QUOTE(sigheart @ Apr 6 2014, 11:17 PM)
TBH if we spent the way City and Chelsea did we would've bankrupted.
A big chunk if not all of the money we earn every year goes into repaying the loan for the new stadium. We were 600 million+ in debt not including the interest when we moved to the Emirates and for all that to be repaid in a space of 8 years is pretty remarkable IMO. That is on average 75 million a year just for the new stadium loan.
I don't claim to know everything but seems like the stadium was just paid off and we had some left over cash hence spent on Ozil.
We need the CL this year for the money to be fully invested into players.
If Wenger stays judge him at the end of next year. But we need the CL football. Lets see what he can do when we have CL and a 100% war chest dedicated to transfers and every thing is at his disposal. If he still f*cks up the transfer window then fair enough probably he has lost it.
It's good that Arsenal has managed to paid the stadium earlier or on time. But what I disagree is why to that extreme? To the point where all the revenue generated used to pay the stadium, and only small chunk to buy players. Look at what happened eventually to players bought? Chamakh, Squillaci, PCY, Giroud = useless. To add to that, all our stars left, Vpersie, Nasri, Fabregas to name a few. If we can balance the power every year, we could have become the new Barcelona by now. The new invincible if you may.
Here is what I think about Arsenal financial model. They could have allocate one big money to buy ONE top quality player every year, just ONE in the right department. Imagine, if 42 million is used to buy a quality forward, and not Ozil, we could have converted 50 more goals at this time of the year, and we might be challenging for title every year.
Balance is the key. Not Extreme.