Gillett and Hicks (ownership saga)

[Catch22]

Wenger's been in this country 11 years. Is it any surprise he's spent more than Benitez?

 

Over the same period.

[SpeedyG]

You are a really odd bloke aren't you?

 

Let's address each of your little snidey posts:

Shit the debate hasn't even started yet and already you are getting personal!

1. Who cares about the atmosphere being counter productive? What's more important - the owners out or a 11 grown men getting nervous?

 

Those of us who want to win the title!

 

2. Manager meets, fans requests protests against owners to stop - manager is getting into politics - no?

That's how you choose to spin it. I spun it differently. Que sera sera.

 

3. Everyone knows the whole meeting details, it was posted on here.

 

Linkage? The guy just said he doesn't know the meeting details!

 

Look mate, I don't think anybody cares if Rafa meets SoS - SoS's biggest success was the Rafa march so he should be thanking them if anything, but getting involved in what SoS can and can't do with regard the owners is not in his pay packet.

 

Asking them to concentrate on supporting the team doesn't seem that big a deal to me.

[ToxtethTerror]

Wenger's been in this country 11 years. Is it any surprise he's spent more than Benitez?

 

His 4 years versus Rafa's 4 when looking at Tranfer fees in and out is still probably better mate. He has an amazing record of player purchasing verses selling on. . stands back and watches catch22 come back with that old wages chestnut.

[Ted]

Over the same period.

 

Do you mean net?

[ScottyT]

Who cares how much any manager spends, it's all about success, and over the last 5 seasons Benitez beats Wenger hands down.

 

Wenger = most overrated manager of all time.

[TommyW]

THE POINT WAS HE WAS VETOED a year after winning the treble - Or does that not your argument?

 

apologies for stepping in late, if I've missed the answer im sorry but on what basis was Fergie vetoed? was it because he would be going over the budget the manc board had set or because the board didnt think VDS was worth it?

[SpeedyG]

His 4 years versus Rafa's 4 when looking at Tranfer fees in and out is still probably better mate. He has an amazing record of player purchasing verses selling on. . stands back and watches catch22 come back with that old wages chestnut.

 

And in that time his got 2nd, 4th,4th,3rd and probably out of the top 4 this year!

[Ted]

And in that time his got 2nd, 4th,4th,3rd and probably out of the top 4 this year!

 

5th 3rd 3rd 4th. Hardly any better is it?

[Catch22]

Bizarre - how much did each spend on transfer fees (in and out) last summer? Or over the past 4 years?

 

This is what i posted earlier.

 

Please feel free to point out where you think there are errors.

 

It isn't exact but is, i think, a fair comparison.

 

"To compare wages & transfers you have to switch to the same methodology as 1 is always quoted as a lump-sum payment whilst the other is given annually.

Yet from your budgetary perspective they are identical.

When a player signs you are liable for all his contract as you can't let him go for bad play. So £5m pa for 5 years is still a commitment for £25m

Equally although transfers are expressed as a lump sum they are actually usually paid in installments over the life of the contract.

So if you sign a player for £15m & give him a 5-year deal you pay the seller £3m pa.

 

The results are the same if you express wages as a 1-off payment or transfers annually.

 

As transfers are paid annually a lot more than wages are paid in 1 go, i'll go for the annual approach although it is doesn't matter.

 

Using the last 2 years for which data is available:

BBC NEWS | Business | Premiership wages 'to top £1bn'

BBC NEWS | Business | 'Record' Premier League wage bill

 

Which gives 2006-7 (2005-6)

Arsenal - £89.7m (£82.9m)

Liverpool - £77.6m (£68.9m)

 

Arse spend about £13m pa more than us

Or £65m more than us.

 

1st assumption:I am going to extrapolate the wages figures which may be unfair either way

(Arse's next bill has already been published & is over £100m so i don't think I am being unreasonable)

 

The next part is a little trickier without going thru every deal but we have to place each transfer across the contract length of the player

For example if Torres cost £21m then our annual transfer bill is £4.2m for him for the next 5 years.

 

To get this exactly right we would have to go thru each deal, know its eaxct value & the exact transfer length

This is possible but would be a proper accounting case-study.

 

We can now be a little clever as all we are doing is comparing 2 clubs & not looking for the absolute right answer.

To do so requires another assumption (that the average contract length is 5years- this is pretty close to reality anyway)

 

Arse have spent about £20m net

Lfc have spent about £95m net

 

That gap is £75m.

