Arsenal FC | 2024/25 Season

[KingKhanWC]

Oh here we go uve got into that mode of making things up as usual.

Where did I state in my response its in the bag for Arsenal? I didnt

Also I see you failed to justify on your claims that "PSG are best side in europe" - bases on what?

hard to see whose waffling most rubbish at moment, you or iqbal'sh.

Lets get to predictions , no ambiguity?

Mine Arsenal win first leg by 1 goal. PSG win the tie at home 2nd .

Yours?

 

[Iqbal'sh]

I think I know where you are coming from.

Arsenal are hard to beat. We haven't lost the league because of lots of defeats. It's the draws that have really killed us.

UCL is different as most big teams go for the wins as that's how they play in the domestic leagues.

Inter and Atletico being the main exceptions who are like Arsenal very difficult to beat.

I think PSG pose a good challenge as both teams are strong. I think we can beat them.

Will be a cracking semi final.

Inter in the group stage and over 2 legs I would have made them favourites against us. Just because they'd be patient and kill us when they had the chance much like Newcastle seem to do . In a one of final game however I think you can only sit back for so long.

Barca are the favourites in my opinion however you never know with one off games.

I actually think it's a great final 4. Barring PSG the other 3 teams were high up in the league phase to. So it's not by chance they've got so far.

Yes the Semifinals have 4 very good teams, as you said it’s the teams that finished 2nd, 3rd & 4th in the league phase, and the other team, PSG, defeated the number one seeds.
It’s not unreasonable to make a case for any of the 4, of course being a supporter of one of these will favour them

 

[Amjid Javed]

Lets get to predictions , no ambiguity?

Mine Arsenal win first leg by 1 goal. PSG win the tie at home 2nd .

Yours?

I'm interested to see how PSG approach the 1st leg, they were very aggressive and gun ho in the Liverpool and Villa games and if they are that open in Arsenal game they could end up being slapped silly.

PSG will look to play on counter, Arsenal I'm hoping will keep the good home form going and will win the game.

Only worry is either jorghino or merino will have to play in midfield.

Jorghino can be good at dictating play, but his lack of mobility can be exposed. Merino has been mediocre in midfield, a few decent moments as make shift striker doesn't change fact he's been poor in role he was signed to play in.

So how Arsenal midfield is set up is only worry where the team could falter.

I back Arsenal to win 1st leg.

 

[Markhor]

More entertainment in this thread than Netflix with the recurring characters and themes

Every fan will have their opinion but this is my personal ranking of achivements:

1) Premier League - The bread and butter for any top club and the most accurate gauge of a team's tactical, footballing, physical and mental strength as it's 38 games over 9 months against all opponents in all situations. Brian Clough once said he'd happily accept a League Title in exchange for first round exits in the European Cup, FA Cup and League Cup, and I'm kinda aligned to that view.

2) Champions League - Competing against the continent's best over a fairly large sample size in front of massive worldwide audiences.

3) CL qualification and a domestic cup

4) CL qualification

5) Domestic cup - sad to say but they just don't have the same allure due to expansion of European competitions.

The well resourced PL clubs, Big Six, or whatever name you wish to give them, are primarily judged on the first two priorities by fans and the media. The question is over how long a period of time ? 5 years in fairness is more than most modern managers at top clubs are given - look at how Roman Abrahmovic mercilessly dumped managers at Chelsea even after winning big prizes (which isn't my preferred model).

Arsenal do remind me of how we used to be under Gerard Houllier and Rafa Benitez. We lacked the guile to unlock low blocks especially at home in the league, and so never won the title. We constantly dropped points to teams like Charlton, Portsmouth, Birmingham etc. However we were superbly organised and our style of play lent itself well to European competitions so I wouldn't be surprised if Arsenal won the CL. They were very streetwise the other night and coped well in the febrile atmosphere of Madrid.

However making that next step in the League will depend on the quality of the attacking reinforcements in the summer.

 

[KingKhanWC]

I'm interested to see how PSG approach the 1st leg, they were very aggressive and gun ho in the Liverpool and Villa games and if they are that open in Arsenal game they could end up being slapped silly.

PSG will look to play on counter, Arsenal I'm hoping will keep the good home form going and will win the game.

Only worry is either jorghino or merino will have to play in midfield.

