Arsene Wenger Has Taken More Money Out Of Arsenal Than Any Other Person In History!

Around £80m by now.

Now before all the Arsène lovers get up in arms about this and jump straight to the comments to insult me, let me first say that I’m presenting this only as a quirky fact (I won’t go as far as ‘interesting’). In terms of value, there’s a good case to say that the money paid to Arsène over the years has been well worth it – certainly was for the first eight, anyway. But let me tell you the full story.

A couple of days ago on Twitter, the subject of why Arsène Wenger is Arsenal’s highest paid employee came up (personally I believe a good manager being the highest paid in a club is justified), and @Invinciblog questioned whether anyone at Arsenal had ever been paid more than AW.

After five seconds’ thought, I’d say looking at each year individually only one person: Thierry Henry in his last year, when he got a £5m upfront fee for agreeing to stay.

Then it struck me that given Arsène’s wages and longevity in the role, he must easily have earned more money than anyone else in the club’s history – or to put it another way, made more profit.

So I tweeted this:

No single person in history has taken more money out of Arsenal than Arsene Wenger. Must be c£80m by now. (I’m not judging value BTW)

Note the last bit: this was not a judgement of value, just a numerical or monetary fact. Some chose to take no notice of that.

Immediately I got several responses regarding shareholders cashing in, but the fact is they only took money from each other, not the club. Lady Nina got the biggest profit – or certainly the biggest in one lump. David Dein and Danny Fiszman may both have profited more than Arsène as a result of their Arsenal dealings, but they sold shares at different prices and different times, and I haven’t done all the maths. Either way, none of them took that money from the club, which would have curtailed its spending in other areas.

Some of the other responses I got were:

What was Arsenal worth as a club when Arsène arrived and what is it worth now?

The monetary answer to that is probably that going by share price Arsenal was valued at well under £100m, whereas it’s now around £1bn.

The alternative answer is: Who cares? An increase in share value is only a benefit to the shareholders, not the club itself. The only possible benefit I can think of is that a business perceived as more valuable can borrow money more easily. In any case, every Premier League club is worth a lot more than it was 17 years ago – TV has seen to that.

I know you’re not judging value, but how else can Arsene’s earnings be judged?

Well as a direct numerical comparison with everyone else. When you compare goalscorers, you tend to just look at the number of goals. Mostly you don’t even bother with goals per game, never mind whether the goals won games or points. It’s just a numerical comparison, that’s all.

Arsène has made big profits on selling players – much more than his total pay.

This is true, but he does buy players as well, and pay them handsomely – sometimes too handsomely. He probably gives a better result than other managers at similar sized clubs, though.

Are you comparing the amount paid to Wenger with the amount paid to Chapman?

Yes. Yes I am. And also to the amounts paid to everyone else. That is the whole and only point.

Similarly:

Have you considered inflation?

No. Again, the point is I wasn’t doing that. Similarly, when a new movie breaks box office records and becomes the highest grossing movie of all time, do they take inflation into account? No they don’t, because it’s a simple numerical comparison.

By that logic the contractor that built the stadium has taken more out than any other.

They may have grossed more, but didn’t make more profit – and in any case I said single person, and they’re clearly not one.

My favourite response was this:
What a stupid post.
I’m guessing the responder is a big Arsène fan. He clearly infers I am attacking his hero, but that doesn’t make my tweet ‘stupid’. I replied:
Explain the logic underlying that conclusion please.
Him: He hasn’t taken money out as such he’s been paid wages. Do you consider yourself taking money from employer?
Me: Yes – everyone does. They [employers] have the money or I have the money. If I have it, they have less. Value, as I said, is different.
Him: He’s taken zero money out. It’s the way you’re wording it.

The conversation ended there, as I didn’t feel it was likely to develop in a constructive manner. To me it’s obvious that given a finite amount of money, the more a company pays to its employees the less is available for anything else (investment, repayment of debt, distribution to shareholders), so in every sense I can think of employees do take money out of the business they work for. I’d honestly have thought this was completely indisputable. In my case my wages are small change to my employer, but in the case of an employee who takes over two per cent of the turnover of the company as his wage, it seems even clearer. It’s up to both parties to ensure that value is given for the money taken out, but that isn’t the subject under discussion.

I did get some support too. For example:
The ability to read something to suit own bias amazes me.
It used to amaze me too.
You can’t say anything about Wenger without someone jumping down your throat.
Yep. It’s another example of people hearing the same information and projecting their own emotions on it to reach a different conclusion. Just because I point out that Arsene has received more money from Arsenal than anyone else doesn’t mean I don’t like him or don’t appreciate what he’s done.

