The Kroenke Problem

Arsenal news and interviews
Discuss anything Arsenal related, players, tactics etc.

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby Power n Glory » Wed Jul 10, 2019 3:09 pm

jayramfootball wrote:
Power n Glory wrote:This thread dies if we end up signing some decent players this summer. That's the reality. Where the money comes from becomes irrelevant and the focus goes back on the pitch.


The focus should always be on the pitch - that is what I don't get about the railing against Kroenke.
I'd understand if he was investing nothing in the team, or every little, but that is just not the case.


It always happens during a quiet window. We're seeing a lot of internal changes and the window is still open so we just have to wait and see. As said, Stan has only just taken full ownership of the club. Wenger was fired and for all we know, Gazidis and Sven could have been fired or forced out the door. Darren Burgess has been fired recently. We've hired Edu, promoted Freddie.....I'm not a huge fan of Emery, but we're still giving him time to show what he can and the same should be applied to the new regime as a whole considering we're actually trying to change things and it's more deep rooted not just surface level. I need a little more time to see what's happening.
Power n Glory
Thierry Henry
Thierry Henry
 
Posts: 1355
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 6:02 pm

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby theHotHead » Wed Jul 10, 2019 3:11 pm

DiamondGooner wrote:
jayramfootball wrote:
Power n Glory wrote:This thread dies if we end up signing some decent players this summer. That's the reality. Where the money comes from becomes irrelevant and the focus goes back on the pitch.


The focus should always be on the pitch - that is what I don't get about the railing against Kroenke.
I'd understand if he was investing nothing in the team, or every little, but that is just not the case.


Because better players = better performances.

We need more cash to be in that conversation.

You can't give Emery a Ford Focus and expect him to beat a Ferrari.

If Kroenke bought us better players we could buy and sell better from here on, but he won't put any additional money in so we can't.

End of story, your argument is trash.

Squeeze Champagne out of Lemons is your answer, enjoy Europa for the rest of your life.

Dude you only need to look at Man U to know that spending money does not necessarily equal better players or better performances. If spending money and buying so-called better players was some panacea why are we worse now - having spent more money than ever on players????

So if his argument is trash what doers that make yours ???
User avatar
theHotHead
David Rocastle
David Rocastle
 
Posts: 5833
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 12:44 am
Location: Norf Landon

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby aniym » Wed Jul 10, 2019 3:25 pm

we definitely didn't get enough money for some of those players. Walcott was around the same age as Zaha when sold and had a much better scoring record, yet he went for £20m only. Same with Gibbs, £7m for a 27yo LB with PL and CL experience was absurdly low.
aniym
David Rocastle
David Rocastle
 
Posts: 5398
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 3:43 am

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby DiamondGooner » Wed Jul 10, 2019 3:57 pm

theHotHead wrote:
DiamondGooner wrote:
jayramfootball wrote:
Power n Glory wrote:This thread dies if we end up signing some decent players this summer. That's the reality. Where the money comes from becomes irrelevant and the focus goes back on the pitch.


The focus should always be on the pitch - that is what I don't get about the railing against Kroenke.
I'd understand if he was investing nothing in the team, or every little, but that is just not the case.


Because better players = better performances.

We need more cash to be in that conversation.

You can't give Emery a Ford Focus and expect him to beat a Ferrari.

If Kroenke bought us better players we could buy and sell better from here on, but he won't put any additional money in so we can't.

End of story, your argument is trash.

Squeeze Champagne out of Lemons is your answer, enjoy Europa for the rest of your life.

Dude you only need to look at Man U to know that spending money does not necessarily equal better players or better performances. If spending money and buying so-called better players was some panacea why are we worse now - having spent more money than ever on players????

So if his argument is trash what doers that make yours ???


Go tell that to Man City, Real Madrid, Barcelona, PSG, Liverpool spent £80 on a fkin CB.

When you say we've spent more money than ever are you even taking into account inflation in those player prices??

You two clowns are taking the exceptions and trying to state its the norm.

Keep it up, because all your doing is pissing up a wall.

The whole argument is what's the point of having a billionaire owner if all we're doing is filling up his portfolio?

If we had a board I'd be happier to accept these circumstances, but we sold the club and what for?