Jorghino can be good at dictating play, but his lack of mobility can be exposed. Merino has been mediocre in midfield, a few decent moments as make shift striker doesn't change fact he's been poor in role he was signed to play in.

So how Arsenal midfield is set up is only worry where the team could falter.

I back Arsenal to win 1st leg.

PSG team now is based on spanish ball control and speed going forward from all angles , reason why the backs score often. However they will be a little more cautious about sending too many players forward. Arsenal will defend in bunches which is something they do well but psg have a few who can shoot accurately from distance.

Both psg and barca relaxed too much with a healthl lead in their 2nd leg matches but will hit peak in the semis. PSG have also played 2nd leg away in ko stages , now they will be home 2nd leg this time. They also now have good experience of premier league sides.

Partey is a huge loss imo , they bossed real in midfield which ultimately lead to victory but psg have a stronger mid and partey would done well .
If arsenal win this to make final it will be an incredible performance against a elite team who are very hungry and very confident. I just feel PSG will score at least 2 goals and likely 3 over both legs. Can arsenal match them or score more I'm not sure.

 

[KingKhanWC]

More entertainment in this thread than Netflix with the recurring characters and themes

Every fan will have their opinion but this is my personal ranking of achivements:

1) Premier League - The bread and butter for any top club and the most accurate gauge of a team's tactical, footballing, physical and mental strength as it's 38 games over 9 months against all opponents in all situations. Brian Clough once said he'd happily accept a League Title in exchange for first round exits in the European Cup, FA Cup and League Cup, and I'm kinda aligned to that view.

2) Champions League - Competing against the continent's best over a fairly large sample size in front of massive worldwide audiences.

3) CL qualification and a domestic cup

4) CL qualification

5) Domestic cup - sad to say but they just don't have the same allure due to expansion of European competitions.

The well resourced PL clubs, Big Six, or whatever name you wish to give them, are primarily judged on the first two priorities by fans and the media. The question is over how long a period of time ? 5 years in fairness is more than most modern managers at top clubs are given - look at how Roman Abrahmovic mercilessly dumped managers at Chelsea even after winning big prizes (which isn't my preferred model).

Arsenal do remind me of how we used to be under Gerard Houllier and Rafa Benitez. We lacked the guile to unlock low blocks especially at home in the league, and so never won the title. We constantly dropped points to teams like Charlton, Portsmouth, Birmingham etc. However we were superbly organised and our style of play lent itself well to European competitions so I wouldn't be surprised if Arsenal won the CL. They were very streetwise the other night and coped well in the febrile atmosphere of Madrid.

However making that next step in the League will depend on the quality of the attacking reinforcements in the summer.

It's too early for any fan thinking CL trophy is going to happen when teams like psg, barca and inter still need to be beaten .

Premier league is the biggest trophy for any English team but arsenal have never won the European cup.. if they do, it will be bigger for them over winning premier league.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

All Arteta did was what suited his agenda at the time.

In regards to the whole Auba incident there was a heated argument and Auba slapped Arteta. So there was no going back after that incident.

Arteta got rid of ramsdale as is suited what he wanted. Just like his blind faith in Zinchenko, Jesus and havertz showed him not being ruthless.

Doing some thing on very rare occasion doesn't make sumone ruthless.

Sir Alex was prime example of a ruthless manager the way he got rid of Robson, Ince, Keane. RVN to name a few...

So all uve done is overexaggerate as usual, which is a running theme with most of your posts

You either struggled to comprehend what was being reported at the time or you are being deliberately dishonest to suit your narrative.
A radio pundit ( I think it was Danny Mills) mentioned the “Auba has slapped Arteta in the face” story citing Arsenal insiders.
What he said was meant in the metaphorical sense not the physical as you have claimed.
Arteta gave Auba many opportunities to reform and improve his professionalism however Auba let him down one time too many. That’s when he was stripped of the captaincy and resulting dropping from the squad.
However, clearly your anti-Arteta bias is based on many such distortions.
In terms of Ramsdale, Arteta gave him a chance and realised Ramsdale was not suited to the style of play he wanted to encourage.
In public he spoke about two number ones fighting for the position and both would have enough opportunities to stake their claim. In reality he had signed Raya to improve the team but wanted to protect the resale value of Ramsdale as well as possible.
Again with other players you have mentioned, he has left them out of the starting XI but will keep his cards close to his chest again to ensure maximum value from their sales.
That is aside from Havertz who after a poor start has been a huge asset to the team and style of play.
So again there is only one person waffling, distorting and frankly adding nothing of note to this discussion.

