good read

[El Quixote]

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/d363b054-6548-11e2-8b03-00144feab4 9a.html#axzz2J5KwQPuE (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/d363b054-6548-11e2-8b03-00144feab49a.html#axzz2J5KwQPuE)

[Classic Jorge]

Which is precisely why we've been able to get the interest locked down so well.

Bit ****ty from Kuper in an otherwise decent article

[Alexism - Atheoist]

Billy Goat Mates :vsign:

[plastic james]

we have 150 million in the bank and have repaid 150 million.

and we have about 100 million left on our stadium debt.

thats 300 million that could have gone to transfers in the last 7 years. instead we've made about 45 million in transfers.

during the same time city and chelsea have spent about 500 million in transfers....united who are abused by their owners and liverpool have spent about 150 million pounds.

this means we would have the potential to spend more if we didn't have to save all this money...and united would be able to spend more if it wasnt for their gangster owners.

thats why during these times of stadium repaying era, we needed an owner to invest some of his own money on the team to keep us competitive....as he would get back that money in the future as the club would be worth more. that is not happening.

this is why those who blame wenger for our spending are deluded, this is a club policy.

the danger is a weak team means less income from commercials which is why since 2006 we've lost huge amount of ground to real, barca, bayern and united in commercial income...and unless we modify our aggressive repayment policy it will have drastic consequences on our ability to attract sponsors, players and we'll lose the only thing that keeps us going...CL football.

this is why wenger is doing a good job...he operates in a difficult financial environment

[Ashberto]

Do you actually mean invest (as in - will get back with interest) or do you mean, as most football fans do, give for free and never get back?

[plastic james]

thats 150 million....

the worth of a debt free arsenal fc that has won throphies, has a competetive team and has huge commercial deals as a result would increase.

our club is worth about 800 million according to forbes....the potential is there to make it worth 1.2 billion and more.....which means the owner who invests money during the spell of stadium repayment..can get back his money....its all about ambition and what you want as an owner

[Ashberto]

Usmanov wants dividends. I assume you know that. I presume he would treat what you call 'investment' as a loan rather than a gift. I don't believe he is a vanity owner, like Mansour and RA.

[JohnnyPuma]

From Arsenal's financial results:

Financing
Cash 153.6
Debt (252.5)
Net Debt (98.9)

[plastic james]

but two things makes me prefer him as an owner.

1- looking at stans teams in america, who has for over a decade been bang average...he doesnt give a monkeys ...if they win or not...as far as he goes..they are stable source of income for him

2- usmanov have a history of injecting his own money in sport for the sake of status. he invested money in the international fencing federation so he could be chairman and get respect.

i cannot imagine him owning a team like arsenal and watch it drop in quality...he would compete witharbramovic and the likes of real, barca and even moratti of inter and berlusconi of milan.....this man who buys a jet for 250 million has to much of pride to watch his team fade away when he can be the most famous owner in the world and get respect in every corner of the world....considering how popular our team is in asia and africa.

stan is not made like that....and couldnt care less.....unless our fans revolt and chase him away

[Ashberto]

to UEFA if Chelsea, City, PSG etc are allowed to use loopholes. If that fails we might end up taking Dr Evil's dodgy coin.