14 Jun 2013 06:00:38
I don't think a lot of people are actually taking note of what our transfer kitty IS. I posted it before but I feel I need to do it again. It is supposed to be around £75 million. that is to INCLUDE THE PLAYERS WAGES we bring in. Not £75 million pound just to buy players. So as I said before IF! We buy let's say 3 players on around £90. 000 per week over let's say a 3 year contract that's over £42 million in wages alone which leaves us around £33 million to actually spend on buying. Now, if I am right and I hope I am not if we are looking for what is rumoured to be around another 3 players we look like we are going bargain basement AGAIN! unless we get just one real quality player and a couple of make doers! just to look like something is happening.

1.) 14 Jun 2013
Not saying we will spend £70m but if you include the wages of the players coming in as part of the budget you have to offset this with the players wages that are going out and there has already been a fair chunk just from the released players. We may even get another £10m from player sales depending on who leaves so all this has to be added to the reported £70m

2.) 14 Jun 2013
I would love to know where this 70m figure was plucked from, did anyone at Arsenal actually say that is what we have to spend? I hope its just press fabrication because your maths suggests we are going to need a bit more

3.) 14 Jun 2013
14 Jun 2013 10:20:14
Does it take into account the huge amount off the wage bill due to the departure of Arsharvin and co. If 52 k goes it could be in the region of 240k per week. that's one player on 100k a week and one on 140k per week. we are due payments for song and Cesc transfers that are paid in yearly instulments. on top of the 123m surplus we had in the bank before any comments from the CEO. I think you will find out there is a lot more if Wenger wants it. Two French based imports might be offloaded soon aswell. that would be another 100 k off the wages. km

4.) 14 Jun 2013
Eddie5555, sorry but I am inclined to disagree with you here!

In previous years there has been a lot of debate over whether this '£50m war chest' is for fees or fees and wages. Wenger has said it's for wages. He's then sold up to £50m of our stars, and invested close to £50m on much worse players, bloating the squad and not even touching that initial balance.

We also have a massive wage bill that is used for wages. I have said before and will say now that I still believe that kitty has always been completely available to Wenger for fees, going on what has been said by the club.

Now, we have approx £70m depending on what story you read. Gazidis has said that is all available for transfers due to commercial deals kicking in. It's not for fees and wages. This is why we can buy Rooney if we want, stick him on £200kpw if we want, and go and buy more afterwards.

Also, it doesn't make much sense to have a squad whose wages are paid for with the wage budget (£145m), sell several players and loan others out, freeing up space for signings, only to then say 'but we won't use those wages we just freed up, instead we'll pay them with the transfer kitty' - it has ALWAYS been a red herring. Wenger would love you and me to believe he couldn't afford £10m players. It's BS and Gazidis is sick of saying it!

Financial restrictions didn't mean we couldn't afford to buy players like a GK or DM last summer, it simply meant we have never been able to spend e. g. £35m+ on one player like our rivals have.

Gazidis made it pretty clear about 2-3 weeks ago that that money is ALL for transfers anyway.

5.) 14 Jun 2013
And that doesn't even start to go into how ridiculous an idea is that when we sign a player and offer them 5m a year for 4 years, we instantly hand over 20m to them on the spot and say goodbye to our transfer kitty!

It's just daft!

6.) 14 Jun 2013
We have £115m in reserve. I really doubt the £75m includes wages as that would be ridiculous.

7.) 14 Jun 2013
No, that is not how it works at all. I don't where you have got the idea that transfer and wage budget are put into one pot, but that is not true. Anyway, you saying that adding up all the money spent over their respective three or four year deals is redundant, because new money is always coming in over that space of time through certain deals. By your logic, we spent 84.4 million last summer, and given that this summer, which is supposedly our most financially free one for a long time, we have, as you say, a transfer kitty of 75 mill, I think it is unlikely that we spent more last summer.

The 70 million is there for Wenger to spend on transfers alone.

8.) 14 Jun 2013
Who says it includes wages? (it might well do) and also aren't we getting rid of about 5 players on 50k or more contracts so there is plenty of wages.

9.) 14 Jun 2013
We can easily spend 100mil if we wanted this window. Also we have freed up about 300k a week already so will have no problem paying wages.

10.) 14 Jun 2013
I'm pretty sure that's without wages. That is why we have a wage bill. With Arshavin, Squid, Denilson and hopefully Bendtner leaving and freeing up wages, does that mean our transfer kitty suddenly rises? I don't think so. Perhaps one of the Eds can help us out here? Thanks in advance

11.) 14 Jun 2013
Your forgetting that we have released a huge amount of player, some of whom had large wages.

All the players gone plus maybe a few more should easily cover the costs of 2-3 top quality player wages.

12.) 14 Jun 2013
I know what your getting at but that's assuming we won't have a budget at all next year, that the £75 million we have this year has to finance the players wages who we buy this summer for the duration of their contracts.

AFC will (should?!) have a long term projected set of budgets, set by assumed income (season tickets, advertising, earnings, merchandise etc) against outgoings (wages, fees, loans, fixed costs etc), and with these in mind probably estimate a simmilar transfer budget next season and some more after that, with a degree of flexibility I imagine.

I`ve not read everything there is to read about the supposedly `£75 million transfer budget`, it could well include wages too or that may be a seperate fund of monies. Hopefully its purely transfer fees and we can afford the likes of Higuain, Rooney etc.

Quick word about the bargain basement transfers we bring in each season - I think Wenger has a strategy; buy young players at a low cost, loan them out and sell them on for a profit. If they come good whilst out on loan, we keep them or sell at a higher profit. They`re a commodity, 100%. We loan a huge amount of players out every year, if none of them end up playing for AFC yet bring in a profit, who cares. If they do play for us, all the better. I think these types of players are very different to those who Wenger buys with the first team in mind, such as Podolsi, Gervinho etc of which we only buy 3 or 4 of each summer.

13.) 14 Jun 2013
Surely wages are budgeted for on a year to year basis. Taking into account future revenue as apposed to a single "70 mill" amount. It's not like when a player is signed there wages for the contract are paid up front!

14.) 14 Jun 2013
Club confirmed it does not include wages

Club would do 5 year forecasts and the funds normally include wages on new contracts

Quite reasonable that the club would include wages as they are a business and commit to the salary. This is why it was clarified


SY4

15.) 14 Jun 2013
I am trying to think if I have ever read a positive or optimistic post from "EDDIE5555" and I really cannot think of one. such a party pooper lol