 

[aboveandbeyond]

I'm interested to see how PSG approach the 1st leg, they were very aggressive and gun ho in the Liverpool and Villa games and if they are that open in Arsenal game they could end up being slapped silly.

PSG will look to play on counter, Arsenal I'm hoping will keep the good home form going and will win the game.

Only worry is either jorghino or merino will have to play in midfield.

Jorghino can be good at dictating play, but his lack of mobility can be exposed. Merino has been mediocre in midfield, a few decent moments as make shift striker doesn't change fact he's been poor in role he was signed to play in.

So how Arsenal midfield is set up is only worry where the team could falter.

I back Arsenal to win 1st leg.

We do have to put things in to perspective regarding PSG looking rattled against Villa They were virtually coasting with a 5-1 aggregate lead which led them to take the eye off the ball, which can happen. Having said that, after coming through that and seeing how dangerous Arsenal can be on Counter, I see PSG taking a possession based approach and not leave themselves open in Transitions.
, and we do know they have serious Quality in wide positions and center.

 

[Amjid Javed]

You either struggled to comprehend what was being reported at the time or you are being deliberately dishonest to suit your narrative.
A radio pundit ( I think it was Danny Mills) mentioned the “Auba has slapped Arteta in the face” story citing Arsenal insiders.
What he said was meant in the metaphorical sense not the physical as you have claimed.
Arteta gave Auba many opportunities to reform and improve his professionalism however Auba let him down one time too many. That’s when he was stripped of the captaincy and resulting dropping from the squad.
However, clearly your anti-Arteta bias is based on many such distortions.
In terms of Ramsdale, Arteta gave him a chance and realised Ramsdale was not suited to the style of play he wanted to encourage.
In public he spoke about two number ones fighting for the position and both would have enough opportunities to stake their claim. In reality he had signed Raya to improve the team but wanted to protect the resale value of Ramsdale as well as possible.
Again with other players you have mentioned, he has left them out of the starting XI but will keep his cards close to his chest again to ensure maximum value from their sales.
That is aside from Havertz who after a poor start has been a huge asset to the team and style of play.
So again there is only one person waffling, distorting and frankly adding nothing of note to this discussion.

According your overhyped nonsense

- Arteta is a miracle worker
- Arteta is ruthless
- Arsenal success isn't based on winning trophies.

It's right up there with your other nonsense that you came up with a few months ago that the kronkes were heavily investing their own money into the club and were ambitions. Where I openly exposed your nonsense and you dissapeared.

You seem to out do yourself everytime you post.

Both Zinchenko and Jesus became liabilities in the team and Arteta continued to persist with both, which ultimately cost Arsenal the title. Where was ruthlessness then?

Oh wait your not able to comprehend that. You've just waffled an excuse

Havertz is an huge asset . Same Havertz who dissapeared vs Bayern, Man city (away) and Villa (home) last season.

Same havertz who was main reason for losing FA Cup ties to Liverpool (last season) Man united and the league cup semi final vs Newcastle. Highest paid player at club and a donkey who continual missing of sitters has meant Arsenal have failed to win trophies.

Amazing Asset. Yet another comedy gem.

 

[Amjid Javed]

You either struggled to comprehend what was being reported at the time or you are being deliberately dishonest to suit your narrative.
A radio pundit ( I think it was Danny Mills) mentioned the “Auba has slapped Arteta in the face” story citing Arsenal insiders.
What he said was meant in the metaphorical sense not the physical as you have claimed.
Arteta gave Auba many opportunities to reform and improve his professionalism however Auba let him down one time too many. That’s when he was stripped of the captaincy and resulting dropping from the squad.
However, clearly your anti-Arteta bias is based on many such distortions.
In terms of Ramsdale, Arteta gave him a chance and realised Ramsdale was not suited to the style of play he wanted to encourage.
In public he spoke about two number ones fighting for the position and both would have enough opportunities to stake their claim. In reality he had signed Raya to improve the team but wanted to protect the resale value of Ramsdale as well as possible.
Again with other players you have mentioned, he has left them out of the starting XI but will keep his cards close to his chest again to ensure maximum value from their sales.
That is aside from Havertz who after a poor start has been a huge asset to the team and style of play.
So again there is only one person waffling, distorting and frankly adding nothing of note to this discussion.

