targeting all summer. In a deal reportedly worth £4m more than we were prepared to pay, Arsenal lost a player who, alongside David Silva, is the finest Spanish talent outside the grasps of Barcelona and Real Madrid.

The girlfriend wanted to know why Arsenal hadn't signed a player they had wanted. I briefly explained the self sustaining model handicapping the club at present and realised that I was no longer excusing it. The club is effectively owned by two billionaires whose money we do not use because we, as a club, have not generated it.

"That's like you sitting on the floor because you didn't buy the sofa."

I like the self sustaining model and the principles at its core. The way The Arsenal has been run is fit and proper and one that, as Arsene says, we should feel proud of. And I am. I just think I'd be prouder of something silver and I'm starting to tire of sitting on the floor when there's a sofa staring me in the face.

I didn't want Stan involved in the club and I certainly wish I'd never heard of Usmanov, but he is and I have. The two are already associated with the club. How much more tarnished would we be by either of them dipping into their deep pockets and coming out with Juan Mata?

In an ideal world the fantastic Fanshare format would see us owning Arsenal Football Club, aided by UEFA strictly enforcing their financial fair play rule. But with Manchester City creating their own naming rights for their stadium at a fantasy figure of £400m, the rule has been p*ssed on before it's even been put in place.

The club have worked tirelessly by moving stadiums to put us in a place where a self sustaining Arsenal can financially compare with Manchester United to ensure we can compete with them on the pitch. Massive credit is due to them for doing things the right way. But billionaires have taken a fancy to football and doing things the right way is completely washed over. We've got two of these billionaires ourselves, only ours can't spend that which gives them the label.

Going back to Juan Mata, Arsenal didn't even have to break the self sustaining ethos to secure his signature. The difference in signing him and sitting here without was £4m. Arsenal make £3m from every home game. In ninety minutes the difference would have been all but made up without even mentioning the Cesc money sitting on top of the unused pile already in place.

Matching the wages Chelsea offered Mata might have seen our few remaining star players demand the same. There lies the problem which our model struggles to sustain, especially in competing with City, Chelsea and United each time a top player becomes available. Or, in the case of Samir Nasri, once your own top players realise they can earn twice as much elsewhere.

So as well as failing to attract the top players we'll also struggle to hold on to our own. A vicious cycle sets. Arsene finds a relatively unknown player and turns him into a star. With a year left on his contract that star knows he can go to City or Chelsea and double his pay. The wage structure has cost us Cole, Adebayor, Flamini and Clichy. Now Nasri has joined the cash queue and Van Persie must have started to think about how many zeros he can add to his salary come the 2012-2013 season.

If we continue to rely and comply with the self sustaining model whilst others stick two fingers up at it, how are we meant to build a team that will challenge?

We might have to wait for the stadium to be fully paid off. Maybe Arsene became so obsessed by having to make do whilst we were moving home that he doesn't realise the shackles are looser.

That and he's tight.

But it's not all his fault. Football and the weak spine of those who run the game have made it impossible to do things in the right way. The Arsenal way. So how do we go 'Forward'?

There has to come a breaking point which forces a change in approach, and it's not going to come UEFA.

It might have to come from Arsenal.

I don't want the billionaires’ money and characters like Usmanov are not Arsenal. But neither is staring at mediocrity.

How much longer are Arsenal prepared to sit on the floor looking up?

*Follow me on Twitter@TheArsenal_


NEW! Subscribe to our weekly Gooner Fanzine newsletter for all the latest news, views, and videos from the intelligent voice of Arsenal supporters since 1987.

Please note that we will not share your email address with any 3rd parties.


Article Rating

Leave a comment

Sign-in with your Online Gooner forum login to add your comment. If you do not have a login register here.

20
comments

  1. truthhurts

    Aug 25, 2011, 14:30 #11832

    A financial analyst in the city couldnt have done a better job!!! The problem is that AW is an angel playing game of poker with devils. you either join them or join them, because you can not simply beat them. Wenger is an idealist not a realist. Unfortunately there is no more utopia in a football world govern by the likes of seb Blatter, Jack warner and their ilks. With mangers and owners like SAF, Mancini, the oil sheikhs of Etihad and russian oligarchs like Abrahmovich, AFC just simply can not afford the status quo ante. we must speculate to generate. Arsene pls prove to us that you still knows!!!