............ we were top 2, then top 3, then top 4, no we're 5th / 6th and out of the CL.

How's your favored strategy going for you two, let me tell you, it sucks!!
Image
User avatar
DiamondGooner
Member of the Year 2018
Member of the Year 2018
 
Posts: 18811
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:35 am
Location: At the Gucci store

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby EliteKiller » Wed Jul 10, 2019 4:46 pm

DiamondGooner wrote:Dude you only need to look at Man U to know that spending money does not necessarily equal better players or better performances. If spending money and buying so-called better players was some panacea why are we worse now - having spent more money than ever on players????

So if his argument is trash what doers that make yours ???


Go tell that to Man City, Real Madrid, Barcelona, PSG, Liverpool spent £80 on a fkin CB.

When you say we've spent more money than ever are you even taking into account inflation in those player prices??

You two clowns are taking the exceptions and trying to state its the norm.

Keep it up, because all your doing is pissing up a wall.

The whole argument is what's the point of having a billionaire owner if all we're doing is filling up his portfolio?

If we had a board I'd be happier to accept these circumstances, but we sold the club and what for?

............ we were top 2, then top 3, then top 4, no we're 5th / 6th and out of the CL.

How's your favored strategy going for you two, let me tell you, it sucks!![/quote]

The takeover of Arsenal was approved on the 25th August 2018 .... it completed 30 days later ... so why do you claim we were 2nd? ... oh wait you wanted the billionaire part owner to give away a few 100 million before he owned the club ... I had forgotten that fictional fantasy, my bad.

Your arguments are getting thinner than water ... please for your own just sanity give it up .....

Things are changing, we have a new outright owner in his first summer, let's see what happens before going all gloom and doom
EliteKiller
Tony Adams
Tony Adams
 
Posts: 3407
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 11:48 pm

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby DiamondGooner » Wed Jul 10, 2019 5:24 pm

Nope.

We were 2nd and you know when so don't play stupid, you have you wanting to start judgement since Kroenke was the sole owner then you have JayRam saying he's invested millions since becoming a majority shareholder which was years ago ........... which is who I was addressing with my post.

Both of you giving two different start dates and I wasn't talking to you so not sure why your chiming in?
Image
User avatar
DiamondGooner
Member of the Year 2018
Member of the Year 2018
 
Posts: 18811
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:35 am
Location: At the Gucci store

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby Zedie » Wed Jul 10, 2019 6:16 pm

What or who was stopping kronke from spending prior to becoming 100% owner?

No one seems to be able to answer that.
Image
User avatar
Zedie
Poster Of The Month
Poster Of The Month
 
Posts: 32563
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:09 pm
Location: in the man cave

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby Power n Glory » Wed Jul 10, 2019 6:23 pm

aniym wrote:we definitely didn't get enough money for some of those players. Walcott was around the same age as Zaha when sold and had a much better scoring record, yet he went for £20m only. Same with Gibbs, £7m for a 27yo LB with PL and CL experience was absurdly low.


Yeah, we sold at the wrong time for most of those players. No demand for them. That includes the other youth players we signed and not just the British core players. It's nuts the way Wenger recounts stories of nearly signing certain star players like Ronaldo and Ibra but somehow we end up with Denilson's and Bendtner's. Either he really lost his touch for youth development and did a botch job on these guys or lost his eye for talent and lacked the true conviction to go all out to sign the truly talented. We ended up with so many duds.
Power n Glory
Thierry Henry
Thierry Henry
 
Posts: 1355
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 6:02 pm

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby LMAO » Wed Jul 10, 2019 8:39 pm

EliteKiller wrote:
LMAO wrote:So...how exactly did I create a fictitious scenario? I simply used the one you provided :dontknow: Y'know, the one where you intentionally devalued Arsenal via a race car proxy. And then because you wanted to become an expert finance lecturer yet got the lesson wrong, I gave justification as to why the idea of investing in new assets without 100% share ownership isn't that dumb when you delve into it.

And then you introduced new information like I don't already know investment in players pre-Usmanov selling would've likely increased Arsenal's valuation, thus making Kroenke's buyout of the Russian oligarch more expensive. If Kroenke had let Usmanov actually invest, then Arsenal is likely worth a hell of a lot more than the $2.3B it's currently valued at. Arsenal may have been worth $3.0B if Usmanov was allowed to bankroll us—even without Kroenke providing outside funds himself. 67% of $3.0B may not be worth more than 100% of $2.3B, but when you include Kroenke not needing to cough up $712 million to buy Usmanov out, the potential profit from the increase in valuation would more than offset the difference for Kroenke.