For further intellectual debate and petty nonsensical disputes, follow me on Twitter: @AngryOfN5

Advertisements

95 thoughts on “Arsene Wenger Has Taken More Money Out Of Arsenal Than Any Other Person In History!

  1. OK, listen the entire premise of this article is wrong. In addition, you seem to have stared the evidence of how wrong it was and the pretended it wasn’t there. It’s right here:

    “…David Dein and Danny Fiszman may both have profited more than Arsène as a result of their Arsenal dealings, but they sold shares at different prices and different times, and I haven’t done all the maths. Either way, none of them took that money from the club, which would have curtailed its spending in other areas…..”

    Well, Phil, surely you do understand that the entire reason that Dein & Fisman put the club on a “diet” (Youth Policy, New Stadium, Land Redevelopment) was to fatten the club up for sale by making all its potential assets and revenue streams more concrete?

    In other words, when the likes of Edu, Wiltord, Pires, Kanu were let go on Bosmans, other players flogged off etc……ALL of that was curtailed spending, intended to make those two richer when they cashed out by selling the club?

    I dont know if I should be shocked at ignorance of how business finances are manipulated – or at an attempt to shovel facts under the carpet in broad daylight.

    Moreover you should have seen this clearly when, after Usmanov paid Dein for his shares, he clearly had been told by Dein that he should simply get the money back from the Arsenal piggy back ie Usmanov demanded a dividend!

    Also I dont know what you would do if you were sent to go be an accountant at a major bank. Judging by this article you’d recommend that all the traders who earn more than the executive management should be given notice, as they were raising salary expenses unduly!!

    • Is there anything in the world that you don’t have a conspiracy theory for? Anything at all?

      I am almost laughing at your reference to bank traders. These are the geniuses who have ruined the economies of dozens of countries, right?

      • Yes you really have no idea – trading is trading. It’s up to bank executives and their risk management staff to set risk limits and manage them. Its up to your elected officials to say no, but they are bought and sold, Oh I forgot – you probably think they work for you too.

        No doubt you dont like being told that you are peddling fallacies. But you are.

        Which is why you made sure not to address the points I made.

      • Ha, you do amuse me with your non-stop conspiracies. I often address your points, but your view never changes from its warped position. Do you ever wonder why no one else agrees with you? Oh no hang on I know this: everyone else in the world is wrong!

      • If you genuinely view it as “conspiracy theory” to assert that Dein & Fiszman slashed costs and redeveloped the land so that so that they could sell the club for a higher multiple, then I don’t know what to tell you – except that you should stick to blogging about what happens between the white lines. You don’t know business.

      • How did they ‘slash costs’? Costs have gone up every year. ‘Business’ to you just means ripping everyone off as much as possible, there are no shades of grey (never mind white), everything is black in your world. It must be quite depressing to go through life with that view. People call me cynical, but you’re totally off the scale. On a bell curve you’d be such an outlier you’d need a telescope to see the rest of the population.

      • “How did they slash costs”? Arsenal at the end of Dein/Fisman carved out capital to build the stadium by no longer retaining veterans, who command a high salary, and started fielding kids who were not only much cheaper and could be sold, to generate even more capital.

        Edu has played well, helped win us a title and wants a fat new contract? Let him go on a free. Vieira is demanding 80k per week to re-sign, flog him off, in with a 17 yr old Fabregas who was not quite ready to take up the mantle at the same level but was on quarter of the salary. Fabregas later sold for about 30 mil in profit. Pires wasnts a new 3 year contract? In with Reyes, let Pires go on a Bosman a year later, etc.

        Had Arsenal kept those veterans there is a good chance more trophies would have been won, but that would have required staying as the #1 or #2 paying club in the league to do that – and as a result there would be less investment capital and working capital avaialble to invest in the stadium/redevelopment project.

        This is no secret. You have no credibility if you really want to spend time debating this.

      • You have such a warped view of events that your own credibility must have disappeared long before you pitched up here. You cherry pick facts then twist them to suit your narrative.
        I repeat my earlier comment though: as you know everything, why not record it as ‘the truth’ on your own blog or website?

      • Well you have all the facts, so blog them. I’ll post whatever you like here if you want, so you don’t even have the inconvenience of setting a blog up and having to publicise it.

      • I’m offering you the chance to put your case forward, but you seem unaccountably shy suddenly. What’s the problem?

      • Not sure where I have been shy, as I have posed you questions you’re not able to answer. And you deny most of the rest.

        No wonder you don’t want to talk about it.

      • I don’t know what questions you think I can’t answer. You’ll have to repeat them. I’m sure they’ll be ones where you ascribe dastardly motives to Arsenal shareholders, though, because that’s your usual line.

        I have only one question for you right now: why won’t you write a blog post of your own? You must be able to answer that one.

