Arsenal Thread 2014/15

[adrianr]

State of some fans, Wenger catching a right earful.

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7XKJSd4cpQ[/video]

Worth reposting, even only a few replies later.

 

[ifiwasarichfan]

We need them to buck their ideas up and soon otherwise both United and Liverpool could find themselves in the Champions League next season.

I have given up hope on Everton and Spurs keeping all three of them out.

 

[MCC]

#InArseneWeTrust

 

[Ghandi's Flip Flops]

Our friends at 'untold arsenal' getting there excuses in early about our financial position

<a class="postlink" href="http://untold-arsenal.com/archives/39332" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://untold-arsenal.com/archives/39332</a>

Man C, QPR, Leicester, Man U, Leeds… yes it is FFP season again.

'Manchester City claim to have reduced their annual loss to £23m for 2013-14 largely by increasing their income with Sheikh Mansour of Abu Dhabi investing £160m during 2013-14 – much of it spent on facilities that make it excluded from FFP.

But this has also in part been achieved by the formation of a parent company leaving a group of other related companies looking after different issues, including the identikit clubs in New York, Melbourne and Yokohama. This approach of separate companies all owned by the same shareholders charging each other for services is not unknown in business but it raises eyebrows, especially where the sums are large. Man City for example recently charged £10m to other parts of the group – which bolstered its income and ease FFP concerns.

Now this is ok if the activities are charged at market rates. But if not then these are a neat way around FFP. Man C charges the New York company money for services and NY pays up because it is not worried about FFP. Man C income is up, the loss is down, FFP is bypassed.

Of course I don’t have access to the accounts of all these companies so I make no allegation, I just report a concern that has been expressed to me by interested parties.'

 

[schfc6]

Wenger looked as scared as his back 4 there. He really won't learn from his mistakes.

 

[malg]

Our friends at 'untold arsenal' getting there excuses in early about our financial position

<a class="postlink" href="http://untold-arsenal.com/archives/39332" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://untold-arsenal.com/archives/39332</a>

Man C, QPR, Leicester, Man U, Leeds… yes it is FFP season again.

'Manchester City claim to have reduced their annual loss to £23m for 2013-14 largely by increasing their income with Sheikh Mansour of Abu Dhabi investing £160m during 2013-14 – much of it spent on facilities that make it excluded from FFP.

But this has also in part been achieved by the formation of a parent company leaving a group of other related companies looking after different issues, including the identikit clubs in New York, Melbourne and Yokohama. This approach of separate companies all owned by the same shareholders charging each other for services is not unknown in business but it raises eyebrows, especially where the sums are large. Man City for example recently charged £10m to other parts of the group – which bolstered its income and ease FFP concerns.

Now this is ok if the activities are charged at market rates. But if not then these are a neat way around FFP. Man C charges the New York company money for services and NY pays up because it is not worried about FFP. Man C income is up, the loss is down, FFP is bypassed.

Of course I don’t have access to the accounts of all these companies so I make no allegation, I just report a concern that has been expressed to me by interested parties.'

Yeah, right.

 

[squirtyflower]

Our friends at 'untold arsenal' getting there excuses in early about our financial position

<a class="postlink" href="http://untold-arsenal.com/archives/39332" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://untold-arsenal.com/archives/39332</a>

Man C, QPR, Leicester, Man U, Leeds… yes it is FFP season again.

'Manchester City claim to have reduced their annual loss to £23m for 2013-14 largely by increasing their income with Sheikh Mansour of Abu Dhabi investing £160m during 2013-14 – much of it spent on facilities that make it excluded from FFP.

But this has also in part been achieved by the formation of a parent company leaving a group of other related companies looking after different issues, including the identikit clubs in New York, Melbourne and Yokohama. This approach of separate companies all owned by the same shareholders charging each other for services is not unknown in business but it raises eyebrows, especially where the sums are large. Man City for example recently charged £10m to other parts of the group – which bolstered its income and ease FFP concerns.

Now this is ok if the activities are charged at market rates. But if not then these are a neat way around FFP. Man C charges the New York company money for services and NY pays up because it is not worried about FFP. Man C income is up, the loss is down, FFP is bypassed.

Of course I don’t have access to the accounts of all these companies so I make no allegation, I just report a concern that has been expressed to me by interested parties.'

Yeah, right.

"interested paries"

his internet mate

 

[everythingchangesbutblue]

Our friends at 'untold arsenal' getting there excuses in early about our financial position

<a class="postlink" href="http://untold-arsenal.com/archives/39332" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://untold-arsenal.com/archives/39332</a>

Man C, QPR, Leicester, Man U, Leeds… yes it is FFP season again.

'Manchester City claim to have reduced their annual loss to £23m for 2013-14 largely by increasing their income with Sheikh Mansour of Abu Dhabi investing £160m during 2013-14 – much of it spent on facilities that make it excluded from FFP.

But this has also in part been achieved by the formation of a parent company leaving a group of other related companies looking after different issues, including the identikit clubs in New York, Melbourne and Yokohama. This approach of separate companies all owned by the same shareholders charging each other for services is not unknown in business but it raises eyebrows, especially where the sums are large. Man City for example recently charged £10m to other parts of the group – which bolstered its income and ease FFP concerns.

Now this is ok if the activities are charged at market rates. But if not then these are a neat way around FFP. Man C charges the New York company money for services and NY pays up because it is not worried about FFP. Man C income is up, the loss is down, FFP is bypassed.

Of course I don’t have access to the accounts of all these companies so I make no allegation, I just report a concern that has been expressed to me by interested parties.'

Who's the other interested parties? other no mark goons(ers) worried at losing their slice of the cl pie no doubt.

 

[Manchester_lalala]

What a set off bell ends there fans are. I hope we never boo a club legend no matter how crap they're doing. They also boo nearly all of there ex players when coming agaisnt them.

 

[Blue Haze]

Our friends at 'untold arsenal' getting there excuses in early about our financial position

<a class="postlink" href="http://untold-arsenal.com/archives/39332" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://untold-arsenal.com/archives/39332</a>

Man C, QPR, Leicester, Man U, Leeds… yes it is FFP season again.

'Manchester City claim to have reduced their annual loss to £23m for 2013-14 largely by increasing their income with Sheikh Mansour of Abu Dhabi investing £160m during 2013-14 – much of it spent on facilities that make it excluded from FFP.

But this has also in part been achieved by the formation of a parent company leaving a group of other related companies looking after different issues, including the identikit clubs in New York, Melbourne and Yokohama. This approach of separate companies all owned by the same shareholders charging each other for services is not unknown in business but it raises eyebrows, especially where the sums are large. Man City for example recently charged £10m to other parts of the group – which bolstered its income and ease FFP concerns.

Now this is ok if the activities are charged at market rates. But if not then these are a neat way around FFP. Man C charges the New York company money for services and NY pays up because it is not worried about FFP. Man C income is up, the loss is down, FFP is bypassed.

Of course I don’t have access to the accounts of all these companies so I make no allegation, I just report a concern that has been expressed to me by interested parties.'

Getting exactly what they deserve. Still making excuses for their vampire owner and his puppet Wenger.