here is the premier league net spending since 2003, how can the anti wenger crew explain this?

Premiership net spending
2003-2012

1- chelsea ..............527 million
2- man city .............434 million
3- Liverpool.............157 million
4- Manu..................128 million
5- Aston villa...........106 million
6- Tottenham...........97 million
7- Stoke.................73 million
8- Sunderland..........70 million
9- Qpr.....................50 million
10- West ham............35 million
11- WBA...................29 million
12- Fulham................27 million
13- Norwich...............10 million
14- Everton...............5 million
15- Newcastle...........4 million
16- Swansea..............2 million
17- Wigan.................135 thousand
18- Southampton .......- 7 million ( 7 million in profit)
19- Reading..............- 8 million ( 8 million in profit)
20- Arsenal.............. -23 million ( 23 million in profit)


If you look at this list and you still think wenger is holding us back, then you need help. What wenger is doing is beyond belief.

Add this list which shows we spent less than anyone on our team during the past few years, to the other list i showed few days ago which demonstrated how our rivals revenues is increasing while ours have decreased.

http://www.awimb.com/fudforum/index.php?t=tree&th=524697 &rid=467&S=b183bc4bf49d0289270b961de0665fb0


Can you see us spending more money anytime soon? We starves us to death yet our revenues have gone down, if you refuse to eat in an attempt to lose weight and you still gain weight, most of you would realise it isn’t working ( maybe not the anti wenger crew). Our current business model will not make us competitive in 1 years, 4 year our 10 years time. Forget that nonsense.


We’re doomed, wenger is holding this ship together, we’ve built a house of cards and we’re about to witness the collapse. If your answer is sack wenger then don’t worry even wenger cant pull this off for much longer, this is unsustainable. We can’t invest so little on our team and expect trophies or even champions league.


.source, http://transferleague.co.uk/

.

impressive table.

of course you do know you ahev to factor in wages as well. I am sure that would lift us right up the table.

Randome pretence that I am too cool to be interested in football this team and all this stuff: "The radishes in Indonesia cope with space exploration better than German Bight chaffinches"

It simply suggests we sold well, or sold lots, in order to balance figures within the business model.

A further table of expenditure only (player sigings) would probably not see us in 20th position.

http://www.awimb.com/images/smiley_icons/shrug.gif

and large hit the ceiling at the moment. They have gone up next to nothing (in the grand scheme of the accounts) in the period from 2006 to 2011.

The only way we will be able to compete, as I said on your last thread, is if we realise the potential £35M that we are short of the likes of United/Chelsea on shirt/sponsorship deals. If we could then not tie ourself into an exclusive deal (like the current emirates deal) we would have scope to have a different sponsor on our training kit (which could generate another £5/£10M per year).

We will know a lot more about our club, and it's ambition, in the next 2 years once the current deals are renewed.

we've spent some fairly big amounts on quite a few players. Just been offset by getting bigger amounts in.

it shows how wenge buys cheap, improve players and sell them for high fees.

it demonstrates the reason we made money is linked to wengers talent of creating stars. it shows he gets no help from the club to compete, it also shows, any other manager cannot come in and do his job.

it also shows, it cant be done forever

:theo:

A rather simplistic approach this to just use the net spending of other clubs compared to ours.
Wenger has the 4th largest wage bill in the league,and he has made huge profits on selling top players without replacing them in kind.
Also if he is being short-changed by Stan then why doesn't he say so then?
The fact is that Wenger,Stan,Ivan and Co all back each other up - as Peter Hill Dud said,thank you for taking an interest in Arsenal Football Club. He could easily have added,now f**k off.