      • Wont be jumping on your red herrings, sorry – they stink. Feel free to explain how Wenger has taken the most money from Arsenal when Dein and Fisman made hundreds of millions by shutting down the purse strings and fielding a team of low-paid kids for sale at high prices while they built a stadium to boost the teams selling price..

        Feel free to explain how Darren Dein takings failed to make their way into your accounts, too.

        And then you know what you can do with you stale herrings after that.

      • What red herrings? I’m asking why you won’t write a blog post. Other questions may or may not be difficult for either of us to answer, but not this one.
        Why won’t you write a blog post? There’s no possible way you can’t know the answer, yet you’ve gone shy.

      • Phil, I’m asking why you publish obvious lies and and half lies – and then get the hump when called to account for it.

        Now explain to us how it is possible that Wenger is your villiain……and you remain silent about your heroes Dein and Fisman who are actually the ones who emptied the treasury, leaving Arsenal unable to compete – and left Wenger to keep the ship afloat while they effectively enriched their children and grandchildren – from the security of luxurious tax havens, no less.

        Out of the reality of these facts, Wenger is your villain (on the days when you cant be arsed to rehash your anti-american rants). Seriously? This beggars belief.

        What is your real agenda, Phil?

      • a) I don’t publish lies or half lies. I publish facts and my opinions of them. If you happen to disagree with all my opinions, that’s your lookout.
        b) I’ve never said Arsene Wenger is a villain, never mind *my* villain. So I don’t need to explain anything on that subject, as it’s never come up.
        c) I’ve never said either David Dein or Danny Fiszman are my heroes – in fact I have specifically told you previously that David Dein is not my hero, when you claimed he was.
        d) In your view Dein and Fiszman left Arsenal unable to compete. I’ve never said they did or didn’t.
        e) What ‘anti-American rants’? Show me where they are.
        Your comments grow ever more ridiculous. I didn’t think it was possible, but you surpass yourself.

        Now back to my question, which you still seem to be having trouble with: Why won’t you write a blog post, as you clearly have a lot of opinions that you believe are right and need to be shared with the world?

      • Wenger is not the one who has taken the most money out of Arsenal – the former owners have. And that not coincidentally is why Arsenal has been unable to compete for nearly a decade now. Everyone knows that, so why you publish nonsense like this, who know.

        All these rants about “American owners” and their supposed ownership style are silly, as the reason we have American owners are that the greedy (and English) former owners demanded a price so high that no Englishman was willing to buy the club….as they wouldn’t make enough money on the deal. But apparently its American owners who are only interested in money. And Dein and Fisman are apparently saints, despite being directly responsible for Arsenal’s current situation, as the club is operating in a financial straitjacket created by them in order to maximize their take from it.

        But here we have an article that seeks to plant the idea that Wenger is bleeding Arsenal? Absurd.

        These are just simple example of lies and half-lies peddled here.

      • In your view the previous owners took money out. That is at least a half-lie, because they never took anything directly. You claim they built up the value of the club by restricting spending (though oddly not on a £400m+ new stadium) and cashed in on the value they deliberately created by stopping the manager spending. This is all supposition on your part. To say ‘everyone knows that’ is absurd. You are the only person who ever says it.

        What are these ‘rants’ about American owners you keep referring to? Where are they? To keep on about something that doesn’t exist is silly.

        Who says Dein and Fiszman (a word I don’t think you’ve ever spelled correctly by the way) are saints? No one uses that language except you.

        But still you’re convinced you’re right and everyone else is wrong, so why not write a blog post with all your theories and let’s see how many people agree.

      • Most obvious that the higher the selling price, the less surplus left in the equation for a new owner to inject in the club.

        Most obvious that when the previous owners leave not even a single share in control of the fans – at this crucial moment in the club’s evolution – their claims of long term stewardship are laid bare as propaganda. They were stewarding the club for the benefit of their grandkids trust fund accounts in the Cayman Islands or whatever.

        The stadium building effect on the club’s spending power on the field over the past 7 8 years is well documented. For you to be debating that is absurd.

        These are fallacies you have been peddling. Stop complaining when you are called to account for it.

      • You are still ascribing motives to people you’ve never met, based entirely on guesswork. That’s nothing to do with fact, just your opinion.

        On another matter: “The stadium building effect on the club’s spending power on the field over the past 7 8 years is well documented.” Is it? Who documented it, because I’d like to see it?

        And still you avoid the question of writing a blog post.

      • You really think any one is idiotic enough to let you off the hook while you are peddling lies and debating historical fact?