Arteta will ensure maximum value from player sales?

oh yeah there are loads of clubs lined up to signed a injury prone Jesus, whose on 240K aren't they?

Same goes for Zinchenko? Why don't you name all the clubs looking to sign this player? On 150K

Vast majority of Arsenal sales under Arteta have been mediocre to say to sat the least.

Has Tierneys sale value been maximized? He was a player Arteta didn't want to keep.

keep the nonsense coming

 

[Amjid Javed]

You either struggled to comprehend what was being reported at the time or you are being deliberately dishonest to suit your narrative.

the irony of calling someone dishonest.

This coming from "the kronkes have heavily invested in Arsenal since taking full ownership"

You have zero credibility

 

[MK7Z]

Suddenly the Premier league is ranked higher than the champions league now that Liverpool have won it. Otherwise it was always you have to win the champions league to be considered a big club .

Now that arsenal have a chance it's suddenly the PL which is higher ranked.

Love it

 

[Iqbal'sh]

It's right up there with your other nonsense that you came up with a few months ago that the kronkes were heavily investing their own money into the club and were ambitions. Where I openly exposed your nonsense and you dissapeared.

You seem to out do yourself everytime you post.

The only nonsense was from you regarding the Auba slap, I see you failed to even mention it in your latest post.
I wonder why?

As far as Kroenke (btw that’s the correct spelling, as a so called Arsenal know it all I would expect you to at least get this right!!) investment is concerned you definitely didn’t expose me. Both provided sources that backed the claims. Not sure how you feel you made me disappear from the forum.
Stan Kroenke replaced external debt with cheaper shareholder loans meaning Arsenal had more money available to invest in the playing XI and infrastructure.
Whether you consider this as a form of outlay conducive to improving the financial outlook for the club is a matter of opinion.

My posts on this forum are irregular at best and down to my work, friends and family commitments. Sorry to burst your bubble.

 

[Amjid Javed]

The only nonsense was from you regarding the Auba slap, I see you failed to even mention it in your latest post.
I wonder why?

As far as Kroenke (btw that’s the correct spelling, as a so called Arsenal know it all I would expect you to at least get this right!!) investment is concerned you definitely didn’t expose me. Both provided sources that backed the claims. Not sure how you feel you made me disappear from the forum.
Stan Kroenke replaced external debt with cheaper shareholder loans meaning Arsenal had more money available to invest in the playing XI and infrastructure.
Whether you consider this as a form of outlay conducive to improving the financial outlook for the club is a matter of opinion.

My posts on this forum are irregular at best and down to my work, friends and family commitments. Sorry to burst your bubble.

You didn't provide any substance to your claims On the kronkes investment claims. Any money that owners put into Transfers etc.. have to be shown on balance sheets in regards to FFP (thats the whole point.

The kronkes were shown to have invested none of their own money in the last 3 year FFP cycle. Something you showed zero proof on proving otherwise.

In regards to the Kronkes taking a loan out, they did that during covid. Because they took advantage of a loop hole in covid regulations on business taking out loans of needed. Spurs did the same thing. Arsenal are paying that loan off back to the kronkes at a set interest rate. So there is no "investment" from the kronkes its just leveraging debt.

None of that money was used to invest in the team, as that would technically be a breaching of rule. Atleast the rules of FFP and what can and can't be done in terms of investment

So yet again more nonsense from you.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

You didn't provide any substance to your claims On the kronkes investment claims. Any money that owners put into Transfers etc.. have to be shown on balance sheets in regards to FFP (thats the whole point.

The kronkes were shown to have invested none of their own money in the last 3 year FFP cycle. Something you showed zero proof on proving otherwise.

In regards to the Kronkes taking a loan out, they did that during covid. Because they took advantage of a loop hole in covid regulations on business taking out loans of needed. Spurs did the same thing. Arsenal are paying that loan off back to the kronkes at a set interest rate. So there is no "investment" from the kronkes its just leveraging debt.

