Profits before people… Can I get a mic check?

Anyone else seen Gervinho's goal against Mali? If only he could pull stunts like that for us more often.

Apparently he hasn't been very good aside from that goal in the tourny, according to Jonathan Wilson

Against a pretty poor defence, but yes, I'd love to see more of that. 

Does anyone else think Abramovich might try to lure Capello to Stamford Bridge next season? He has a long history with three of Chelsea's best players, including the captain, and is a proven class manager. And it would be a miracle is Villas-Boas keeps his job considering the expectations Abramovich has for his club..

Not a crazy idea. He's a proven league manager, and has that Champions League trophy. 

15 to 20 M profit, well, it is a nice figure.
If the Arsenal spends more (debts, mortgages, payrolls, I mean all expenses) than what is received from tickets/ UCL/ t shirts; caps, scarfs etc, then yeah, we re in trouble.

Hey it was my BDay yesterday, and I am scared, I think not once in receny years have I had a good BDay present from the team (meaning they lost the games that followed...ouch)

How much do you guys think Berbatov would cost?  I still find it strange how much that guy is left on the bench at ManUre.  Wasn't he the leading scorer in the EPL last year or close to it?  His lack of playing time obviously is not hurting them but seems to be a waste of goal scoring talent....

Agreed on all accounts.

The comments by Wenger DO NOT say HE must make the profit, but that the club must do so. Also he does not say when the profit has to be in place, at the start of the season or the end (saying that it is the first priority is nothing new in any business).

We need to be careful that we do not read too much into this and automatically assume that it is the Board tying Wenger's hands. He has never been the very biggest of spenders (I know he has spent, but he was always looking for bargins) and the fact that he turned down opportunities to go the Real Madrid, with their umpteen millions to spend, maybe says a lot more about his attitude to spending.

I think it says more about his dedication to Arsenal. You'd be ridiculous to think a frugal man would turn down an offer from a club worth billions for financial reasons.

Still can't understand how Harry the Oinker has enough credentials to manage England outside of well, he being English. He's not that great of a manager, and hasn't really won anything to note other than that single FA cup.

So lemme get this straight.  If a manager takes over Plymouth Argyle and wins 2nd in FL2, FL1, FLC and BPL in a period of 4 years, is he not a great manager? Is he a loser?  

Would he not be a better manager than someone who takes the 2nd top team to  1st?  Would you have him as your team's manager or have a "winner" like Houlier?

Harry Redknapp did not take teams from obscurity to the top but what he did was pretty amazing.  Football is hardly fair and it tends to prefer the established teams.  To go into CL against financial powerhouses like Milan, Inter and Madrid, teams with vast financial and political powers that extend way beyond unequal (Madrid-Barca TV rights) to plain old cheating (Calciopoli) is simply amazing.  The Premier League itself isn't all that fair.  I remember Nani handling a ball, placing it with his hands and scoring against Spurs.  It wasn't a penalty or free kick. The FA was too busy monitoring twitter to say a thing.

"But he's spud scum AND Fat Frank's uncle!" Oh, okay then.

I'm not quite sure I understand the comparison with Houllier. Nor can I think of anyone that would argue with your theoretical Plymouth Argyle manager. That guy would deserve all the plaudits that came his way. 

Harry's record is good, not great. He won that FA Cup, he did fairly well earlier (promotion with Portsmouth?), and he's done very well at Spurs. Top manager, though? Arguable. 

Of course, you know, Capello won the league with every club he's every been with, including Roma, Juventus, Milan, and Real Madrid. He won the champions league in '97, beating Barca 4-0 in the final. 9 out of 16 seasons in managing he's won a major league title. He also won the league in Italy as a player three times. What's more, the man was dedicated enough to choose football (a friendly, no less) over his son's wedding. You can't seriously believe that 'Arry's achievements are anyway near as illustrious as Capello's. Harry's never won the league, and before you say that this is the toughest league in the world, our own under-fire manager has won it, as has Ancelotti in one year, and Mourinho. Capello's incredible record matches that.

So no, I do not think Harry has the credentials to manage a team of England's stature, largely because he would be a huge downgrade from Fabio Capello, no matter what you think of him. Might as well get Neil Warnock or something; he's won championship!

Winning the league with Roma is like winning the Premier league with Spurs. Capello has done the former.. Redknapp does not look like he will be able to do so with Spurs even if he stays for 5 more years.

In 2001 Capello had Totti, Cafu and Batistuta on the team. My grandmother could have won the league with those guys.

That is three players. How about the rest of the team?

And don't forget Juventus had Buffon, Nedved and Del Piero. AC and Inter had great teams as well. Didn't Inter have Ronaldo as well as Vieri?

Harry has VDV, Bale and Modric and still hasn't won the league.

You know I still don't get your point.

Capello got DESTROYED in South Africa. He sucks at International tournaments. Nobody worse.

