The Great Squad Cost Thread

[redanddread]

Manchester City top Soccerex Football Finance 100 ahead of Arsenal, PSG

The Soccerex Football Finance 100, which ranks the world's top teams based on both their playing and fixed assets, money in the bank, owner potential investment and debt, was published on Wednesday.

City, who have dropped just four points in the league this season, lead the way ahead of Arsenal with English clubs dominating the top 10. Tottenham are fifth on the list ahead of seventh-placed Manchester United, with Chelsea in ninth.

According to the study, Arsenal have £766 million worth of fixed assets -- following their move from Highbury to the Emirates Stadium -- more than any other club in world football, while only Manchester United have more money in the bank (£307m) than Arsenal's £300m.

The north London club also have the lowest net debt (£8m) of any other team from England, with Chelsea's £800m recorded as the largest of clubs in the top 100.



http://www.espn.com/soccer/english-...rex-football-finance-100-ahead-of-arsenal-psg

 

[Makingtrax]

Manchester City top Soccerex Football Finance 100 ahead of Arsenal, PSG

The Soccerex Football Finance 100, which ranks the world's top teams based on both their playing and fixed assets, money in the bank, owner potential investment and debt, was published on Wednesday.

City, who have dropped just four points in the league this season, lead the way ahead of Arsenal with English clubs dominating the top 10. Tottenham are fifth on the list ahead of seventh-placed Manchester United, with Chelsea in ninth.

According to the study, Arsenal have £766 million worth of fixed assets -- following their move from Highbury to the Emirates Stadium -- more than any other club in world football, while only Manchester United have more money in the bank (£307m) than Arsenal's £300m.

The north London club also have the lowest net debt (£8m) of any other team from England, with Chelsea's £800m recorded as the largest of clubs in the top 100.



http://www.espn.com/soccer/english-...rex-football-finance-100-ahead-of-arsenal-psg

No doubt the Emirates is a massive asset situated in London. But you can't buy players with it.

And while we've been struggling to pay off our debt, there is no sign that Chelsea, or rather their holding company Fordstam, has needed to make any move on theirs. Abramovic may eventually just write it off, of course.

 

[redanddread]

No doubt the Emirates is a massive asset situated in London. But you can't buy players with it.

And while we've been struggling to pay off our debt, there is no sign that Chelsea, or rather their holding company Fordstam, has needed to make any move on theirs. Abramovic may eventually just write it off, of course.

We also have GBP 300M in the bank....and the article go on to say that we do have the financial might to compete but do we have the appetite to compete at that level.

After I posted this article here, I posted it in the 'Are Arsenal the worst run club" thread which I thought might be more appropriate.

 

[redanddread]

 

[Mark Tobias]

https://arsenal-mania.com/forum/threads/2016-17-vs-2017-18.30424/

Well this is awkward...

 

[James Bond]

Source: Deloitte, revenues for 2016-17 season.

•1. Manchester United: €676.3m

•2. Real Madrid: €674.6m

•3. Barcelona: €648.3m

•4. Bayern Munich; €587.8m

•5. Manchester City: €527.7m

•6. Arsenal: €487.6m

•7. Paris Saint Germain: €486.2m

•8. Chelsea: €428m

•9. Liverpool: €424.2m

•10. Juventus: €405.7m

Manchester United have topped the table of the world's 20 richest football clubs for the second year in a row, and tenth time overall, says Deloitte.

Its Football Money League, based on season 2016-17, also shows the combined revenues of the 20 clubs has risen 6% to €7.9bn (£6.97bn), a new record.

Real Madrid, which held top spot for 11 years, were second and Barcelona third.

There were a record ten English Premier League clubs in the top 20. The number in the top 30 was up from 12 to 14.

The list only looks at revenues accrued and does not take into account club debts.

This year's battle for first place was the closest ever, with just €1.7m separating Manchester United and Real Madrid.

Manchester United's €676m revenues were boosted by €44.5m from Uefa after winning the Europa League against Ajax.

Deloitte said this sum was "the critical factor in keeping them ahead of Real Madrid and Barcelona".

Bayern Munich and Manchester City completed the top five, retaining their positions from last year.

Arsenal, Paris St-Germain, Chelsea, Liverpool and Juventus occupied places six to ten. Tottenham were in 11th spot, Leicester City 14th, West Ham 17th, Southampton 18th and Everton 20th.

All the 20 clubs represented are from the "big five" European leagues, with Italy, Germany and Spain contributing three clubs each and France one.

Other findings include:

• AC Milan fall out of the top 20 for the first time and AS Roma for only the third time
• Southampton is the only debutant in the top 20 after broadcast revenues soared
• AFC Bournemouth is the only debutant amongst clubs ranked 21 to 30
• China and the USA may see a member club enter the list in future

"Next year, we expect the eight billion euros [revenue] barrier will be broken, but revenue growth is not expected to be as significant as seen in 2016-17," said Dan Jones, partner in Deloitte's Sport Business Group.

