• 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

ENIC

Superhudd said:
Do you 100% know they are not paying him a penny.

I will suggest that UEFA will ask the New York club for details.. should they refrain then FFP will make them up... and probably over what if they were honest. Its exactly what they did with sponsorships.. I would imagine if they challenge then UEFA simply say you cannot take part in the Champions League. There is nothing in law which states that City have a GHod damn right to be in that competition. All competition's have rules in which everyone agrees upon.. there is no comeback IMO from a legal standpoint.
Click to expand...

UEFA are in no position to ask another federations club anything
 
Jordinho said:
Deary me, what a load of crap.

Unless you have some insight into what Levy, Poch and Baldini have talked about and agreed upon, I'd say this is mostly about your unrealistic expectations.
Click to expand...

I've tried to explain, over and over again, that historical evidence shows that clearly there is a huge disconnect between what the manager agrees to upon signing and what he tends to get/ ask for once he's settled in. Across the Stambouli thread, the transfer threads, and the Liverpool OMT. If you still wish to baselessly, blissfully believe that this sort of thing is what Poch asked for, then by all means please do so. But don't expect me to believe it- I am done believing that our chairman and our managers are on to the same level when it comes to club policies about a whole range of things. From Jol being undermined by Comolli to Ramos being brusquely given players he didn't want as replacements for Keane and Berbatov, to AVB sitting pretty at the end of two transfer windows without an overwhelming number of the players he asked for after his best one had been sold....and now to this miraculous transfer window for Poch, there is a great deal of evidence to back the Daily Mail's early description of us when Poch took over as 'the most divided, political club in the Premier League', or words to that effect. If you wish to believe otherwise, by all means go on defending Daniel Levy.

I however am done rounding on our managers for failing when they are never given the tools to succeed by the man highest up the chain. If Poch stumbles, it will not be his fault. That honour lies with Danny boy. Will that prevent Poch being sacked if we struggle,though? Absolutely not. And I repeat, that is a dysfunctional, counter-productive way to run this club.
 
Jordinho said:
Deary me, what a load of crap.

Unless you have some insight into what Levy, Poch and Baldini have talked about and agreed upon, I'd say this is mostly about your unrealistic expectations.
Click to expand...

I've tried to explain, over and over again, that historical evidence shows that clearly there is a huge disconnect between what the manager agrees to upon signing and what he tends to get/ ask for once he's settled in. Across the Stambouli thread, the transfer threads, and the Liverpool OMT. If you still wish to baselessly, blissfully believe that this sort of thing is what Poch asked for, then by all means please do so. But don't expect me to believe it- I am done believing that our chairman and our managers are on to the same level when it comes to club policies about a whole range of things. From Jol being undermined by Comolli to Ramos being brusquely given players he didn't want as replacements for Keane and Berbatov, to AVB sitting pretty at the end of two transfer windows without an overwhelming number of the players he asked for after his best one had been sold....and now to this miraculous transfer window for Poch, there is a great deal of evidence to back the Daily Mail's early description of us when Poch took over as 'the most divided, political club in the Premier League', or words to that effect. If you wish to believe otherwise, by all means go on defending Daniel Levy.

I however am done rounding on our managers for failing when they are never given the tools to succeed by the man highest up the chain. If Poch stumbles, it will not be his fault. That honour lies with Danny boy. Will that prevent Poch being sacked if we struggle,though? Absolutely not. And I repeat, that is a dysfunctional, counter-productive way to run this club.
 
Rorschach said:
We have money and plenty of it but have chosen not to funnel it into player transfers. It's as simple as that as far as I can see and although I commend Levy's stewardship of the club for the most part he must realise that once in a while he needs to roll the dice, take a risk and give the manager, and indeed the fans, something to give them hope. I think if one of our main transfers had come off (coupled with a better result yesterday) would have improved the mood around here. Sandro leaving is just added to the gloom. Anyway I hope we look back at the signings of Stromboli and Fazio as good players rather than good deals.
Click to expand...

We're hardly running up massive profits each year. We run pretty close to break even, sometimes just in loss, sometimes just in profit but never far off break even.
 
milo said:
We live within our means, I don't know why this has come as such a big surprise to anyone. All we have seen this weekend is that some players that we wanted were difficult to get, one because of third party ownership issues and the other because his club wanted more money than we valued the player at. There is a big jump to get from there to assuming that Poch wanted us to get those players at any price. I think that it is just as likely that Poch recognises that we have finite resources for transfers and wages and agreed to us moving on to alternative targets. I think that what is key is that the two players that we failed to sign, we brought in alternatives, so the gaps that Poch identified have been filled.
Click to expand...