        Yes indeed Phil, Vieria and Pires and Henry and all the rest were let go because Arsenal was swimming in money but just felt like fielding kids for fun. Someone should arrest Mssr. Wenger at once – obviously he robbed Dein and Fisman blind. The latter died penniless and the former is a regular at soup kictchen. Because Wenger took all the money. *roll eyes*

      • Yeah whatever.

        So to repeat:
        On another matter: “The stadium building effect on the club’s spending power on the field over the past 7 8 years is well documented.” Is it? Who documented it, because I’d like to see it?

        And still you avoid the question of writing a blog post.

      • Phil you can keep jabbering about blog posts but it wont help you to rid yours of what is often at least wildly misleading innuendo and at worst falsehoods. As long as you claim to be running an Arsenal “fan” blog and post that sort of thing, you should expect to be rebutted. And you will.

      • Still not answering my questions then. If you don’t know the answer, as I believe I’ve mentioned before, just say ‘I don’t know’.

        So to repeat again:
        You say “The stadium building effect on the club’s spending power on the field over the past 7 8 years is well documented.” Is it? Who documented it, because I’d like to see it?
        If you don’t know the answer to this one, say ‘I don’t know’. Or perhaps you could document it, as you know all the answers. I’ll post it for you.

      • Question you havent answered is why you publish propaganda.

        Dein & Fisman made off to Switzerland with the loot. Arsenal has for years had to field kids with the little cash left – even Dein calls Wenger a “magician” for actually keeping the club afloat though that – and you come here to suggest Wenger is the villain.

        Shame on you.

      • It’s only propaganda in your eyes. You claimed the likes of Vieira and Henry were sold by the evil Dein and Fiszman against Arsene’s will, which is utter nonsense. Vieira agitated for a move for about four summers in a row. Henry wanted to leave in 2006 and only stayed another year because he got a £5m up front fee – sanctioned by the Board. Sounds like you were dishing out propaganda there.

        So to repeat again:
        You say “The stadium building effect on the club’s spending power on the field over the past 7 8 years is well documented.”
        Simple question: Who has documented it? Because I’d like to see it.
        As I said, if you don’t know the answer to this one, say ‘I don’t know’. But I’m very surprised if you can’t find something so ‘well documented’.
        Or perhaps you could document it, as you know all the answers. I’ll post it for you.

      • Vieira was angling for a move because he was getting paid to the level of his performance. Why would a team underpay the caotain? Beacause they are swimming in money?

        Sorrry but this is just ridiculous. Total propaganda.

      • I have no idea what that comment means.

        But to repeat the bit you keep ignoring: You say “The stadium building effect on the club’s spending power on the field over the past 7 8 years is well documented.”
        Simple question: Who has documented it? Because I’d like to see it.
        As I said, if you don’t know the answer to this one, say ‘I don’t know’. But I’m very surprised if you can’t find something so ‘well documented’.
        Or perhaps you could document it, as you know all the answers. I’ll post it for you.

      • Its well documented. So that puts you in flat earth territory.

        Feel free to use google to educate yourself Phil, before you run around publishing garbage. Arsenal has for years been forced to a tightrope as a result of which Dein & Fisman cashed in richly and early. The gap was filled by Wengers ability to use kids to qualify for the CL..while selling the most marketable player every year. Without this the clubs accounts would have been red ink for 5 or 6 years. Thats what it takes to build a valuable new stadium and develop apartments for sale without a sugar daddy. All the value of that is what made Dein & Fiszman, etc equity go up to the level the sold it at.

        They could have simply stayed at Highbury and spld right then, but then the selling price would have been lower. All that belt tightening on the field made them richer. Thats why they did it.

        Its your own job to educate yourself. Empty bravado gets you nowhere. You look like a fool challenging estalished facts and pretending like its my problem you dont have a grip. Who do you think you are fooling other than yourself?

      • Ha ha, brilliant – this is your idea of well documented, is it? A few jibes about past Board members and some generalisations backed up by no figures whatsoever! And you think I need to get a grip. Amazing.
        I repeat (for what seems about the 19th time): where is this WELL DOCUMENTED? See how I’ve put ‘well documented’ in capital letters as ‘WELL DOCUMENTED’, because I’m trying to draw your attention to what’s missing from your belated answer.

      • Up to you educate yourself. A half-wit “analysis” declaring Wenger to have taken out more money from Arsenal than anyone else does not cut it. Onus is on you, as mist have declared this to be garbage.

      • Not to mention, its also a basic tactic that even small businessmen do. You want to sell your business for a high multiple in the near future, you fatten it up by taking no money out and avoiding sometomes necesary expenses in the interim. I mean how bleedlingly obvious was this one. Or you though Dein & Fisman were being parsimonious because of “Arsenal’s history and culture”? No they were both traders – and they traded Arsenal!