  2. Ron

    Aug 25, 2011, 9:37 #11794

    The budiness model adopted by the Club is really no different to how Arsenal have always been ran. Its just that now with the Arabs and Abramovitch etc the whole football climate has chaNged. 'Football warming' if you like. A much as it means we shall now lose players and not sign big money players etc and as much as we are less competitive vis the title ad CL at least, it is the way that any business with finite resources has to be ran. Its almost an admission akin to a bloke having erectile problems, but the truth is that Arsenal arent a major player anymore in the way that many fans want them to be. A combination of arab and oligarch cash plus the great expectations that Arsenes management has generated over 15 years has sadly now become the heavy sticks that people beat both him and the Club with, particularly him. Yes, i know he makes some odd decsions and that we all gripe at him at times but its easy to do a Leeds and then where would his detractors be? The problem is finding a sort of middle ground beteen cash madness and frugality and Arsenal and Wenger seem to err to much on the saide of frugality for the sake of it in my view.

  3. GoonerGoal!

    Aug 24, 2011, 14:06 #11770

    Wenger and the board decided to sit down to play poker with the Big Boys. They entered the game with much less money than the BB’s, armed only with principles, skill, youthful exuberance, and the belief that strict adherence to the "rules" would somehow level the playing field and see them ok. They gambled and lost. The Big Boys ate them alive. They are now devouring our young, and what a supply of them we have for the BB’s to dine on in the coming seasons! If Arsenal FC wants to protect our young and get back in the game, the immediate appointment of David Dein as Director of Football is an absolute necessity. He could immediately begin assisting the manager in the identification and purchase of players, and the re-negotiation of existing contracts. If that isn’t enough, and Kroenke will not put up to protect the future of Arsenal, then he must make way for Usmanov and his billions. Either we put our principles away and do whatever we must to once again become one of the Big Boys, or we must accept our natural position is one of sitting outside peering through the windows at the party going on inside, and battling for scraps with Liverpool, Everton, Spurs and the others.

  4. Joe Mardon

    Aug 24, 2011, 13:13 #11766

    Dan - I don't believe I accused Usmanov of not being willing to provide funds, more that the club set up restricts him from doing so. This also answers your "I think you obviously know very little about the set up and happenings at Arsenal". I don't claim to.

  5. ctc

    Aug 24, 2011, 13:06 #11765

    Stop blaming ffp or the board. Neither of them have given us Almunia, Eboue, diaby, vela, denilson, bendtner.....

  6. fozzy's mate

    Aug 24, 2011, 12:38 #11757

    Unlike you I see nothing wrong with billionaires dipping in for a change rather than taking out. However the complaint of the vast majority of fans is that the club do not utilise the resources at its disposal, ie the self generated funds available for transfers. Unlike most I think selling both cesc and nasri is wrong only because we will not use the funds. Kronke and usmanov are rich enough already.

  7. Ramgun

    Aug 24, 2011, 12:22 #11752

    True enough, but not the whole story. Wenger's blunt refusal to countenance the idea that he could ever be wrong has seen us suffer hundreds of appearances in our first team from Diaby, Denilson, Eboue, Almunia and others. They and others all cost transfer fees and wages to the tune of tens of millions, maybe upwards of £100 million. Ferguson's mistakes (Taibi, Kleberson, Djemba-Djemba etc) are soon got rid of. Sensible purchases over the last six years rather than the massive ego trip by Arsene would have seen us win trophies and, almost certainly, the Premier League in 2008. Remember that we could have signed Friedel in 2005 for virtually nothing. Instead we have had SEVEN YEARS of the spanish waiter. It is true that some clubs have unnatural advantages but sensible recruitment would have kept the trophies coming and we would not now be in this mess. I am very nervous about tonight. Playing teams that I have never heard of at 5.30 on a Thursday should not be on the agenda for a club with our support and ticket prices. By the way, I can't remember Arsene ever complaining about the financially doped Monaco when he was on the receiving end of the largesse whilst he was making his name as a coach!