So was Lippi.

Your point?

He did some good things, but still nothing that tells me he's qualified enough to manage an international squad. There are far better "non-English" managers out there (that speak the language fluently since that is usually a concern) that I would hope are looked at first before they look towards him.

Managing England is an entirely different animal than even being in charge of the biggest club teams. Being able to put up with the press and public scrutiny is at least as important as being good tactically and with personnel.

To paraphrase Douglas Adams - "Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made [England manager] should on no account be allowed to do the job."

And what makes you think Redknapp has these qualities?

 Where did I ever say he did?

According to a report from Deloitte LLP, we are the 5th highest revenue generating team in the world. After Real, Barca, Man U and Bayern Munich. Those player sales had to count for something!

Revenue =/= net income

6 years, huh? When did Silent Stan join us?

Wenger could be slotting into the England job as we speak, so we may find out the truth sooner than you think

If Arsene were to be named England manager ahead of 'Arry there would be unprecedented (righteous) indignation. I also think he's smart enough to not go anywhere near that position.

 I couldn't agree more to be honest. However, I have a bad feeling that 'arry taking the job won't be good for us

If 'arry were smart, he would leverage the England opening to go back to Spurs and ask for more money to stay.  Spurs would not want to let him leave in the middle of one of their best seasons ever in the Prem.  Given his track record of shadiness, I could definitely see this happening.

 Well the board will probably be a little less enthusiastic when Arsenal arent going to play the CL next year and therefore not receive the big cash for participating. As I said so many times before being successful and winning trophies can make you earn a lot of money and increase your fanbase size. imagine Arsenal retrogated to champioonship league in a few years with a 60000 stadium seats half empty

Not a suprise really; it does explain the way things are being done at Arsenal.

I doubt AW's giving out the board's secret agendas will make him popular there; i suppose he did it to deflect some of the comments that have been directed his way.

We all know that the board are a bunch of slime, but as long as we buy tickets and jerseys etc, they're not going to change an iota.

One would think though, that if a manager knew he had limited resources that he would work on other ways to win football matches, like practicing set plays, learning to pay attnetion to the other team on the pitch...

Well said. It's really hard to look at the club in any other light.
We all know the money is there (if limited), but it's not going to be spend for whatever reason.
Hard not to support the Homey train at times, or atleast consider it

How is it Wenger's fault, and how would any other man in the same position do better, given the board's demand of a minimum yearly profit first, and acquisitions second?

I have a horrible feeling the team is headed the way of teams like the Kansas City Royals - with ownership that does not understand "you gotta spend money to make money" - scrimping on players and wondering why the revenues are drying up as people stop coming to games.

One small quibble is that I think the owners of the Kansas City Royals are in a situation where you can make money by NOT spending money, and they do. And I suspect their ownership knows that. The wonder of not having relegation and having some form of revenue sharing is that you can finish dead last and put a pitiful product on the field, and piggy back off the product/quality of the other teams, which people actually want to watch on television.

 Very good point.

We don't really know that the boeard demands a yearly profit first, as they have always stated that Wenger has the funds to spend if he needs them. Wenger himself has said so. But we also hear about the funds being limited, Nigel Winterbun has commented on it recently, and now this quote by Wenger.
I really have no idea where the blame should thrown exactly. There is a lot of double speak in the management of the club, and things don't exactly add up. I personally have a feeling there is some fear-mongering about the the finances to excuse in-action, but again, that's just my intutition and could be entirely wrong.
Until we actually know more (and likely won't until Wenger retires/moves on), I personally put the blame on Wenger and the board in equal measure, but understand the angst and the setting blame on either or.

When the board said Wenger had money to spend, I think they were referring to the 53 mil or whatever that has been spent. There can be money to spend and still be a minimum profit required.

 To be fair, that statement was made by Gazidis before we sold Nasri or Fabregas, so I don't think that's fair seeing as that generated more than we spent alone.

Didn't realise that. Still, the point was that there's technically always "money to spend," seeing as we make a profit, but how much we actually can spend is unknown. It would be unheard of for Arsenal to actually use funds it didn't make and reach into Stan's pocket instead. Which has been a pretty solid formula for transfer success for other clubs held in our stature.

Not being in the Champions League next season would definitely hurt Arsenal's ability to spend

 I've never actually looked at the Arsenal accounts. But our profits wouldn't be that high now that we have sold all the housing. Does the 'profit' count our debt repayments or not?

I like having Djourou on the team, and I like it even more when he's not our starting right back. Solid re-sign - as long as he is being paid a reasonable amount and not the crazy money we have tended to give squad players.

Also like AW bringing this profit stuff out into the open. As I've said before I think a lot of what we interpret as ineptness on his part really stems from dictates coming down from the board.

when the best news is the one about djourou resigning, you know we don't have much cheer to spread..lets wear done the b'cats at wearside..COYG!