  2. Wenger has too much power and does not know how to use it.
    Look at any bookshelve and you see Man utd, Man City, Celtic, Liverpool, even Spurs books on sale. But Arsenal, well a few Libraries still have books on the Graham years and the years after he left, that is the teams that succeeded thanks to Seaman, Dixon, Bould, o’leary,Adams, Winterburn, Parlour, Bergkamp, and Ian Wright. Without them and David Dean, i wonder whether Wenger would have achieved anything, even the 4th place nonsense!

  3. Most glaring evidence of the curtailed spending in fact was actually Ashley Cole, mind you.

    And you might want to total up all the fees Dein’s son has been collecting as well. His only qualification for the job is his father’s Arsenal boardroom history and connections.

    • Here’s an idea: as you know everything, why don’t you write a blog? I’m sure people would flock to read it, because y’know – you know EVERYTHING!

      • Phil, I dont agree with you here. The reason you have a comments section is for readers of your blog to comment on a particular blog post, whether you agree with them or not. Either remove the comments section entirely or accept that your readership may have different opinions from yours. telling them to go and write theor own blog is insulting to your readership.

        On to the post, I agree with some points that Ziontrain makes. Arsene is an employee (forget how much power we are made to believe he wields), he does not set his own salary, he surely negotiates the terms of his employment. To simplify issues by just looking at raw numbers rather than renumeration, which is what Arsene gets, is entirely missing the point. It would have made sense if the line argument was the money Arsene is paid (he does not take it out, its in return of a service he provides to the club) is whether the service that he provides to the club merits the renumeration that he gets. I doubt your post has looked critically at the contribution the manager (or any other employee you may want to consider) makes to the club.

      • this doesn’t make any sense. Ziontrain is just making an observation that seems to directly relate to and enhance the depth of this article. Why so weirdly hostile Phil?

      • Dein’s son is a solicitor….who specialised in “advising” players who were either current or former employees of his father and often were sitting across the negotiating table from his father or his father’s contacts at other clubs.

        In other words our own verison of Jason Ferguson, and a business practice that is termed “corruption” or “nepotism” at any well-run public company.

        But no, I’m sorry, must toe the party line – Dein was a saint and never took a penny from the club. Its that greedy Wenger who is taking it all.

      • Zion – You claimed that Dein’s son isn’t qualified. Well, looking at the deals that he had due to his connections would suggest otherwise.

        I read on a blog the other day that Darren Dein actually helped Arsenal rather than stripping their assets because he represented the crown jewels of Arsenal (Fabregas, RVP, Henry, etc) and helped negotiate their deals elsewhere thus filling the coffers for debt repayment at Arsenal (of course, lining his own pockets and his clients)

        The common story was that Dein was the villain in the piece.

        It’s a fine line between hero and villain in any circumstance.

      • “You read on a blog”, did you? Well then it must be true.

        Curious then, that the “favour” of asset stripping began when Dein Sr was no longer in power at Arsenal.

        In contrast, while Dein Sr was on the Arsenal board, Dein Jr acquired clients from the Arsenal playing staff, presumbly by offering guaranteeing them a better deal – as long as a cut went to the Dein family coffers.

        Does anyone doubt that Ashley Cole would have bee granted the extra 5,000 quid a week – and stayed – if his agent had been Darren Dein instead of Sky Andrew? No. That’s corrupution, my friend.

        In any properly run public company, like say Tesco, GE or Aviva, any such practice would lead to dismissal and likely a lawsuit agains the perpetrator. However in the neo-fuedal world of football the peons come down from the stands to hail the thief and demand that he be reinstated and given back the keys to the till.

        No surprise then that said fans are laughably easily parted from their money.

        Yes indeed it s Arsene Wenger who has been making away with the fans’ money. Not the leech in the board room and his son.

      • ““You read on a blog”, did you? Well then it must be true.”

        Yeah – I did. Blogs typically portray the bloggers point of view. He didn’t say that it was true, nor was I trying to portray it as such. It was just an alternative point of view to consider which I did and thought, there could be something in it – maybe not.

        “Curious then, that the “favour” of asset stripping began when Dein Sr was no longer in power at Arsenal”

        Or (probably more poignant) when Arsenal had moved to the Emirates and had debt to service by selling players.

        “Does anyone doubt that Ashley Cole would have bee granted the extra 5,000 quid a week – and stayed – if his agent had been Darren Dein instead of Sky Andrew? No. That’s corrupution, my friend. ”

        I think that Cole’s head had been turned by Mourinho (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_prem/4596209.stm), so I think that whoever the agent was is irrelevant. Cole was the best left back in the league at the time, so it is hardly surprising that he was coveted. Let’s not make it out that he was completely innocent in the matter and if it weren’t for the Darren Dein/David Dein conspiracy, he’d still be at Arsenal.

