View Full Version : Debt hangs heavy over Arsenal's gilded palace
BridgeMonkee
20 Jan 2006, 07:17 AM
http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,1563,1690703,00.html
For a club with such strong Gallic connections it is perhaps ironic that Arsenal's hubris may have taken on Napoleonic proportions. After all, like the French emperor's, their conquest has been undone by a Russian.
yossarian
20 Jan 2006, 07:44 AM
......and there you have it folks.......BridgeMonkee makes his much heralded return to the Arsenal boards.
:p
Catfish
20 Jan 2006, 07:46 AM
......and there you have it folks.......BridgeMonkee makes his much heralded return to the Arsenal boards.
:p
I thought his member name was "TrollMonkee"....my bad.
Arsenal_pwns_all
20 Jan 2006, 07:56 AM
Don't forget to send him some "welcome back" reps.:)
The Grimster
20 Jan 2006, 08:07 AM
http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,1563,1690703,00.html
For a club with such strong Gallic connections it is perhaps ironic that Arsenal's hubris may have taken on Napoleonic proportions. After all, like the French emperor's, their conquest has been undone by a Russian.When Chelski move to Earls Court you'll need to change your username!
Bluto11
20 Jan 2006, 08:18 AM
welcome back :rolleyes:
BridgeMonkee
20 Jan 2006, 08:35 AM
For arsenal punters: I didn’t write the article y’know and if you have any problems with the content of the article may I suggest you contact the Guardian directly.
GU Sport deputy editor, Barry Glendenning, on 020 7713 4478 or
barry.glendenning@guardian.co.uk (http://us.f309.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=barry.glendenning@guardian.co.uk&YY=91893&order=down&sort=date&pos=0&view=a&head=b).
Send your neg reps to Barry eh?
thank you all for your kind words, I really liked the "troll monkee" one that was a real side splitter :rolleyes:
Anyways, what do you guys think about the article and its content?
Chelsea to Earls Court?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/c/chelsea/4630618.stm
BridgeMonkee
20 Jan 2006, 08:51 AM
......and there you have it folks.......BridgeMonkee makes his much heralded return to the Arsenal boards.
:p
Its great to be back in the Arsenal forum and be able to discuss the real issues facing the modern game of football with people who have a real understanding for the game and who are always capable of good skilful debate and who make such insightful comments
surfcam
20 Jan 2006, 09:05 AM
Its great to be back in the Arsenal forum and be able to discuss the real issues facing the modern game of football with people who have a real understanding for the game and who are always capable of good skilful debate and who make such insightful comments
Well, if this wasn't the 1,425th thread started by either a Chav, Manc or Spud about an issue that is wrongly reported in each article, we would be more than happy to discuss. :rolleyes: As it is, it is yet another attempt to incite a uproar by the posters to this forum. All you are going to get is more of the same as those posts above.
yossarian
20 Jan 2006, 09:06 AM
Its great to be back in the Arsenal forum and be able to discuss the real issues facing the modern game of football with people who have a real understanding for the game and who are always capable of good skilful debate and who make such insightful comments
I know.......which is why I welcomed you.
michaec
20 Jan 2006, 09:08 AM
Anyways, what do you guys think about the article and its content? Actually, I think the mention of Arsenal's hubris having taken on "Napoleonic" proportions and mentions of huge debt mountains are there to shroud the facts, which are actually there in the article.
Looking at it (I'm approximating the figures here), it says that capital repayments went down from £40m in 2004 to £19m last year. Net debt is up by £12m, profit down by £4m and turnover down by £18m. Taking all that into account there's a net downside of £13m. With match income projected to rise by £32m next year, that's a £19m net increase going forward.
Sounds like the board of directors have got their sums right if you go on these figures.
KevTheGooner
20 Jan 2006, 09:22 AM
There was a similar article in the Scotsman in December. The club's board is very very conservative. I have faith the board has looked at the increased revenue from the gate, which will allow us to bring in better players, win more silverware (esp. champions league), which will bring in more revenue, etc. etc.
Without a Russian knight to ride in and launder money in our club, this seems like the right way to go. Not without risk and sweaty palms (I'm glad I didn't have to sign the loan papers!!) but within reason...
Lanesra
20 Jan 2006, 10:20 AM
Oh, you are a card....too funny....
btw - I know you have learning difficulties but try reading…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/c/chelsea/4630618.stm Oh, there's no doubt about it Bridgebaboon, you can buy what you want..except a history of course.
Miles Brasher
20 Jan 2006, 10:28 AM
Anyways, what do you guys think about the article and its content?
About as much as Chelsea fans think of articles about Roman being thrown into jail and having his fortune taken back to Russia.
The concern would be if we did not qualify for the CL on more than one occasion, but that would be the same concern if we'd stayed at Highbury. We wouldn't have the debt, but the base income would be lower. The reality from the figures is that from day 1 in the new stadium, we are better off than at the old one...
Cannon
20 Jan 2006, 10:55 AM
Actually, I think the mention of Arsenal's hubris having taken on "Napoleonic" proportions and mentions of huge debt mountains are there to shroud the facts, which are actually there in the article.
Looking at it (I'm approximating the figures here), it says that capital repayments went down from £40m in 2004 to £19m last year. Net debt is up by £12m, profit down by £4m and turnover down by £18m. Taking all that into account there's a net downside of £13m. With match income projected to rise by £32m next year, that's a £19m net increase going forward.
Sounds like the board of directors have got their sums right if you go on these figures.Exactly. When you add the impact of refinancing the debt to lower rates over a longer period and the picture gets even better for Arsenal. Whoever wrote that piece is either a fool who doesn't get the math or BridgeMonkee's cousin. Probably both. :D
BridgeMonkee
20 Jan 2006, 10:59 AM
Whoever wrote that piece is either a fool who doesn't get the math or BridgeMonkee's cousin. Probably both.
Whoever wrote the piece? Who did write it I wonder. Oh, look, there it is at the beginning of the article . . .mystery solved :)
BridgeMonkee
20 Jan 2006, 11:01 AM
ah bless, you are editing my posts already? how pathetic...
Bluto11
20 Jan 2006, 11:03 AM
ah bless, you are editing my posts already? how pathetic...
cause that never happens at the Chelsea forum :rolleyes:
michaec
20 Jan 2006, 11:05 AM
@BridgeMonkee, care to comment on some of the serious answers to your question or was it really just a troll and I've been wasting my time?
BridgeMonkee
20 Jan 2006, 11:07 AM
@BridgeMonkee, care to comment on some of the serious answers to your question or was it really just a troll and I've been wasting my time?
It really is pointless when my posts are edited. Sorry, but a truthful debate cannot exist under such circumstances.