more lazy than useless said:
Thanks for that. I understood the idea behind the Arsenal plan - finance the stadium and it will finance the rest - and it was no doubt the right thing for Arsenal to do in the circumstances imo, but I think you might be being a little harsh on your club about the sponsorship deals. They did tie themselves into long up front deals (and almost came unstuck the last couple of seasons by the look of it, having to sell players/players wanting to leave) but I don't think anybody could have foreseen how the value of those deals would go through the roof over the same period. Just unfortunate timing. Definitely other clubs would love to be able to do what Arsenal have done, but not being in the CL is a major reason they cant. Not having the large stadium incomes is part of the reason they can't make CL. Catch 22!
For some reason though I thought Arsenal had paid off all the big debts and now had the big income, so I was surprised at the financial figures. Its probably that I don't keep close tabs on this stuff and as it's spread out over years I loose the time perspective (eg these 'new' figures cover 4 months ago to 16 months ago - new deals kick in soon for next few years).
Was reading this with interest so ill try and embellish a bit on afc16 post regards the finances.
Of course, the headline in the statement is that Arsenal needed player sales to make a profit, but of course in the same period the purchased Podolski, Giroud, Cazorla and Monreal, so they just about broke even on player transfers.
The small profit each year in my opinion is what most clubs should aspire to do, basically spend what you make. It's not sustainable for Arsenal to make big losses, but equally the fans will be upset if there are big profits without player purchases.
In terms of the actual finances, Arsenal still owe over £200M to their new stadium, so they are not debt free. What they do have is a mortgage on it at roughly £20M a year repayment and with the revenue growth that should be easily covered.
Also, the war chest is there, but its not all for player purchases. Some must be kept as a guarantee against things such as the stadium mortgage amongst other things, which is why the figures for the war chest were between £70M and £80M and not the full £150M cash reserve they have.
Now, as for their revenue, look for that to increase between, £80M - £100M each year, as the Emirates deal has been renewed, the rumoured Puma deal kicks in and the new tv deal kicks in, as well as secondary sponsorships coming through quite quickly now. As the club basically breaks even now, this will be where the make up of transfer money comes from.
The wage bill was quite high and very inefficient because of Arsenes failed policy, which is the reason why there was a big summer cull, which should save about £500k a week. Also though, with the expected revenue growth, if they keep the wages to turnover at a conservative 60%, (I believe City's at last count was 87%?), they could afford a wage bill of£190M a year as it stands.
This is the point now where the Arsenal board have been aiming to get to, it's the point they've been telling the fans that they will properly compete, and was the reason why there was so much discontentment before the Ozil signing as they thought they were just getting fed the same line they had been hearing for 6 years. It's now up to Wenger and the board to deliver and the players, if not this year, then in the next year or two for definite. There will be no more restricted finance excuses then, they playing field will have levelled out if not totally then much more significantly.
