• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Daniel Levy - Chairman

Arsenal was/is different

- They fudged up the real estate part (apartments if I remember correctly)
- I suspect they financed at higher rates
- They would have built the stadium on expectations of CL revenue
- Their stadium isn't multi-use
- Their main issues stem from not managing the decline or Wenger and lack of overall strategy

With all of that, they have been able to spend significantly on squad acquisitions and wages

Compare to us

- Levy made money from even the fudging cranes in the project
- Some of the lowest interest rates in history
- Yes, costs went up due to Brexit issues, but we had budgeted against non-CL revenue and without the massive increases of PL money that happened (this was planned 10 years ago)
- The stadium is multi-use and the NFL deal
- We are obviously so comfortable money wise we haven't forced the naming rights
- We haven't even seen a full season of that revenue and we made it top 8 clubs in the world income.

I really wish people would not argue money/revenue for Spurs, Levy may have faults, he may have learnt a lot of football lessons along the way but when it comes to money he has repeatedly proven himself without peers in the game.

The challenge for us will be spending the money the right way, which is why all the talk of the Lille DoF is encouraging


I would add that arsenal gave wenger too much power, at some point they should have reigned him.
It probably suited them at first but it got out of hand.
 
- Yes, costs went up due to Brexit issues, but we had budgeted against non-CL revenue and without the massive increases of PL money that happened (this was planned 10 years ago)
While we had budgeted against non CL revenue, I don't actually think we could've achieved the project without the CL revenues.... Consider the fact that in the four years prior to the stadium opening we spent a grand total of £20 million net.... An average of only £5 million per year. If we consider our wage to income ratio that would probably indicate that we were putting somewhere close to £100 million a year from club finances into the stadium project. We still entered the stadium with a whopping £637 million of debt. Take those CL runs away and we're probably talking about a total of £300+ million of revenue that we would've lost in that period (prize money, TV money, gate receipts, sponsorship money).

Had we not had those CL qualifications then we either would've been having to enter that stadium close to £1 billion in debt (could we really have taken on £1 billion of debt?... I'm not sure we could've, especially if we were not considered a CL level club). Alternatively we would've had to have instead operated at a significant negative net spend to make up that difference.

The stadium may well have been budgeted without CL revenues. If it was - and I suspect it must've been as to do anything other than that would've been very poor financial planning - then I think it adds even more weight to the argument that we went massively over budget with our stadium build.
 
Last edited:
Sorry. I don't see how any of that explains this in relation to my point?

We entered the new stadium £638 million in debt, having pumped in about £100 million a year of club funds for the 4 years prior to the stadium opening (and pumped in various lesser amounts in the years up to then). Had we not overspent on the stadium then we either could've/would've entered the stadium with less debt (giving us more wriggle room to take on more debt if we need to (e.g for a squad overhaul) or we could've entered the stadium with the same debt but having instead spent the difference on buying new players (so that we didn't need a squad overhaul when entering that stadium).
 
Over spends on building projects of that size are common place and highly unlikely to be the fault of the client, which you keep implying is the case.

It's why private/club funded stadium builds of this size are so rare and that negotiating those years surround the build reasonably unscathed is of great credit to everyone involved in the project/running of the club during this period.
 
Last edited:
I would add that arsenal gave wenger too much power, at some point they should have reigned him.
It probably suited them at first but it got out of hand.
I also think they had a really flat wage structure, which meant a lot of bang average players on big money but not quite offering enough to entice the best players available.
 
Over spends on building projects of that size are common place and highly unlikely to be the fault of the client, which you keep implying is the case.

It's why private/club funded stadium builds of this size are so rare and that negotiating those years surround the build reasonably unscathed is of great credit to everyone involved in the project/running of the club during this period.
I think that Arsenal came in pretty much on budget.

Anyway, thank GHod for Pochettino as just imagine if we hadn't lucked out on him and built this stadium without having those 4 years in the Champions League?
 
I think that Arsenal came in pretty much on budget.

Anyway, thank GHod for Pochettino as just imagine if we hadn't lucked out on him and built this stadium without having those 4 years in the Champions League?