None of that money was used to invest in the team, as that would technically be a breaching of rule. Atleast the rules of FFP and what can and can't be done in terms of investment

So yet again more nonsense from you.

Read and weep
Man City challenged the ATP regs with reference to ownership loans and how it was favourable to certain clubs and their FFP position:

Man City accuse Premier League 'of distorting the competition in favour of Arsenal'

Man City are insisting that the Premier League rules over shareholder loans favour Arsenal and other rival clubs...😬

www.football365.com

 

[Iqbal'sh]

You didn't provide any substance to your claims On the kronkes investment claims. Any money that owners put into Transfers etc.. have to be shown on balance sheets in regards to FFP (thats the whole point.

The kronkes were shown to have invested none of their own money in the last 3 year FFP cycle. Something you showed zero proof on proving otherwise.

In regards to the Kronkes taking a loan out, they did that during covid. Because they took advantage of a loop hole in covid regulations on business taking out loans of needed. Spurs did the same thing. Arsenal are paying that loan off back to the kronkes at a set interest rate. So there is no "investment" from the kronkes its just leveraging debt.

None of that money was used to invest in the team, as that would technically be a breaching of rule. Atleast the rules of FFP and what can and can't be done in terms of investment

So yet again more nonsense from you.

Another post another diversion from mentioning Auba and the mystical slap.

So which was it; comprehension or dishonesty??

 

[Amjid Javed]

Read and weep
Man City challenged the ATP regs with reference to ownership loans and how it was favourable to certain clubs and their FFP position:

Man City accuse Premier League 'of distorting the competition in favour of Arsenal'

Man City are insisting that the Premier League rules over shareholder loans favour Arsenal and other rival clubs...😬

www.football365.com

Do you even understand the concept of those loans?

So once again uve post an article with zero understand.

Feel free to show evidence of where these loans were used to invest in the team?

More clueless rubbish.

 

[Amjid Javed]

Another post another diversion from mentioning Auba and the mystical slap.

So which was it; comprehension or dishonesty??

Mystical slap? There was a physical altercation. Even Aubameyang has mentioned that their was.

Your harping on about dishonesty? I've exposed your lies in regards to the kronke nonsense. Now your posting Articles which you don't even understand.

I've asked you numerous times to show proof where kronkes have invested money into Transfers. Yet you can't show any proof.

Same nonsense you came up with moneys ago, clearly the schooling you git back then wasn't enough.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Do you even understand the concept of those loans?

So once again uve post an article with zero understand.

Feel free to show evidence of where these loans were used to invest in the team?

More clueless rubbish.

Do you actually forget what you posted?

In regards to the Kronkes taking a loan out, they did that during covid. Because they took advantage of a loop hole in covid regulations on business taking out loans of needed. Spurs did the same thing. Arsenal are paying that loan off back to the kronkes at a set interest rate. So there is no "investment" from the kronkes it’s just leveraging debt.

None of that money was used to invest in the team, as that would technically be a breaching of rule. Atleast the rules of FFP and what can and can't be done in terms of investment

Now re-read the link and accept your wrong again.

 

[Amjid Javed]

Read and weep
Man City challenged the ATP regs with reference to ownership loans and how it was favourable to certain clubs and their FFP position:

Man City accuse Premier League 'of distorting the competition in favour of Arsenal'

Man City are insisting that the Premier League rules over shareholder loans favour Arsenal and other rival clubs...😬

www.football365.com

Well done for showing how clueless you are.

Arsenal have stadium debt to pay.
Arsenal made huge losses during covid like every other team. A loan was taken by kronkes to cover losses.

but according to you it was to free up money to invest in team?

If that was the case, why did all players take 12.5% wage cuts, also staff were made redundant. If that so called "made money available" to use else where thar wouldn't have happened.

Yet more clueless nonsense.

Also got educate yourself on how leverage debt works before just posting articles, which you don't understand

 

[Amjid Javed]

Do you actually forget what you posted?

Now re-read the link and accept your wrong again.

You really slow, rather then posting an article you can't even comprehend.

Show me evidenced of balance sheets where it shows the kronkes invested money directly into Transfers.

Because on the FFP rules, ownership investment money has to show. Not once have you show proof of this.

All uve done is post an article which you don't even understand.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Mystical slap? There was a physical altercation. Even Aubameyang has mentioned that their was.