        If you were tapped up by another business who offered to pay you double or triple of what you were making, what would you do? Arsenal couldn’t compete with those kind of wages, so they sold him.

  4. Big whoop, loads bollox got bored half way through no other manager would have us the way we are today he stayed loyal an could of earned more money if he travelled aboard an took over there clubs

    • Agree with he could have gone elsewhere for more money,but these would have been big clubs,where he would’ve have been a coach.Arsene most likely would not have been allowed to set the wage structure of any these clubs.Also on the past few seasons results and performances,i think Arsene would have been shown the exit.

  5. Yeah hell right !
    Well , he did spend some ”right’ money on J.Baptista
    God is funny sometimes, isn’t he !

  6. I enjoy this blog but this article seems pointless.
    You’re not comparing value, but monetary cost to the spending budget? Any good manager would cost a substantial amount to employ over a period that long.
    It would make very little difference to the money available for players, in fact, you would need to go into huge detail and massive guesswork to even try to answer that. CL qualification, contract termination payments, the possibilities are endless and the answer is probably going to be underwhelming.
    If you are actually comparing value, then I think that’s one thing Wenger has delivered. If our club is 10 times more valuable than when he took over, his salary is a drop in the ocean and money well spent.
    As far as finances and value are concerned, there is probably nobody better in world football.
    Wenger’s flaws are obvious, but they are more football related than that.

  7. 100 million value to 1 billion – but apparently that’s irrelivent….? Who cares…? that completely derails your bitch against the most successful Manager the club has seen.
    A one sided arguement that misses everything the man has achieved.

    you couldn’t make it up… you should be on stage, big shoes, spinnig bow tie, bucket of tinsel… the lot.

  8. well you acomplished what you set out to do!!!!!other that that i have nothing to say,except you really need to get a life dude!!!!

  9. Wenger has earned money as salary and bonuses but as he’s helped to bring in more than he earned you can’t really say money’s been taken. Taking implies that nothing’s been put back. He’s just been very handsomely paid to do his job and been there a very long time. He’s profited, as have the Directors that sold up but the club seems to be more valuable than ever. I thought the interesting point is that no one player earns more than him and maybe that’s why he’s so reluctant to break the player’s wage structure for big names and prefers a more balanced pay structure that doesn’t compromise his principles that he’s gotta be the top earner, (or taker?).

  10. I must say phil your articles verses conspiracy theorists ziontrain are very entertaining..
    Its almost like a jackal & hide scenario…
    Keep up the excellent posts (both of u )

  11. The blog is called angryofislington so we can’t really expect the opinions expressed to be entirely objective, but to dismiss criticism by saying ‘write your own blog cause you know everything’ really illustrates that the writer is not really someone whose opinion is worth anything. It would be nice if arsenal had fans to be proud of, but unfortunately it’s more likely that Bendtner will break Messi’s goals in a calendar year record than that happening.

  12. Of course he has. He is the longest serving manager and also the most successful manager. Lies, damn lies and statistics. The phrasing of ‘taking’ money from the club is provocative so expect some backlash (i’m sure that’s the idea). He has been paid by the club to do his job.

  13. God dude, you have to realise the way you write is so inflammatory. This thing called the internet, something I guess has been around for less than 30% of your life, demands a little more tact in the way something is written. I know you have a good heart but everything you write just comes across as so bitter and inflammatory. You’re like a well-researched, intelligent version of Myles Palmer.

  14. Thought provoking article and so mush better than reading a rehash of last weeks news or another idiot basing an article on the Mirror story about Fellaini….I mean seriously is the buyout clause 22 23 or 24Million? I mean seriously there was a story today on Higuain thinking “Arsenal suited him” from the 2 week old quote!

    Personally I wish every Arsenal blogger great success financially this season so they can all afford to spend 2 weeks at a beach somewhere and they are not forced to cobble together more transfer rubbish next year.

  15. Well I think he is one of the best managers in the world he deserves to take that money coz he earns it specialy wen he buys a crap player and then turns them in to a world class player and sells them then why not. But I don’t like wat he spends for the club coz he don’t spend any

  16. It would be interesting to know how much other top four clubs have spent on managers over the period Wenger is in charge of Arsenal, including severence packages after sacking managers etc,etc. My guess is it would probably come up to the same figure or more.

      • The amount spent on mangager compensation is not interesting, other than at Chelsea and Man City, where they have spent huge amounts on compensating fired managers.

        Isolating manager salary is pointless as the real compensation expense at any club is in the playing squad.

