Mikel Arteta, First-Team Manager

[Zenith]

[Arsenal Tone]

Explains a lot LOL

[Phil71]

It's great that he has Wenger to turn to for advice. No doubt he also talks to Pep, David Moyes and many other people in the game.

All managers that he has worked with who have bags of experience for him to draw on.

Of course he has to make his own decisions at the end f the day, but having the benefit of advice from such people is not to be dismissed lightly.

[Angelito]

Vast difference between Unai and Arteta here.

Apparently, Unai didn't call Wenger when he first joined. I'm not sure if they ever talked unless they bumped into each other.

[Salibatelli]

Explains a lot LOL

Yup lol

[Salibatelli]

Your grasp on investment is weird

Kroenke invested a billion (1.029m) in buying Arsenal ... in what world is that NO MONEY? Any investor would expect a return on their investment that would come via dividends and increased share value ... so what would be a reasonable dividend return?

How about 5%? that's about what the Glaziers take every year out of Utd - that would be 50m a year does he take that? NO so your argument that he's "making money off the back of our failure" is simply wrong, the value of the club that he owns dropped 125m last year so in fact he's losing a fortune right now ...

The reality is under Kroenke's ownership the club have spent net 300m on new players only City and Utd have spent more in that time ... that's 300m Kroenke could have kept in the bank as cash, as the owner that's his cash ... it's not "the fans" money it's his, fans pay to see his team at his stadium same as paying for any other goods and service.

Agreed his an absentee owner, but so are half the owners in football, having Kroenke sitting in the Director's box is not going to make anyone at the club any better, even if it does show 'fanboy' credentials.

The bottom line is that Kroenke is not a great fan, that's a shame but so what, the real problem is that he allowed his employees (Gazidis, Wenger, and now Edu) far to much power and then didn't react fast enough when they fecked everything up ... that's his failing it's not the money, we've spent fortunes on players and on wages, we just haven't spent it very well ... is that truly all Kroenke's fault?

Not at all, football isn't just a regular business, nor do most owners treat it just that way, noone invests in a sport unless they have an interest in it. Kroenke has made a tonne of money out of his investment and that's the only reason he invested make no mistake, unlike Abrahmovic, the City owners, Liverpool owners etc, they are actually interested in success on the pitch and what's more they realise success on the pitch means a better return as well, they don't just sit there and watch the club implode and keep employees on, they get rid and find better ones when need be, because they're actually interested.

As well as this Kroenke knows that if he sells he'll get his money back.

As for the net spend it's a stupid stat, City spends hundreds of millions but they have got it back because they made their club successful and reaped the rewards, they've spent vastly more on players and you can see that from the quality of their squad, likewise Chelsea, Man U who spend have have spend fortunes for years.

This is 100% Kroenkes fault, the employs the people in charge, if they don't perform he has the power to replace them, he doesn't so the buck stops with him, of course the people below him are also to blame for their performance but in the end your boss assesses your performance and if it's not good enough replace you, doesn't happen at Arsenal.

I can't believe people are defending Kroenke, he's literally the worst thing to have happened to Arsenal, since he arrived we've become a nothing club.

[Highbury Hillbilly]

Vast difference between Unai and Arteta here.

Apparently, Unai didn't call Wenger when he first joined. I'm not sure if they ever talked unless they bumped into each other.

It's about optics. Emery was the new face of Arsenal, post-Wenger, post-Gazidis. He had no prior relationship with Wenger, so why would he be in touch with him? Was Tuchel calling up Emery when he took over at PSG?

[Angelito]

Vast difference between Unai and Arteta here.

Apparently, Unai didn't call Wenger when he first joined. I'm not sure if they ever talked unless they bumped into each other.

It's about optics. Emery was the new face of Arsenal, post-Wenger, post-Gazidis. He had no prior relationship with Wenger, so why would he be in touch with him? Was Tuchel calling up Emery when he took over at PSG?

It's etiquette and common practice in high-functioning organizations.

When you succeed a monolithic figure, or even an influential one, at any organization, the incumbent always calls or has dinner with his or her predecessor. It's an unspoken law that is followed most of the time. Part of organizational/corporate/management culture.