Your harping on about dishonesty? I've exposed your lies in regards to the kronke nonsense. Now your posting Articles which you don't even understand.

I've asked you numerous times to show proof where kronkes have invested money into Transfers. Yet you can't show any proof.

Same nonsense you came up with moneys ago, clearly the schooling you git back then wasn't enough.

So from a slap it’s now a physical altercation
Seems only one of us is capable of backing what is said with proof:

Danny Mills did not claim Aubameyang ‘slapped Arteta in the face’

I would not normally come to Danny Mills’s defence. He is a poor pundit and very bitter about Arsenal. But Football365, a once well-respected and football website needs to hang its head in sh…

shewore.com

That’s one of many articles that rubbish the claims you make.

 

[Amjid Javed]

So from a slap it’s now a physical altercation
Seems only one of us is capable of backing what is said with proof:

Danny Mills did not claim Aubameyang ‘slapped Arteta in the face’

I would not normally come to Danny Mills’s defence. He is a poor pundit and very bitter about Arsenal. But Football365, a once well-respected and football website needs to hang its head in sh…

shewore.com

That’s one of many articles that rubbish the claims you make.

Who said I got the story from that article? I never mentioned that article

So uve just made an assumption here of this is where I got the info from.

more clueless rubbish from you.

I already told you that Auba himself in interviews has said there was a physical altercation.

at least read things properly before making things up and making assumptions.

 

[Amjid Javed]

Comedy gold today

- kronkes heavily invested in Arsenal transfers
- Arteta is a miracle worker
- Arsenal success isn't measured on winning trophies
- Havertz is an Asset to the team
-Arteta is ruthless
- Arteta is protect player sale values

 

[Iqbal'sh]

A loan was taken by kronkes to cover losses.

It was not taken it was given to Arsenal to help pay stadium debts etc

£324m Stan Kroenke cash injection confirmed by Arsenal as Man City case 'eats into' PSR budget

£324m. 😲

tbrfootball.com

Report: Kroenke restructures Arsenal debt to ease short-term financial pressure

Back in May, the Arsenal Supporters’ Trust (AST) war-gamed a few scenarios that would allow Arsenal to access more cash to help cover short-term costs at a time when matchday revenue has fallen off a cliff and other income is likely to be affected. Financial expert Nigel Phillips outlined that...

arseblog.news

 

[Amjid Javed]

It was not taken it was given to Arsenal to help pay stadium debts etc

£324m Stan Kroenke cash injection confirmed by Arsenal as Man City case 'eats into' PSR budget

£324m. 😲

tbrfootball.com

Report: Kroenke restructures Arsenal debt to ease short-term financial pressure

Back in May, the Arsenal Supporters’ Trust (AST) war-gamed a few scenarios that would allow Arsenal to access more cash to help cover short-term costs at a time when matchday revenue has fallen off a cliff and other income is likely to be affected. Financial expert Nigel Phillips outlined that...

arseblog.news

And again show the evidence where kronkes directly invested onto transfers?

You made a huge song and dance about them heavily investing their own cash.

Keep embarrassing urself, this is hilarious.

The best you can do is keep posting articles.

All public companies, have to disclose their balance sheers every year. You can get this information from government websites. So feel free to show me the evidence where kronkes invested their money directly into Transfers.

You can't

 

[Amjid Javed]

It was not taken it was given to Arsenal to help pay stadium debts etc

£324m Stan Kroenke cash injection confirmed by Arsenal as Man City case 'eats into' PSR budget

£324m. 😲

tbrfootball.com

Report: Kroenke restructures Arsenal debt to ease short-term financial pressure

Back in May, the Arsenal Supporters’ Trust (AST) war-gamed a few scenarios that would allow Arsenal to access more cash to help cover short-term costs at a time when matchday revenue has fallen off a cliff and other income is likely to be affected. Financial expert Nigel Phillips outlined that...

arseblog.news

Under Premier League's Profit and Sustainability Rules (PSR), Premier League clubs can lose up to £105 million over a three-year period, with only £15 million of that loss being their own funds. The remaining £90 million can be covered by owners through "secure funding," meaning they must buy more shares in the club, not loan the club money. This means that owners are essentially investing in their club's shares to cover losses.