Loyal *******s but still *******s in places.

it shows he gets no help from the club to compete - the club/board makes money available to him every summer to spend as he sees fit, it it didn't we would be in deep ****. There is further money to spend than has been done (allegedly). Sometimes the decision not to spend further is down to one man. One example would be in the summer just past where no midfield signings were made on the flip of a coin regarding the fitness of Diaby & Wilshere. Most people were okay with this at the time as Jack is the saviour to lead us to Wembley next May.

it also shows, any other manager cannot come in and do his job - that is your belief, fair enough. It however cannot ever be proven and if anything can only be judged after retrospective analysis of his successor.

in 2005 our commercial income was 34 million. manu had commercial income of 51 million


in 2011 our commercial income was 46 million...manu was at 103 million.


that development is staggering and its similar to other top teams.

by the time you say our shirt deal goes up, so will manu's commercial income and they will pull further ahead

My comment was merely a note on how his star rose during his absence.

I look forward to his red card tomorrow.

no manager would say no to spending money, and you choose to believe the clubs party line despite me demonstrating how our revenues has gone down while our rivals are getting richer from commercial deals.


let me make one thing clear, if not spending has been a policy for years, soon enough as the top teams pull away in income revenues, we will have no choice, as we're swimming in mid table mediocrity and wenger long gone, you can then blame the poor f.cker managing our sh.te squad and claim, he doesnt want to spend money.

I wasn't asking a question I pasted an abbreviated quote from Plastic James post - he asked the question .
Do you normally worry about such trivialities?

And anyway, no-one is arguing that he hasn't done a great job. It's just that it might have been better had he been willing to spend a bit more of the cash in reserve. Might

but not spending money guarantees failure.

ie all winners of the league has spent money while all the spenders haven't won the league.

Wanted to leave and we sold them for big money. Wenger hasn't been forced to buy and sell and turn a profit, it's just happened that way because our relative ****ness or better offers from oil rich clubs has lead to players wanting to leave.

http://www.awimb.com/fudforum/index.php?t=tree&goto=3580 202&rid=4253&S=772b1c3b87f371fcf4911a185d1c577a

because when we sell a player for huge money, we've put in alot of time in him, improved him, and he has become a huge part of the team, as we sell a star, and replace with a cheaper player, we then must spend time on improving him and building a new team.

this is why we cant win the league.

however if we sell star players and replace them with other star players......or even add big players to what we have.

1- we wouldn't be in profit

2- we would have a strong team.

my whole point is this the money making excise puts strains on the team. and no matter how good a job a manager does, its unsustainable, sooner or later you need to buy quality.

The board make money available to him for signings every summer?

Interesting. Having pointed put the difference between net and gross spending you now splodge the two together with a spin statement. The summer before last there is precisely no evidence that the money was available BEFORE cesc and nasri left. The last minute splurge suggests the opposite.

Either way there is a huge difference between a club saying 'here is 30 million to spend' and them saying 'well, you have just raised 50 million from selling your best players, here is half of it to replace them with'

I did hear our gross spend on the same period the other day and it is much, much lower than other clubs arpund us. Lower than newcastle, liverpool, much lower than spurs. Still, net spend is more significant when you are actively selling your best players.

I also like the way you justify the low net spend by referring to our constant selling of players, as though that somehow makes wenger's performance less admirable.

Where we may have an issue is the wage bill. There is clearly a growing feeling that we are not making best use of our huge wage bill.

All we know is that we have raised plenty of it and not spent it all.

Remains to be seen. Some of the frustrations at AW aren't just related to spending though. It's that the team has been making the same mistakes over and over again for the last 5-6 years, even with different personnel. Not that I'd dare tell AW how to do his job, but that's enormously frustrating.

And for some reason decides not to spend it. I still struggle with that.

Not entirely happy with the phrase 'balanced by sale'. Almost makes them sound coincidental when the more likely explanation is that without the sale we wouldnt have spent a penny.

stop selling or best players for 20-40m per season and replacing them with inferior ones resulting in mug fans saying he does a brilliant job.

Continues to be consistently awful . http://www.awimb.com/images/smiley_icons/rubchin.gif

I just refuse to go along with this excuse that he is shackled by the board.

I simply said above that he is given money to spend each summer which was in reply to PJ's comment that he got no help from the club, which itself is a laughable comment.