And, Gazidis hired Unai, btw. It wasn't until 3 months into Unai's reign that he left to join Milan.

[Callum]

What I see from Kroenke is him investing a huge amount of his money into our squad.
That's all that is needed from him, so I give him an A+.

I would not, however, if I was him, give his managment team any money to spend. It should be sell and buy to break even.

Kroenke investing his own money? What?

[theHotHead]

Really interested to see what Mikel does next season.

Formation, style of play.

I am slightly concerned he's pushing for a Pep philosophy and I feel he really needs to find his own, we're not Man City and can't buy the best in every position.

Mourhino, Fergie, Pep, Wenger ........... all the best had their own philosophy, I don't want Arteta to try to be a 2nd rate Pep because it'll fail.

This!!

[theHotHead]

Your grasp on investment is weird

Kroenke invested a billion (1.029m) in buying Arsenal ... in what world is that NO MONEY? Any investor would expect a return on their investment that would come via dividends and increased share value ... so what would be a reasonable dividend return?

How about 5%? that's about what the Glaziers take every year out of Utd - that would be 50m a year does he take that? NO so your argument that he's "making money off the back of our failure" is simply wrong, the value of the club that he owns dropped 125m last year so in fact he's losing a fortune right now ...

The reality is under Kroenke's ownership the club have spent net 300m on new players only City and Utd have spent more in that time ... that's 300m Kroenke could have kept in the bank as cash, as the owner that's his cash ... it's not "the fans" money it's his, fans pay to see his team at his stadium same as paying for any other goods and service.

Agreed his an absentee owner, but so are half the owners in football, having Kroenke sitting in the Director's box is not going to make anyone at the club any better, even if it does show 'fanboy' credentials.

The bottom line is that Kroenke is not a great fan, that's a shame but so what, the real problem is that he allowed his employees (Gazidis, Wenger, and now Edu) far to much power and then didn't react fast enough when they fecked everything up ... that's his failing it's not the money, we've spent fortunes on players and on wages, we just haven't spent it very well ... is that truly all Kroenke's fault?

Not at all, football isn't just a regular business, nor do most owners treat it just that way, noone invests in a sport unless they have an interest in it. Kroenke has made a tonne of money out of his investment and that's the only reason he invested make no mistake, unlike Abrahmovic, the City owners, Liverpool owners etc, they are actually interested in success on the pitch and what's more they realise success on the pitch means a better return as well, they don't just sit there and watch the club implode and keep employees on, they get rid and find better ones when need be, because they're actually interested.

As well as this Kroenke knows that if he sells he'll get his money back.

As for the net spend it's a stupid stat, City spends hundreds of millions but they have got it back because they made their club successful and reaped the rewards, they've spent vastly more on players and you can see that from the quality of their squad, likewise Chelsea, Man U who spend have have spend fortunes for years.

This is 100% Kroenkes fault, the employs the people in charge, if they don't perform he has the power to replace them, he doesn't so the buck stops with him, of course the people below him are also to blame for their performance but in the end your boss assesses your performance and if it's not good enough replace you, doesn't happen at Arsenal.

I can't believe people are defending Kroenke, he's literally the worst thing to have happened to Arsenal, since he arrived we've become a nothing club.

Ozim I don't think you know much about investment!! If you think people invest in something only if they have interest in it you are way off the mark bro. If I was a millionaire/billionaire and was given a presentation that showed if I invested some money in something I had f**k all interest in, I would get a healthy return, I would invest my money.

[StLGooner]

Your grasp on investment is weird

Kroenke invested a billion (1.029m) in buying Arsenal ... in what world is that NO MONEY? Any investor would expect a return on their investment that would come via dividends and increased share value ... so what would be a reasonable dividend return?

How about 5%? that's about what the Glaziers take every year out of Utd - that would be 50m a year does he take that? NO so your argument that he's "making money off the back of our failure" is simply wrong, the value of the club that he owns dropped 125m last year so in fact he's losing a fortune right now ...

The reality is under Kroenke's ownership the club have spent net 300m on new players only City and Utd have spent more in that time ... that's 300m Kroenke could have kept in the bank as cash, as the owner that's his cash ... it's not "the fans" money it's his, fans pay to see his team at his stadium same as paying for any other goods and service.