------

feel free to show where in last 3 years where Kronkes have invested any of the 90M allowance they are allowed to put in themselves.

again understand the FFP rules

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Who said I got the story from that article? I never mentioned that article

So uve just made an assumption here of this is where I got the info from.

more clueless rubbish from you.

I already told you that Auba himself in interviews has said there was a physical altercation.

at least read things properly before making things up and making assumptions.

Usual diversion from you because you can’t back up your claims.

No where have I stated your made up story of Auba slapping Arteta was from this article.
Contrary to that the article states journalists with an agenda (similar to yourself) exhibited gutter level journalism to misrepresent what Danny Mills had stated.
Changing a metaphor to supposed physical clash

 

[Iqbal'sh]

And again show the evidence where kronkes directly invested onto transfers?

You made a huge song and dance about them heavily investing their own cash.

Keep embarrassing urself, this is hilarious.

The best you can do is keep posting articles.

All public companies, have to disclose their balance sheers every year. You can get this information from government websites. So feel free to show me the evidence where kronkes invested their money directly into Transfers.

You can't

Diversion again??
Was the loan taken by Kroenke or given by him to assist the club??

 

[Amjid Javed]

Diversion again??
Was the loan taken by Kroenke or given by him to assist the club??

Diversion? What was the primary question here or discussion point.

It was on your so called claims that kronkes have heavily invested their own money into transfer since taking full ownership.

I've asked you numerous times to show balance sheet proof.

When last years PSR 3 year cycle came out (March 2024), 9 PL teams had zero investment directly from their owners into Transfers, that included Arsenal. With club making a fuss over getting in money from sales this summer, and not spending in this january, it's clearly obvious kronkes didn't invest any personal cash into Transfers this season.

So il ask you one last time, as I know your struggling here.

Show me proof of where kronkes directly heavily invested their own cash into Arsenal transfers?

1 simple question. I guarantee you can't show any evidence of it

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Diversion? What was the primary question here or discussion point.

It was on your so called claims that kronkes have heavily invested their own money into transfer since taking full ownership.

I've asked you numerous times to show balance sheet proof.

When last years PSR 3 year cycle came out (March 2024), 9 PL teams had zero investment directly from their owners into Transfers, that included Arsenal. With club making a fuss over getting in money from sales this summer, and not spending in this january, it's clearly obvious kronkes didn't invest any personal cash into Transfers this season.

So il ask you one last time, as I know your struggling here.

Show me proof of where kronkes directly heavily invested their own cash into Arsenal transfers?

1 simple question. I guarantee you can't show any evidence of it

You claimed a number of things which I have countered with evidence.

How about you do some heavy lifting of your own to build your argument?

So loan taken or given?
Auba slap a physical reality or metaphor?
Leveraging debt contrary to FFP or not?

Keep up your diversionary tactics as that’s all you can do.

 

[Amjid Javed]

You claimed a number of things which I have countered with evidence.

How about you do some heavy lifting of your own to build your argument?

So loan taken or given?
Auba slap a physical reality or metaphor?
Leveraging debt contrary to FFP or not?

Keep up your diversionary tactics as that’s all you can do.

You haven't countered anything with evidence.

I asked you 1 simple question.

Show me proof of where kronkes directly heavily invested their own cash into Arsenal transfers?

Last years released PSR cycle shows kronkes have put zero of their own cash directly into Transfers in last 3 years.

Or are you now saying that these PSR cycle accounts are in correct?

The UK government website has all Arsenal financial accounts year on year.

So feel free to show me evidence on those accounts where kronkes put their own money in.

Posting meaningless articles ain't evidence.

If club owners have invested directly into transfer they have to declare it on their accounting books for 2 reasons.

One for correct business accounting purposes. Also for PSR cycle declarations.

Failure to do so in 1st instance (business accounting) would constitute fraud.

Failure to do so in 2nd instance would be breaking PSR rules.

you waffled the same nonsense a few months ago. Your really are clueless.

Whats making me laugh the most is your now talking about leveraged debt (this is an industry ive worked in for last 4 years in my current job) and FFP, with zero understanding of what Man city complaint is.

Clubs are allowed to leverage debts against loans. The whole crux of complaint is are those loans being charge at market value

So for example sake

If Arsenal are in debt by 160M and the bank interest rate is 2.5%

If then the owners leverage the debt, the interest on that loan would have to be around what's considered an average across the market.