"Germany's new domestic broadcast deal commences and will increase revenue, but Premier League and La Liga distributions will remain relatively stable, as both enter the second year of existing TV deals.

"Looking further ahead, the long term composition of the Money League is an intriguing topic. English clubs' dominance will depend heavily on the outcome of the Premier League's ongoing tender for the next three year TV deal starting from 2019-20."

Deloitte says that participation and performance in Uefa competitions has always been a critical success factor in the Money League, "but its impact on clubs' revenue is more noticeable than ever".

The Champions League and Europa League played an important role in improving, or retaining, positions for Manchester United, Leicester City, Napoli and Southampton,

Meanwhile FC Zenit St Petersburg and AS Roma lost their top 20 status after weakened European performances compared with 2015-16.

A return to the Europa League also buoyed Southampton's revenue.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-42767374

Fitting Deloitte released their annual list the day we lose our best player to a domestic rival due to lack of ambition, again.

Couple this with the recent report that Arsenal fans spend more than any other supporters in world football for their match day experience and you can see that the board/owner/Wenger all work together to get top pay, not for delivering on field success at a level which the other names/clubs on the list above would be judged on (League and CL), but for selling their forever lowering bar of "success" as they play the broke card as they milk everyone dry.

6th highest revenue in world football but we look likely to finish 6th in our domestic league, yet people believe we can't compete and Wenger is doing the best he can

 

[KROENKE SUCKS]

I believe we can compete but our owner is highly risk averse and won't spend as much relative to our wealth as our rivals, hence Sp**s and Liverpool being closer to us than they should be and Chelsea, PSG, Man City, etc being further ahead of us than they should be. This is compounded by an inexperienced CEO in Gazidis handling transfer negotiations. Gazidis has for the longest time employed a sell low buy low policy which is contrary to how the rest of the footballing world operates and contrary to how Dein used to operate. He only got away with it because of Wenger's ability to get us 4th, but as we are seeing that is no longer guaranteed because of increased competition. What you expect Wenger to do in these circumstances I don't know? But he's got us Mislintat/Sanllehi and he's removed or is going to remove Gaz from transfer negotiations and we are already seeing the benefits.

Mkhitaryan in from a manager who wouldnt sell us the flu. Good prices for Ox and Walcott. Mavropanos in without a fuss. All of this is because we have changed our transfer negotiation policies. Players are now interested in coming to this club because they don't see us as a joke anymore. Mkhitaryan found out about the Sanchez deal and got himself thrown in. PEA wants to come. Malcom wants to come. Hell soon Lemar is going to change his tune.

A lot of Gazidis paid hacks in here *****ing about not selling Sanchez for 60M in the summer once Lemar turned us down. Im sure old bald head had quite a few sleepless nights over that one. How was he going to deliver a nice looking financial report to Kroenke if we didn't just accept whatever **** arsed deal we could get because he was too cheap to extend Sanchez a season ago when he should have? Yet none of the paid hacks on here *****ed about not extending Sanchez earlier which was the real mistake. Or even if they mentioned it the focus was on not cashing out for 60M.

I knew back then that the measly 60M was nothing. Sanchez is at the very least worth 40M to us if he gets us into the CL. And as bad as we have been how much worse would we be if we didn't have him? How many losses has he turned into draws and how many draws has he turned into wins? Would Mourinho be willing to sell us Mkhi if we didn't have Sanchez? F No. Would Malcom be as interested if we were further off the pace and look like some chump selling club?

As it is we are only 3 points behind Sp**s and 5 behind Pool. And Klopp is *****ing that we sold Sanchez because he knows Mkhi is a decent substitute and we got a good deal all things considered.

 

[Mrs Bergkamp]

That's because we've signed some rubbish players and those that were meant to come good,didn't

 

[Mark Tobias]

paid hacks in here *****ing about not selling Sanchez for 60M in the summer once Lemar turned us down. Yet none of the paid hacks on here *****ed about not extending Sanchez earlier which was the real mistake.

Do enlighten us to who these 'paid hacks' are. I'm not disputing the possibility just not sure how you're so certain to draw this conclusion.

 

[GeorgiaGunner]

Do enlighten us to who these 'paid hacks' are. I'm not disputing the possibility just not sure how you're so certain to draw this conclusion.

I get paid £10 per anti-Wenger post I make on here, don't you?

Tons of very wealthy, important people out there want to make sure that a moderately-trafficked Arsenal fan forum is (artificially) negative -- you really ought to hop on the gravy train as well!

 

[KROENKE SUCKS]

I get paid £10 per anti-Wenger post I make on here, don't you?

Tons of very wealthy, important people out there want to make sure that a moderately-trafficked Arsenal fan forum is (artificially) negative -- you really ought to hop on the gravy train as well!