        It is even worse to do such “analysis” at a club where the business strategy has in fact been to secure manager who can keep the club afloat by find cheap players and later sell them for a lot of money.

  17. My question on Twitter to you, was the one about current valuation of the club compared to when Wenger took over, to which you replied about x15 but no different to the other clubs. whilst adding on here ‘who really cares’. But if you actually look at it, of those other
    19 clubs, 9 are no longer in the premier lge ( 2 in division one ) and at least 2 have filed for bankruptcy. so if you want to compare can you be neutral.

    • Ok fair point, but I still consider it largely irrelevant. The value is what someone will pay for it. And other clubs have been promoted in place of the ones who have fallen, and their value has probably risen by a greater factor.

  18. If anything, i wouldnt say first 8 years… for the first 12 years Arsene has been great and excelled. The last 5 years have been issue. It seems your most recent articles have attacked the manager.

    I personally think if that change doesnt happen this summer, he’s should be let go next year.

    • Wenger is out of contract next summer and is already a legend at Arsenal no matter what. He is filthy rich. He does not need money anymore. He is coming off of 5 or 6 years of austerity imposed on him by the board. He is also 63 and needing a another league title and a champions league trophy to secure his legacy beyond Arsenal.

      I’d say the story is more like of the board doesn’t give Wenger the money to spend this summer, then he will be sitting at the managers desk at PSG by this time next year. With a huge war chest to spend.

      And the Arsenal board is not going to get a manager to replace who can guarantee trophies unless they offer that manager a huge spending chest.

      Any manager lower than that level is pointless, as that would involve more rebuilding, which the fans are not up for anymore and the club’s own commercial growth ambitions can no longer tolerate.

      In other words its not a matter of Wenger being “let go” – he’s the one in the driving seat here.

      The subtext to Gasdis recent pronouncements on Wenger’s contract was that they are begging him to stay but he has refused to re-sign so far because he isn’t happy with the conditions i.e. the amount of money he is being offered for player transfer and salary budget.

      • He may just be in the driving seat… but the majority of supporters will go for the ”face” of the club to vent their frustrations… I would hate to see, unless he comes out and says what the limitations are, he has to accept vitriol that will come… all the fans want is truth and honesty.

  19. Can you consider whether anyone has taken money out of the club without also considering what contribution the individual has been made to the clubs earnings? Equally simplistic but say 16 years in the CL at £20m a year is £320m. Is Wenger directly or solely responsible for that? He’s certainly the one constant during that time. Has he taken £80m out of the club or just 25% of the earnings he has made from the CL alone? Bottom line seems to be that it’s been a win-win situation for both sides as his stewardship probably means no individual has ever earned more money for the club either.

  20. ” It’s another example of people hearing the same information and projecting their own emotions on it to reach a different conclusion”.

    Insert comment here.

    • Phil comes across as a bitter and twisted old/young man! We know you don’t like Wenger but try to give balanced views!

      Even on twitter you can across as a “know it all” guy when you’re interacting with a humble but intelligent man @Darrenarsenal

      Your attitude stinks and you don’t like being challeneged either here on your blog or on twitter…bizarre

      • When I pointed this comment out to Darren he was most amused, as he regards himself as anything but humble (though I quite agree he’s intelligent). Perhaps that shows that there’s the possibility of error in your character judgements. Just a thought.

  21. The majority shareholders are not helping the club either, hence they are showing other clubs the best players is shame to them, i can manage the club more than them

  22. Pingback: Junnuja hankitaan ja oikeiden vahvistusten kohdalla kitsastellaan tuttuun tyyliin | FinnGooners

  23. If you didn’t expect the phrase ‘taken money out of’ to annoy people then I think you were being naive. Even if you weren’t intending it as a criticism it’s a not a natural way of phrasing the transaction at all, and it has immediate negative connotations.

    • I like to see reactions and whether people can separate emotion from a simple numerical fact. A lot of people can’t, even when there is a lot more praise of Arsene in the post than criticism.

      • So you phrased it in a way that you knew would be likely provoke a negative response just to see whether people would be able to avoid that response?

        I understand that people find it hard to separate emotion from fact – and it’s a shame – but when the facts are presented in terms which already have negative leanings I can’t help but feel it’s not really a fair assessment. And this is massively magnified when it’s a tweet rather than an entire article, because there isn’t room for further explanation.

  24. This is most amusing non-season reading… I almost took my mind off of false reports of strikers in various M25 based locations for a minute…

    as for asset stripping, non spending and “fattening” – were the club not gearing up for taking out a somewhat large mortgage on a property that was yet to be built? If the loan was against the club then is it possible that was the reasoning behind it? I don’t know, I’m just the IT guy 🙂

    • If you are planning on selling the club anyway, why do the budget cutting to build a stadium? For all you know the new owner might have enough capital to build a stadium without squeezing the operating budget at the same time.