I don't even know where to begin ... I created a fictitious analogy and called it exactly that ... the 2 billion dollar car? it's not real ... but the economics are very basic, or at least they should have been ... but clearly they went straight over your head ...

Now you're creating your own fantasy world to justify your previous fantasy ... and frankly it's beyond jackanory ....

If Kroenke had let Usmanov actually invest - so in your scenario Usmanov gives Kronke free money?
Arsenal may have been worth $3.0B if Usmanov was allowed to bankroll us - that's based on what a dream you had?
67% of $3.0B may not be worth more than 100% of $2.3B - You're right it isn't

So let's get your imaginary scenario in chronological order of how you think it would have gone ....

Usamanov invests 200m and for that he wants nothing back, he's just happy to be the nice guy Mr Arsenal, that 200m magically increases the value of the club by 700m from 2.3 billion and so we arrive at your lovely 3 billion number (the other 500m coming from the magic money tree no doubt) .... Usmanov loves Kroenke so much he's happy for Kroenke to have complete control of his 200m investment and for Kroenke to take all the profit in his increased share value even though he made no investment at all ... what a lovely fella he must be ....

Meanwhile in the real world none of that happened ... nor would it ever happen .... :BangHead: :BangHead: :BangHead:

In the days of billion pound football businesses nobody puts 100's of millions into any club without getting something back ... not even fanatical fan football club owners ... you are living in a world of pure delusion if you think that was ever going to happen ... the fact it never did, and that Usmanov left, and that Kronke now owns 100% of our club kinda bears that out don't you think.


Usmanov wouldn't expect anything back and would do it out of the kindness of his heart? smfh. Where are you getting this straw man? Please point me to where I ever insinuated such.

Let's break it down for you: Arsenal is worth $1.4B. Usmanov gives the club a $400MM interest-free loan in 2011 to purchase players (getting the ball rolling and eventually Arsenal can sell those players on for a profit and get a huge jumpstart on being a self-sustainable juggernaut in the present day). Arsenal goes on to win major trophies, or at least consistently competes for them. Value increases to $3.0B (roughly what Bayern Munich is currently worth) because of on-field success leading to better sponsorships and being a club—the biggest club—in London.

For $400MM, the club's value increases $1.8B in almost a decade (instead of $1.1B from no outside funding). $1.8B * 30% = $540MM for Usmanov. He increases his potential profit by $140MM. Hardly receiving nothing in return and giving all to Kroenke, is it?

And before you give me some bs about a $1.8B increase in valuation from 2011-19 being unrealistic:
•Barcelona was worth $975MM in 2011, $4B now ($3B increase)
•Real Madrid $1.5B in 2011, $4.2B now ($2.7B increase)
•Manchester City $291MM in 2011, $2.7B now ($2.4B increase)
•Bayern Munich $1B in 2011, now $3B ($2B increase)
•Chelsea $658MM in 2011, $2.6B now ($1.95B increase)
•Manchester United $1.9B in 2011, $3.8B now ($1.9B increase)
•Liverpool $552MM in 2011, $2.2B now ($1.65B increase)
•Tottenham $412MM in 2011, $1.6B now ($1.4B increase)

Meanwhile, we've gone from $1.2B in 2011 to a whopping $2.3B now.

So please explain to me why that is? Why our peers exploded in valuation (i.e., at least near tripled in value, other than United who still managed to double), except for us. I'll save you the trouble and tell you: Kroenke is simply too risk averse to properly own a football club, and I don't just mean in terms of financing.
User avatar
LMAO
Dennis Bergkamp
Dennis Bergkamp
 
Posts: 6606
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:53 pm

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby LMAO » Wed Jul 10, 2019 8:42 pm

Zedie wrote:What or who was stopping kronke from spending prior to becoming 100% owner?

No one seems to be able to answer that.


Ask EK. He seems to have a handle on things.