Agreed his an absentee owner, but so are half the owners in football, having Kroenke sitting in the Director's box is not going to make anyone at the club any better, even if it does show 'fanboy' credentials.

The bottom line is that Kroenke is not a great fan, that's a shame but so what, the real problem is that he allowed his employees (Gazidis, Wenger, and now Edu) far to much power and then didn't react fast enough when they fecked everything up ... that's his failing it's not the money, we've spent fortunes on players and on wages, we just haven't spent it very well ... is that truly all Kroenke's fault?

Not at all, football isn't just a regular business, nor do most owners treat it just that way, noone invests in a sport unless they have an interest in it. Kroenke has made a tonne of money out of his investment and that's the only reason he invested make no mistake, unlike Abrahmovic, the City owners, Liverpool owners etc, they are actually interested in success on the pitch and what's more they realise success on the pitch means a better return as well, they don't just sit there and watch the club implode and keep employees on, they get rid and find better ones when need be, because they're actually interested.

As well as this Kroenke knows that if he sells he'll get his money back.

As for the net spend it's a stupid stat, City spends hundreds of millions but they have got it back because they made their club successful and reaped the rewards, they've spent vastly more on players and you can see that from the quality of their squad, likewise Chelsea, Man U who spend have have spend fortunes for years.

This is 100% Kroenkes fault, the employs the people in charge, if they don't perform he has the power to replace them, he doesn't so the buck stops with him, of course the people below him are also to blame for their performance but in the end your boss assesses your performance and if it's not good enough replace you, doesn't happen at Arsenal.

I can't believe people are defending Kroenke, he's literally the worst thing to have happened to Arsenal, since he arrived we've become a nothing club.

Ozim I don't think you know much about investment!! If you think people invest in something only if they have interest in it you are way off the mark bro. If I was a millionaire/billionaire and was given a presentation that showed if I invested some money in something I had f**k all interest in, I would get a healthy return, I would invest my money.

I think that was his point. Kroenke doesn't care or has no interest in Arsenal, only as an investment. Which isn't an ideal type of owner to have imo of course, and many others.

[Highbury Hillbilly]

Vast difference between Unai and Arteta here.

Apparently, Unai didn't call Wenger when he first joined. I'm not sure if they ever talked unless they bumped into each other.

It's about optics. Emery was the new face of Arsenal, post-Wenger, post-Gazidis. He had no prior relationship with Wenger, so why would he be in touch with him? Was Tuchel calling up Emery when he took over at PSG?

It's etiquette and common practice in high-functioning organizations.

When you succeed a monolithic figure, or even an influential one, at any organization, the incumbent always calls or has dinner with his or her predecessor. It's an unspoken law that is followed most of the time. Part of organizational/corporate/management culture.

And, Gazidis hired Unai, btw. It wasn't until 3 months into Unai's reign that he left to join Milan.

Sure, but the companies you speak of promote from within, or the boss handpicks his own successor, which was not the case here. I think Wenger himself said he didn't attend games at the Emirates after stepping down because he didn't want the media creating comparisons between him and Emery. He's still doing that with Arteta at the helm. Meanwhile SAF was frequently in the stands when Moyes was boss at Utd, because he picked him and his presence was there as a vote of confidence.

What Arteta is talking about is different from a courtesy call or dinner with the predecessor. He has ongoing contact and support from Wenger, which is understandable because Arsenal are a huge club and he has a lot to learn. He hasn't had to work his way up the ranks like most other people in his position.

[Salibatelli]

I honestly don’t know why a manager would want to ring another manager up for advice, if he doesn’t know what he’s doing he shouldn’t be in the job.

Also why would you ring Wenger when the guy underperformed for 10 years, surely you should be ringing someone successful who clearly knows what you need to win in modern football of anyone at all?

Personally I worry he’s been speaking to Wenger, we don’t want to go back to that, we want to move away from that time completely.

[ag6789]

Wenger won 7 FA cups. So he's considered a FA cup legend. No harm in ringing up for some advice. After all he holds the record!!