  8. Gman

    Aug 24, 2011, 10:21 #11742

    If we don’t win tonight it’s not the end but it’ll be the beginning of the end for Wenger unless your favourite billionaire comes to the rescue with David Dein in toe, and buys out silent Stan - if not we will really be in ‘merde noire’

  9. Steviej

    Aug 24, 2011, 10:05 #11740

    Interesting article and follow up comment from the City fan. As a long term Chelsea fan you know where I'm coming from. Arsenal and Man U had a cosy duopoly until Roman came along. The Champions League is the core of the problem - designed to make Barcelona, Man U and others of the self titled european elite (and previously Arsenal) richer and to exclude others. So when Chelsea and now Man C come along the clubs they displace suddenly decide it's unfair. Unfortunately it's not fair and without these billionaires we would have year after year after year of Man U dominance with everyone else falling further behind. As for the EUFA financial fair play rules these are another attempt by Barca and Man U to exclude others, after all if you don't have success and turnover then you will be excluded from competing. Look at the latest sponsorship deal announced by Man U - the Premier League and UEFA are a joke and until you have europe wide rules on spending (not linked to turnover!) the gulf between the haves and have nots will keep on growing to make these competitions grossly unfair and obscenely one sided

  10. GaryFootscrayAustralia

    Aug 24, 2011, 9:49 #11737

    The Arsenal's wage structure being lower than other clubs is nothing new. The '89 and '91 title teams were on appreciably less money than Liverpool, United or Spurs players of the time. Kennedy, Brady, Stapleton all left for more money decades ago. O'Leary could have joined that list but stayed loyal to the idea of club before fortune. There's been plenty more during the intervening years before Nasri and Cesc; I don't need to list them, you all know who they are. Years after leaving the club, George Graham spoke of the way the Hill - Wood family led board treated him and his players, with a patronising pat on the head saying "isn't George great, winning all these trophies without spending any of our money". The Arsenal have been doing it on the cheap for ages. This doesn't explain the current manager's whatever - it - is million a year salary and the 6.5% price increase for customers - whoops, sorry I mean "Arsenal supporters" - to watch a lower standard of football than the year before. Meanwhile, the national workforce face higher unemployment,lower wages and the effect of austerity measures created and delivered by those who can actually afford to live by them...but that's contemporary capitalist economics for you - heartless, soulless and completely bonkers.

  11. Dan

    Aug 24, 2011, 9:47 #11735

    I think you obviously know very little about the set up and happenings at Arsenal. Why would or should Usmanov give any money to a club that has actively spurned his cash advances in the past, hired private investigators to spread rumours of a shady past (Panorama confirms this 23/10/2009) In my opinion having Usmanov on the board would be a good thing, as the panorama programme showed, he is in fact an arsenal fan and has been for many years, and he has a history of long term businesses not a get rich quick philosophy.

  12. Gee

    Aug 24, 2011, 9:40 #11733

    The major obstacle in our path in this self sustaining model is that of the commercial deals we have for the kit. Both Fly Emirates and Nike pay us a paltry figure in the region of £10m a year between them. These run until 2014 and we can not renew until then. Compare that with Liverpools combined revenue of £40m for adidas/standard chartered combo and you can see that we are missing out on £30m a season until then. Once this kicks in we can add another £30m per year to the accounts and up the wage structure significantly. This brings me onto the next point - the current wage structure. AW has always had a policy of the gap between bottom earner and top earner being relatively low. This is how you get Bendtner, Eboue, Diaby, Denilson on the wages of £40k-£60k per week. I now think they are starting to revise this. With the loans of Denilson and Vela with the sales of JET this has reduced the wage bill significantly. The new additions of Jenkinson, Chamberlain and even Gervinho earn nowhere near what players under the old structure would earn for these types of signings. We are at least addressing the wage structure and not having unknowns sign lucrative £25k a week deals, this raises up the cap at the top end. So instead of saying "Sorry Robin £80k is the limit", we can now offer the £120k (or whatever) a week he's after. In summary until 2014 we are hamstrung in terms of additional revenue we can earn, but it does appear we are looking at cost cutting exercises around wages which is something at least. I still feel we'll need more patience until 2014 to see a monster signing we all crave(?) but we are still in a good position.