      The only reason you’d invest in a very expensive land and stadium redevelopment project right before selling the club…..is to max out the actual value stream of the club (turning land into real assets with higher revenue streams) and thus increase the selling price.

      Thus Dein and Fisman cashed out at a higher price – at the cost of turning the club into an also ran during that period.

      It was a planned strategy, with known consequences on the field – not a side effect.

      Wenger got paid to keep the ship afloat in the mean time.

  25. I’m not a blog writer but I read a lot of blogs and honestly I’m not an Arsene fan but this has to one of the most biased articles not to mention poorly constructe at that. You make the AKB look like they have a point when we are having trying to have a serious debate. I won’t go throught the whole thing cos I see other have already addressed this point. The one thing I’ll address is what was sed about whoever built the stadium and them having taken more money than that. You said in terms of the profit they made then it wouldn’t be, which is a fair enough point, but why don’t you apply the same logic to Arsene, do you have access to his expense accounts and also why discredit his labour because that company that built the stadium takes labour into account before calculating profit. His family expenses and what he has had to do for his children, if all those things don’t matter then you must be reach, cos if you even clear 20 grand from you company a year then if you there for 3 years then you should have 60 grand in you bank account because your expenses don’t matter. I’m not trying to insult you, you are probably better versed on arsenal matters compared to me but still, tho is poor by your previous standards and propaganda poorly disguised as just pointing out facts.

  26. Nice to see Arsene fans ganging up on you Phil on your own soil ….. Hahaha

    Maybe you should have said, Arsene is the person who took more than anyone from Arsenal on wages …

    Honestly I don’t think this would have helped though 🙂

  27. Just read everything on this post,wow! dont know what to say on this arguement, keep writting phil its definitly thought provoking and subsequently entertaining, Ziontrain maybe you should write a blog as phil suggests equally thought provoking. Ultimitley our arguements or opinions dont change anything AFC does, unfortunatly! Lets hope the glory days return….soon.

  28. If you dine in an expensive restaurant and the food is rotten and the service is awful, then you complain to the manager. But if you are foolish enough to keep going (because you remember when the food used to be excellent) and the food stays rotten and the service awful, and you’ve complained to the owner and still nothing improves, then you know the manager is following his boss’s instructions. Logic suggests that Arsene is obeying Kroenke’s instructions. Not explicitly detailed instructions – such as how much to pay an individual player or to buy an individual player – but by staying within the over-arching wages/transfer budget. In which case, Arsene is probably worth to his bosses every penny they have paid him.

  29. I’m a fan of the more incisive and critical writing here, but this post is not your finest moment. I love the club even though I’m indifferent to some of the playing and management staff. Football fans everywhere feel a level of cynicism towards their clubs but this type of post couched as ‘sociological commentary’ is pretty low. In addition to the many excellent rebuttals above, I’d add that your facile analysis of value (whether you added a disclaimer or not), and bizarre interactions with your commenters are not particularly classy. Best of luck increasing your twitter followership though.

  30. Kroenke’s annual ‘take’ is £25K – which means Arsene’s ‘take’ is appr 250 times greater. Assuming Mr K receives the same from his other 5 sports outfits = 150K – Arsene’s take is 40 times greater. What can we conclude from this? Here is what I would like to believe (which is basically what the Great Gatz has been telling us):- Our favourite Yank is not interested in money, he has more than enough. What he wants to be is the world’s biggest owner of sports clubs. His way of achieving this is sustainability: each club must pay its way. Whatever wealth the Club generates will be devoted to improving the competiveness and facilities of the Club. He will never sell Arsenal – it’s the jewel in his crown. It has the capacity to compete with the elite. Eat your heart out, Mr U. We have ourselves an honest custodian. If you can believe it.

  31. I read most of your posts an enjoy a majority. But fail to understand the purpose of this post. I know you said “just to say that Wenger has taken the most money out of Arsenal and nothing else”. But still what does that mean ? That he is taking Arsenal for a ride ? That he doesn’t deserve it ? I don’t know. Probably your attempt at a light hearted debate.

    As I see it, if Wenger has taken the most out of Arsenal, he also has added the most to Arsenal.Definitely that is what the board and owners think. Has he been set targets which he has been achieving.

    Also, I just cannot understand the fact you compare the wages between 1920’s and 2000’s. Sorry but that is pointless.

    Before you think I am a blind Wenger admirer, I categorize myself as a rational admirer. Tell me he screwed up FA cup team selection (this year) and tactics in some games over the years. I will agree. But in the bigger sense of things , he has done very well for the club.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s