It doesn't take tonnes just one...

 

[krengon]

 

[GeorgiaGunner]

It doesn't take tonnes just one...

I get cheques from the Glazers, Mansours, and Abramoviches.

 

[Mark Tobias]

It doesn't take tonnes just one...

LOL at this. What a waste of money that would be. There are plenty of actual supporters spewing anti-Wenger posts all over ALL the Arsenal forums. No need to pay anybody. Half the fan base does it for free.

 

[CJJ]

CIES valuations are bullshit.

They also say Hector Bellerin is worth £70m and Dele Alli is valued at £110m.. just as examples.

 

[Makingtrax]

CIES valuations are bullshit.

They also say Hector Bellerin is worth £70m and Dele Alli is valued at £110m.. just as examples.

Most squad valuations are just guesses. Transfermarkt valuations are crowd sourced.

Still prefer squad cost as a reflection of squad talent, better than wages or valuations. But nothing's perfect.

 

[bingobob]

Most squad valuations are just guesses. Transfermarkt valuations are crowd sourced.

Still prefer squad cost as a reflection of squad talent, better than wages or valuations. But nothing's perfect.

Your preference makes our recruitment redundant.

 

[Wilshere1010]

I believe we can compete but our owner is highly risk averse and won't spend as much relative to our wealth as our rivals, hence Sp**s and Liverpool being closer to us than they should be and Chelsea, PSG, Man City, etc being further ahead of us than they should be. This is compounded by an inexperienced CEO in Gazidis handling transfer negotiations. Gazidis has for the longest time employed a sell low buy low policy which is contrary to how the rest of the footballing world operates and contrary to how Dein used to operate. He only got away with it because of Wenger's ability to get us 4th, but as we are seeing that is no longer guaranteed because of increased competition. What you expect Wenger to do in these circumstances I don't know? But he's got us Mislintat/Sanllehi and he's removed or is going to remove Gaz from transfer negotiations and we are already seeing the benefits.

Mkhitaryan in from a manager who wouldnt sell us the flu. Good prices for Ox and Walcott. Mavropanos in without a fuss. All of this is because we have changed our transfer negotiation policies. Players are now interested in coming to this club because they don't see us as a joke anymore. Mkhitaryan found out about the Sanchez deal and got himself thrown in. PEA wants to come. Malcom wants to come. Hell soon Lemar is going to change his tune.

A lot of Gazidis paid hacks in here *****ing about not selling Sanchez for 60M in the summer once Lemar turned us down. Im sure old bald head had quite a few sleepless nights over that one. How was he going to deliver a nice looking financial report to Kroenke if we didn't just accept whatever **** arsed deal we could get because he was too cheap to extend Sanchez a season ago when he should have? Yet none of the paid hacks on here *****ed about not extending Sanchez earlier which was the real mistake. Or even if they mentioned it the focus was on not cashing out for 60M.

I knew back then that the measly 60M was nothing. Sanchez is at the very least worth 40M to us if he gets us into the CL. And as bad as we have been how much worse would we be if we didn't have him? How many losses has he turned into draws and how many draws has he turned into wins? Would Mourinho be willing to sell us Mkhi if we didn't have Sanchez? F No. Would Malcom be as interested if we were further off the pace and look like some chump selling club?

As it is we are only 3 points behind Sp**s and 5 behind Pool. And Klopp is *****ing that we sold Sanchez because he knows Mkhi is a decent substitute and we got a good deal all things considered.

What are you on about? Everyone and their dog knows we should gave extended Sanchez and Özil's contracts earlier, and many other players too. It's been happening for years, its a well known lroblem at this club. We get **** monry for players worth triple the worth. You aren't the only one to see it. I haven't seen anyone here who supports Kroenke or whatever it is you think, stop with that bulls*** man.

 

[Mark Tobias]

Most squad valuations are just guesses. Transfermarkt valuations are crowd sourced.

Still prefer squad cost as a reflection of squad talent, better than wages or valuations. But nothing's perfect.

While 70M may be extreme for Hector.
Your squad cost theory would have him marked at virtually nothing. Which is even more ridiculous. We're talking here about one of the most promising fullbacks in the world and here you would have us believe that he is worth nothing. Simply because it fits your narrative.

 

[Mark Tobias]

What are you on about? Everyone and their dog knows we should gave extended Sanchez and Özil's contracts earlier, and many other players too. It's been happening for years, its a well known lroblem at this club. We get **** monry for players worth triple the worth. You aren't the only one to see it. I haven't seen anyone here who supports Kroenke or whatever it is you think, stop with that bulls*** man.

Careful, you'll be called a 'paid hack'

Not sure why we're not calling @KROENKE SUCKS a Wenger 'paid hack'. Isn't the possibility equally as plausible given the circumstances.