  13. Gunner6288

    Aug 24, 2011, 9:40 #11732

    Usmanov declared years ago that he would write a 100 million pound cheque and hand it over, no strings attached if a) the board would take it (they wouldn't) and b) if Arsene would invest it in the team (he wouldn't)

  14. Arsene is a Fraudster

    Aug 24, 2011, 9:32 #11731

    PaulB we cannot argue with that my friend, I am sure that is exactly what you feel and best of luck to you fella. To be fair, our lot has taken it to the extreme, thinking that this bogus ffp that UEFA have come up with will be in place in a few months and therefore the club will become the richest in the land which is total nonsense. This is just an excuse I feel for the club to spend less and less. We have never needed to spend £500m the last few years to have won trophies / leagues etc. Everyone saw that but now we have to spend more then ever because of the lack of activity these last few season from the club has meant we have gone backwards big time. What a joke we have become.

  15. Ted Hughes

    Aug 24, 2011, 9:26 #11729

    City were after Nasri before Arsenal. Sturat Pearce tried to sign him. A player of his quality was never going to go to a club with no money who weren't playing in the Champion's League though. The very idea is ridiculous. So he went to big, rich, Champion's Lg Arsenal.

  16. sparksy

    Aug 24, 2011, 9:24 #11727

    I don't see how UEFAs financial fair play rules can work. The top clubs will find ways around the rules, such as Man City have done. In simple terms they are not going to ban any of the top clubs. I mean, UEFA are not going to kick a Real Madrid or Man Utd out of their top competition and as such de-value it and then lose the income they generate. To do so will result in these top clubs breaking away and forming their own competition to earn even more cash. UEFAS rules are all lip service.

  17. Blue Dave

    Aug 24, 2011, 9:23 #11726

    We're paying Mata 55k a week. I'm sure the Gooners could've managed that. Sick and tired of the mancs, would be all right if Wenger got his act together.

  18. james

    Aug 24, 2011, 8:30 #11717

    one problem these days my friend as you said in more ways than one loyalty it has died the players seem to see us as and international academy for turning average players into world class ones little do these players seem to realize if 5 or 6 of them stick around instead of get greedy they could actually win something at this club makes me bloody angry tbh there is nothing wrong with wenger and his coaching or scouting why do you think mega rich clubs knock on arsenals door first because we develop the best technical players around something other clubs cannot do themselves only buy

  19. Paul B

    Aug 24, 2011, 8:24 #11716

    I enjoyed reading your thoughtful and thought provoking piece. It is obvious that you are passionate about your club and care deeply about the fate of the game. I commend you on this. My only comment is regarding the way other clubs with aspirations and new found wealth (yes, I'm talking of City) are dismissed. For years Arsenal have enjoyed the added revenue of champions league and with it too the prestige. This has made it much easier to attract the better players around the world. Arsenal built a squad to be envied. In the same period City languished in other divisions or struggled to stay in the premiership. People complain that City are buying their way to the top. I ask you, is there any other way in the modern game? United's imagined home-grown youth team image does not stand up to scrutiny. They have spent heavily over the years. Chelsea have too, of course. Arsenal have probably spent their money most wisely but still have had the extra money from Europe to invest. To have aspirations to make history involves investment in the necessary talent. There is no other option. With no disrespect to the Wigans and Norwichs, it is unlikely that we will see them dominating Europe soon. Furthermore, City cannot be held to blame entirely for selling teams and agents trying to squeeze every last penny from them. So, to wrap up, I wish too that the league was more fair in terms of the haves and have-nots but that is not today's reality. I do wish Arsenal every success as I like to watch them play but as a life-long City fan (40+ years), I cannot say I am sorry we have some clout now. It's wonderful to see my team playing the type of football we could only dream about a handful of years ago.

  20. ForceMajeure

    Aug 24, 2011, 8:16 #11714

    Those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.