But, the answer is he's a t**t who didn't want to feel beholden to another person, even though that person would've created more value for Kroenke.
User avatar
LMAO
Dennis Bergkamp
Dennis Bergkamp
 
Posts: 6606
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:53 pm

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby Zedie » Wed Jul 10, 2019 10:09 pm

LMAO wrote:
Zedie wrote:What or who was stopping kronke from spending prior to becoming 100% owner?

No one seems to be able to answer that.


Ask EK. He seems to have a handle on things.

But, the answer is he's a t**t who didn't want to feel beholden to another person, even though that person would've created more value for Kroenke.


I think theyve gone silent after I had to spell out their logic for them using their own sources and they couldn't handle it.

EK is on tilt so expect more abuse and nonsensical bollocks.

Hothead is on a banned substance, because he cant even make sense of his own points.

None of them can answer simple questions like the above.

Its phenomenal watching them defend kronke after he presided over the wenger v gazidis self destruct era and is now full force leading the club towards a free transfer/loan bonanza.

We've already been embarrassed by the zaha bid which is quite literally worse than the suarez situation (at least we had Intel on that, liverpool simply refused to honour the contract).

All this while kronke is as far the f**k away as possible refusing to put his hand in his pocket.
Image
User avatar
Zedie
Poster Of The Month
Poster Of The Month
 
Posts: 32563
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:09 pm
Location: in the man cave

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby Manoban » Wed Jul 10, 2019 10:25 pm

Being in the PL brings enough funding nowadays. As long as we don't relegate, there is no reason for him to invest.

We will continue regressing, it is time to accept that.
TOP
User avatar
Manoban
Charlie George
Charlie George
 
Posts: 646
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2017 7:22 pm

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby Power n Glory » Wed Jul 10, 2019 10:38 pm

@Zedie....the points have been hammered to death and it's going around in circles and now just a case of point scoring. You're repeating the same thing, it gets an answer but none of it sinks in. Comprehension is the problem and why this debate can't go any further.

As said before,the window hasn't closed, the season hasn't started and if by some miraculous chance we do well this season, if Emery gets his act together, if we actually sign some quality and if the work behind the scenes pays off, the discussion on ownership and funding stops. As it always does.
Power n Glory
Thierry Henry
Thierry Henry
 
Posts: 1355
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 6:02 pm

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby Zedie » Wed Jul 10, 2019 11:02 pm

Power n Glory wrote:@Zedie....the points have been hammered to death and it's going around in circles and now just a case of point scoring. You're repeating the same thing, it gets an answer but none of it sinks in. Comprehension is the problem and why this debate can't go any further.

As said before,the window hasn't closed, the season hasn't started and if by some miraculous chance we do well this season, if Emery gets his act together, if we actually sign some quality and if the work behind the scenes pays off, the discussion on ownership and funding stops. As it always does.


Theres a lot of simple questions you guys cant answer and those questions keep getting overrun with responses that quite literally dont have a bearing on the topic at hand.

Your main argument that because wenger and gazidis f***ked up raul and vinai shouldn't be given a budget, which leads to lichtensteiner and Suarez type deadwood signings makes no sense whatsoever.

Someone f***ked up so shut up shop isnt a viable way forward and makes no sense whatsoever.

Talk of net spend and max private equity amounts being trumpeted by those two plus jayram which literally only applies if you ignore:

New Adidas deal
Ability to sell twice within each season of the 3 year period to cover the additional expenditure from the following season.
Wage bill decreases

Makes no sense whatsoever.

Talk of training monreal to run faster, kos to get injured less, mustafi to stop making fatal errors every other game to resolve our woes makes no sense whatsoever.

I honestly dont understand how between you all, you can come to these conclusions.
Image
User avatar
Zedie
Poster Of The Month
Poster Of The Month
 
Posts: 32563
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:09 pm
Location: in the man cave

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby EliteKiller » Thu Jul 11, 2019 12:31 am

Zedie wrote:What or who was stopping kronke from spending prior to becoming 100% owner?

No one seems to be able to answer that.


Please send me 200m for a project I'm working on - in 7 years time I'll let you buy me out for 550m ... are you in?
EliteKiller
Tony Adams
Tony Adams
 
Posts: 3407
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 11:48 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Arsenal Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Gooner_LK6, Semrush [Bot] and 5 guests