Frank Lee
An interesting story reached me yesterday. An interview with a Ukrainian agent, who represents Sergey Rebrov, and also knows Andrey Arshavin. It’s in Russian, but if you open the link in google chrome you can get an English translation of sorts. However, it was sent to me by a Russian source who confirmed that Sandor Varga matter of factly stated that the Arsenal manager was on a deal that awarded him 20% of any club profit figure, presumably on top of his wages.
Google translates it as follows – “As for the roll-back schemes, then it works, a Natural, not everywhere. For example, the same Arsene Wenger is not interested in these options. He, first, crystal decent man. And, secondly, it is a point in the contract, which spelled out that he was supposed to at the end of the year 20 percent of the profits of the club. Taking kickbacks to his advantage.”
At first, I was uncertain whether the wording on the translation was suggesting that Wenger did or did not take the 20% bonus mentioned, but I asked my source to translate it himself and he came back with the following. Firstly the final sentence is better translated as ‘Taking roll-backs is not gainfully for him’. Rollbacks are kickbacks, such as those familiar to the bankers of Harry Redknapp’s dog or George Graham circa 1992. So the agent is actually saying that Arsene Wenger is an honourable man – because he ultimately takes a percentage of profits (usually resulting from transfer activity) in a perfectly legal and honourable manner. A respectful way to earn money, because a kickback would dent club profit figures. Remember this is from an agent in Ukraine, so interpretations of what is honourable are all a matter or perspective.
And of course, it may not be true, and I would certainly welcome an official denial from the club. However, if it were, it would explain a couple of things.
Firstly, why Arsene Wenger is reluctant to use all of the money available to him for spending to improve the squad. If there is a profit posted (pre-tax profit was £36.6 million in 2011/12) then it would be in his personal financial interest. It should be remembered that the club actually made an operating loss for the 2011/12 year before transfer activity was factored in – specifically the sales of Fabregas, Nasri and Clichy.
Secondly, Arsenal report a total in their accounts of ‘other operating costs’ which is normally around the £50 million mark. In an Arsenal Supporters Trust q&a event with Ken Friar in 2008, when he was acting managing director after the departure of Keith Edelman, Mr Friar was asked to break down this total for the assembled audience. He said he did not have the exact figures but would relay them to the Trust in the days after the meeting. The sound of tumbleweed was all that followed.
The amount does cover items like the stadium running costs, team travel and accommodation, and quite possibly a multitude of other sins. It could certainly mask any bonus payments of the type Vaga states can be contractually paid to Arsène Wenger.
To my mind, the club should be doing everything it can to maximize the opportunities of success. I have no issue with them making profit or even bonus payments to the manager if they are genuinely competing. But in recent seasons the gap between the club and the league champions has been getting wider. So the idea that there is a benefit to the manager for not spending in the transfer market is not one that I welcome at this time.
Who knows the accuracy of the agent’s information. But with Arsenal so far off the pace and the estimated financial resources to recruit someone of the quality of, say, Falcao, the matter would certainly benefit from official clarification and a vigorous denial of a suggestion that is out there in the public arena. Is Arsène Wenger entitled to a 20% cut of club profits? And if so, is he taking it?
Over to you Arsenal.
(Ed's note - Did a little research on this agent and it appears he used to represent Oleg Luzhny as well - which may or may not give any credence to his statement)