But that gets allocated over 5 summers 04,05,06,07,08

So £15m more per summer in fees for us.

(This is another & probably most heroic assumption but our transfers seem fairly spread out this way.

In fact the biggest spend is in 2008 which means that this method is a bit unfair to us)

 

But we are assuming 5 year contract so

2004's dealings are fully an extra £15m

2005 are an extra £12m (with £3m to come in the 2009-10 seasomn)

2006' is an extra £9m (with £3m in 2009-10 & £3m in 2010-11)

2007 is an extra £6m (ditto & £3m in 2011-12)

2008 ia an extra £3m (ditto & £3m in 2012-13)

 

Therefore at the end of 2008-09 we will have spent £45m more on transfers (with another £30m earmarked but equally Arse have future higher wages earmarked as well)

They will have spent an extra £65m more on wages (with another £13m pa or close to earmared on outstanding contrcats but equally we have higher future transfer paymenst to make)

 

We have spent less (£20m) & have less committed in the future (our transfer gap is less than £13m pa)

 

We do have a lower footballing budget which is no surprise when Danny Fiszman, the self-made diamond-dealing millionaire is compared to DM, the idiot who inherited a company."

[Ted]

Just give us the gist of it. I'm not fucking reading all that.

[SpeedyG]

5th 3rd 3rd 4th. Hardly any better is it?

 

No it's worse, but the point I was making is that taking your team consistently backwards is hardly making a strong case for your transfer strategy.

[Catch22]

His 4 years versus Rafa's 4 when looking at Tranfer fees in and out is still probably better mate. He has an amazing record of player purchasing verses selling on. . stands back and watches catch22 come back with that old wages chestnut.

 

 

Is Degen a good deal for us?

Was Kewell a good deal for us?

 

Kewell cost £4m in fees & over £20m in wages.

 

You can choose to spend your budget on a combination of wages & fees.

 

What is important to compare is overall budget.

(All clubs now spend more their budget on wages than fees)

[Ted]

No it's worse, but the point I was making is that taking your team consistently backwards is hardly making a strong case for your transfer strategy.

 

What does our league record say about Rafa's transfer record?

[SpeedyG]

Just give us the gist of it. I'm not fucking reading all that.

 

They spend less on transfer fees but more on wages so the gap between us is less than you would think.

[SpeedyG]

What does our league record say about Rafa's transfer record?

 

I wasn't talking about Benitez's transfer record.

[Ted]

They spend less on transfer fees but more on wages so the gap between us is less than you would think.

 

So the gap between us is less than people think and yet Arsenal are, apparently, going backwards?

[Catch22]

Just give us the gist of it. I'm not fucking reading all that.

 

 

Arsenal's total footballing budget is higher than ours.

 

They choose to spend a lot more on wages (Do you think all those "kids" in the reserve team left their home-town clubs to move to London for the weather?) than us.

 

Sometimes they have done very well from that (ie/ Fabregas) but it comes at a cost of the most expensive reserve team in the country by miles.

 

Overall they spend more.

[SpeedyG]

So the gap between us is less than people think and yet Arsenal are, apparently, going backwards?

 

The gap in terms of capital invested!

[Ted]

I wasn't talking about Benitez's transfer record.

 

So what the fuck is everyone talking about?

[Catch22]

They spend less on transfer fees but more on wages so the gap between us is less than you would think.

 

 

It is not so much how big the gap is but the direction.

 

Arsenal spend more than us.

[SpeedyG]

So what the fuck is everyone talking about?

 

You would have to ask everyone else what they're talking about. I've already told you what I was talking about.

[Ted]

Arsenal's total footballing budget is higher than ours.

 

They choose to spend a lot more on wages (Do you think all those "kids" in the reserve team left their home-town clubs to move to London for the weather?) than us.

 

Sometimes they have done very well from that (ie/ Fabregas) but it comes at a cost of the most expensive reserve team in the country by miles.

 

Overall they spend more.

 

Do you think all those kids clogging up our reserves come here for the weather?

[Malarkey]

Mbokani.

[odris]

Mbokani.

 

De de dere de Mbokani de de dere de Mbokani de de dere dere dere de de dere dere dere.

[Catch22]

Do you think all those kids clogging up our reserves come here for the weather?

 

 

No but they don't actually cost very much.

 

Possibly because you think they are crap!

 

Arsenal do spend more than us though....