And Wembley? Our build is more of a landmark build than the relatively generic off the shelf design of the arsenal stadium.

I don't think appointing a good manager is luck any more than it is just being a well thought out appointment, Pochettino ticked a lot of boxes for the circumstances we would be facing and ultimately a manager is only as good as the support and tools he is provided with.
 
And Wembley? Our build is more of a landmark build than the relatively generic off the shelf design of the arsenal stadium.

I don't think appointing a good manager is luck any more than it is just being a well thought out appointment, Pochettino ticked a lot of boxes for the circumstances we would be facing and ultimately a manager is only as good as the support and tools he is provided with.
Spot on. Long term focus over time with player recruitment, training ground, academy. Then getting the head coach decision right, I'll agree that there's an element of luck involved in that one, they are difficult decisions.

Pochettino was just as lucky with us as we were with him. He was highly rated, but his stock has skyrocketed and he can now seemingly get just about any available job he wants.
 
And Wembley? Our build is more of a landmark build than the relatively generic off the shelf design of the arsenal stadium.

I don't think appointing a good manager is luck any more than it is just being a well thought out appointment, Pochettino ticked a lot of boxes for the circumstances we would be facing and ultimately a manager is only as good as the support and tools he is provided with.
But some managers will be better than others when provided with the same support and tools.

He looked like he'd done good things at Southampton but most of us and Levy surely surprised at the level he reached with us?
 
But some managers will be better than others when provided with the same support and tools.

He looked like he'd done good things at Southampton but most of us and Levy surely surprised at the level he reached with us?

Must admit I was luke warm with poch when we appointed him. Really only saw him as treading water at best.
I wanted lvg or de boer :rolleyes:.
 
Spot on. Long term focus over time with player recruitment, training ground, academy. Then getting the head coach decision right, I'll agree that there's an element of luck involved in that one, they are difficult decisions.

Pochettino was just as lucky with us as we were with him. He was highly rated, but his stock has skyrocketed and he can now seemingly get just about any available job he wants.
He outperformed the market massively, got 4 straight CL finishes with 6th biggest wage bill and not even top 10 for transfer spend, as nobody before him has been able to do.

Without those unexpected top 4 finishes I think the stadium would've needed to be paid for by the sale of a marquee player each year.
 
Pochettino was just as lucky with us as we were with him. He was highly rated, but his stock has skyrocketed and he can now seemingly get just about any available job he wants.

I think that's a pretty patronising take on Poch.

He was a worthy applicant for the job. His stock has skyrocketed because of himself. His backroom team, his methods, his philosophy, the culture he creates, and his tactics and training. Many hours of study, research, dedication and plain hard work got him (and us) to the heights we did. I fail to see any 'luck' in that.

And I'd hazard a guess that if you said it to the man's face, he'd give you a slap:D
 
I think that's a pretty patronising take on Poch.

He was a worthy applicant for the job. His stock has skyrocketed because of himself. His backroom team, his methods, his philosophy, the culture he creates, and his tactics and training. Many hours of study, research, dedication and plain hard work got him (and us) to the heights we did. I fail to see any 'luck' in that.

And I'd hazard a guess that if you said it to the man's face, he'd give you a slap:D
Luckiest thing was having the players here for him to work with

imagine if we had to buy a quality first choice striker under ANY manager right now
 
Sorry. I don't see how any of that explains this in relation to my point?

We entered the new stadium £638 million in debt, having pumped in about £100 million a year of club funds for the 4 years prior to the stadium opening (and pumped in various lesser amounts in the years up to then). Had we not overspent on the stadium then we either could've/would've entered the stadium with less debt (giving us more wriggle room to take on more debt if we need to (e.g for a squad overhaul) or we could've entered the stadium with the same debt but having instead spent the difference on buying new players (so that we didn't need a squad overhaul when entering that stadium).
I don't think we were pumping £100m into the stadium in 15/16/17/18 ....looking at our turnover for those years...pretty impossible.
 
Luckiest thing was having the players here for him to work with

imagine if we had to buy a quality first choice striker under ANY manager right now
The Kane thing is lucky without doubt. Especially as even we didn't think he'd become what he did.

Just Parrot to become similar to double luck out:)
 
Back