I agree, but there is a recurring theme of late which people must admit seems to happen more recently. I to be honest cannot believe that Muschino geezer at Villareal was quoted at 22m. He didn't play in the world cup but the player that did, signed for Swansea for 8m. I didn't understand the valuations personally on that one. Attainable IMO was the Spanish left back that went to Liverpool though but we ended up with Davies. (I don't know whether he was better or not) but I do know I would have liked an upgrade on Rose and not a sideways step.
 
Last edited:
Wow you lot are easily pleased. Another window royally (f)mucked up but hey who cares when your chairman is happy to have a bucket of water chucked on him. In a suit. Wooooo, what a guy.
 
Rorschach said:
We have money and plenty of it but have chosen not to funnel it into player transfers. It's as simple as that as far as I can see and although I commend Levy's stewardship of the club for the most part he must realise that once in a while he needs to roll the dice, take a risk and give the manager, and indeed the fans, something. I think if one of our main transfers had come off (coupled with a better result yesterday) would have improved the mood around here. Sandro leaving has just added to the gloom. Anyway I hope we look back at the signings of Strombouli and Fazio as good players rather than good deals.
Click to expand...

Please tell us where you are seeing this, because it's not in the accounts.
 
JerusalemMan said:
What guff you spout. A sad case of oral flatulence.
I've read more complimentary and realistic things from Arsenal fans
Click to expand...

Eh. I've heard worse, put in far more erudite and thought-provoking ways, so no skin off my nose. Doesn't change the facts, and I hope you think about the situation and consider what they portend.
 
milo said:
We're hardly running up massive profits each year. We run pretty close to break even, sometimes just in loss, sometimes just in profit but never far off break even.
Click to expand...

Well according to Gutter boy over in transfer rumours we are 11 mil up this window so after the stat I see earlier that makes 32 million in profit on transfers over last 5 seasons
 
djp82 said:
Well according to Gutter boy over in transfer rumours we are 11 mil up this window so after the stat I see earlier that makes 32 million in profit on transfers over last 5 seasons
Click to expand...

let's not forget the massive increase in TV revenue either

something tells me levy didn't give all the players a bonus
 
djp82 said:
Well according to Gutter boy over in transfer rumours we are 11 mil up this window so after the stat I see earlier that makes 32 million in profit on transfers over last 5 seasons
Click to expand...

First of all, those numbers need to be taken with a massive pinch of salt.

Secondly, you can't just use them and say we've made a profit without taking into account everything else we spend money on, like agents, wages, stadium upkeep, training ground etc.
 
milo said:
We're hardly running up massive profits each year. We run pretty close to break even, sometimes just in loss, sometimes just in profit but never far off break even.
Click to expand...

No we are not, but that I think the excess was and is being sucked up the land grab around WHL and the ongoing works. Our player trading is almost self sustaining. The extra TV money alone this year could have funded the transfer of any of our targets with room. I'm sure we'll have to borrow less for the new stadium but running a profit on our player trading is just an replica of the Arsenal model from a couple of seasons back.

The transfer targets were sensible and balanced the squad but we have not bought a game changer and I think there is room within our resources to make one of these every now and then.
 
Last edited:
screen nayim said:
Wow you lot are easily pleased. Another window royally (f)mucked up but hey who cares when your chairman is happy to have a bucket of water chucked on him. In a suit. Wooooo, what a guy.
Click to expand...

What's to moan about. We're still the balance sheet trophy holders.
 
galeforce said:
let's not forget the massive increase in TV revenue either

something tells me levy didn't give all the players a bonus
Click to expand...

£40m tv revenue + £10m transfer profit = another £50m towards the stadium.

As we've been doing this for 6-7 years now, we mustn't be too far off being able to pay for it upfront with minimal loans.

3 years time and maybe we'll be able to buy our Ozils and Sanchezs
 
I'd love to go through the accounts to see where the money is going. Wages.. fees.. or just be honest and the stadium already.. transparency is needed. But I feel certain things are hidden or made vague because like I bang on about with the Glazers.. they are milking the clubs profits to make there own interests greater, whilst other areas suffer... after all Levy did stress that the transfers wouldn't suffer. I think its been mentioned tonight -21m over the last 5 years on transfers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back