The problem with this comment is that you have to guess how Stan perceives Arsenal as an investment tool. He seems to be a long-term investor, and Arsenal could simply be a real estate play - paying the stadium debt with operations and allowing the real estate to appreciate over the next decade or two. Also, because interest rates have been so low, he redeemed all of the bonds and “refinanced” the stadium debt with an internal KSE loan at 5.5%, so he is able to place money at Arsenal and pay himself back at above market interest rates over the long term. There is no reason to believe that his purchase of Arsenal had anything to do with on-field performance, and I think if we look at it solely through that lens, we most likely are going to miss the mark. FWIW, according to Forbes, the value of Arsenal increased 23% over the last two years despite the global epidemic and loss of gate revenue.
There are many, many ways to make even more money that don't involve pissing off thousands of fans and don't put you under the scrutiny of someone like Swiss Ramble. If Stan only cared about making money, he could have stuck to shady real estate deals.
100% agree. He obviously cares about sports and teams enough to wanna own them. Or at least buy them as toys for his son. Obviously Stan's personality is completely lacking, at least his public one, and KSE may not be so great at managing their sporting assets but those are other issues.
n=1 In the US sports franchises are both cash generating and have high ROI on value of the franchise. For all the pissing off he's done, the club sells every ticket to every game. So what about Swiss Ramble. He gives fans good info, but nothing he's done has had any effect on how owners operate their clubs. Plus, he's had to do next to nothing. As far as safe investments go, sports franchises are pretty close to the top of the heap.
Pro sports franchises are very expensive but they aren't going to turn into the next Amazon, Bitcoin, Tesla, Spotify or Gamestop. I'm not saying they don't make money, I'm saying there are many better investments that are more liquid, that have more upside, that have safer returns, etc. Sports have been hit by the pandemic and have to deal with unions/strikes and kids that prefer Twitch to watching baseball. My point re Swiss Ramble is pro sports teams are under more scrutiny if they, as you suggested, are trying to do crime and make more money. It's easier to do that in the shadows, look at Trump's business dealings and how more came to light after his presidential run. Pro sports and politics is very "look at me".
Pro sports ownership opens doors though. I don't think Stan gets the land in Inglewood if he's not an NFL owner. As far as safety, it's been more than 40 years since any US big 4 sports team folded. For somebody like Kroenke, sports franchises are specialty real estate companies and he made his money from specialty real estate.
Apparently Ek is doing an interview with Sky which immediately means his plans are dead in the water and he’s being advised by morons
I don't read too much into those Forbes valuations. They have Barca up 18% in that period, when they are on the verge of financial collapse, and Dortmund up 112%. Stan may have little interest in the on-field performance, but it is going to have a big impact on the clubs finances. We were losing money as a Europa League team, and are going to incur even bigger losses with no European football over the next few years. If presented with the option of owning a nice stadium in London, where there are newer and fancier stadiums existing or coming soon, with a team losing 30-50m a year, or cashing out for 2 billion and leaving someone else to sort out the club's finances, I think Stan would strongly consider his options. The revenue difference between finishing 4th and making it to the CL knock out rounds, versus sitting mid-table and out of Europe is £100m (70m CL + 30m PL) a year. That is without taking into account your ability to secure larger sponsorship deals from being a perennial high profile team. The club is not in good shape financially (or on the field), and just passively holding on to the team and expecting the value of your investment to appreciate won't work.
I was thinking of Ek & Arteta as owner & manager. We've just taken a chance with a HC/manager who had no previous experience doing that, and it hasn't exactly gone well. Overall just a grade of meh. Would it be wise to take another big chance on an owner who has no previous experience doing that? Doesn't seem like it. I know many/most of us are now #KroenkeOut, but we should be careful who we might replace them with.
Dangote (assuming his interest was always genuine) likely has the better chance of producing the cash for a reasonable offer. Not sure we know enough to declare either would necessarily be the better owner. Both are fans of the club and that in of itself is a plus over Stan.
I think of it more as "would X be a good owner? why?" Spotify seems like it's a function of being in the right place at the right time. Obviously counter arguments in play, including that something like Spotify brings commercial opportunities. Dangote seems like he's more of a low tech industrialist who's had to get into otherwise crowded markets. That takes real ability, and it suggests that he'd be a value-add owner.
There was something on Reddit about Dangote's company being linked to some shady stuff, including a few murders, but I don't think there is an energy magnate on earth who is not linked to really shady doings. There are no moral billionaires, so I'd focus on what they will do for the club. Ek will need other investors, and they will want to make their money back - but owning a club is not really a money making venture unless you were able to buy it cheap or are as well run as Bayern, or print money, which only United, Real and Barca do (with the latter 2 still unable to turn a profit despite revenues over €700m).
Billionaire energy magnate from Nigeria to boot. This is another good point. One owner vs and owner group could be a huge difference.
What if any experience does he have owning sports teams? And if so, what success has he had at that? If the answer to either or both is "no", I'd say we should be careful.
"If I can help @Arsenal, I will do it as well"Wenger willing to offer his expertise to Thierry Henry, Dennis Bergkamp and Patrick Vieira in their takeover bid!#beINUCL #AFC pic.twitter.com/lLiHD5SYEt— beIN SPORTS (@beINSPORTS_EN) April 27, 2021
Thanks for sharing. It has seemed pretty clear that Wenger is not interested in working for or with the Kroenkes. But perhaps he leaves the door slightly ajar to working with a new owner