If the kronkes for example gave Arsenal a interest free loan, that wouldn't be at market value.

If your stupid enough (which you clearly are) to think that the kronkes aren't charging Arsenal interest then your a lost cause.

Anything the kronkes do is to benefit to themselves.

----

you can easily answer my question as you have to places you can get your evidence from, the PSR 3 cycle report or Arsenal annual accounting.

Yet your posting random article. Comedy gold.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

You haven't countered anything with evidence.

I asked you 1 simple question.

Show me proof of where kronkes directly heavily invested their own cash into Arsenal transfers?

Last years released PSR cycle shows kronkes have put zero of their own cash directly into Transfers in last 3 years.

Or are you now saying that these PSR cycle accounts are in correct?

The UK government website has all Arsenal financial accounts year on year.

So feel free to show me evidence on those accounts where kronkes put their own money in.

Posting meaningless articles ain't evidence.

If club owners have invested directly into transfer they have to declare it on their accounting books for 2 reasons.

One for correct business accounting purposes. Also for PSR cycle declarations.

Failure to do so in 1st instance (business accounting) would constitute fraud.

Failure to do so in 2nd instance would be breaking PSR rules.

you waffled the same nonsense a few months ago. Your really are clueless.

Whats making me laugh the most is your now talking about leveraged debt (this is an industry ive worked in for last 4 years in my current job) and FFP, with zero understanding of what Man city complaint is.

Clubs are allowed to leverage debts against loans. The whole crux of complaint is are those loans being charge at market value

So for example sake

If Arsenal are in debt by 160M and the bank interest rate is 2.5%

If then the owners leverage the debt, the interest on that loan would have to be around what's considered an average across the market.

If the kronkes for example gave Arsenal a interest free loan, that wouldn't be at market value.

If your stupid enough (which you clearly are) to think that the kronkes aren't charging Arsenal interest then your a lost cause.

Anything the kronkes do is to benefit to themselves.

----

you can easily answer my question as you have to places you can get your evidence from, the PSR 3 cycle report or Arsenal annual accounting.

Yet your posting random article. Comedy gold.

Making the post twice the length isn’t going to hide the fact you are again diverting.

So let’s see:

According to you Auba slapped Arteta and that’s a reason you have given for Arteta to show his ruthless behaviour.
I have given you the evidence to prove there was no slap & thus you have used an incorrect non-incident to build a false narrative

You have wrongly claimed Kroenke took a loan from the club which I have again proved incorrect by posting articles as evidence. In fact Kroenke provided the club leveraged debt to reduce the amount of money they were paying for external loans.
It benefitted the club hugely and it is open to debate whether this can be considered investment through a different arrangement.

You claim to know about leveraged debt but stated it was not invested in the team as it would break FFP rules and again I have provided evidence to the contrary proving you wrong once more.

Come back with something meaningful, I doubt you are capable of that.

After all you previously said Edu was useless in his role and a primary reason for Arsenal being sluggish in the transfer market. Now that he has vacated his position you have put the blame on to Arteta and claim now is Edu wanted to sign any number of Brazilian players but Arteta didn’t want them. How convenient that this flip flop from you sits perfectly with your anti-Arteta bias.

 

[Amjid Javed]

You claim to know about leveraged debt but stated it was not invested in the team as it would break FFP rules and again I have provided evidence to the contrary proving you wrong once more.

if your so called claim above was even remotely legit, then your indicating the following.

1) Arsenal are not disclosing correcting accounting which is essentially fraud

2) Arsenal are not disclosing correct accounting which is breaking of FFP rules

Or are you now going to show on Arsenal balance sheets where it shows the investment?

If kronkes were investing their own money into Transfers into has to show on a balance sheet

So once again uve shown how clueless you are.

I work in in the finance industry, where my client I service trades in the LMA market. Which is syndicate loans which is essentially leveraged and also corporate debt. So I'm fully aware of how the process work.

But according to your expert knowledge you have evidence that essentially Arsenal are committing fraud and breaking FFP using false accounting

 

[Amjid Javed]

It benefitted the club hugely and it is open to debate whether this can be considered investment through a different arrangement.

Wow so now leveraging debt is now investment.

This isn't some dodgy Asian business where the accounting books are made up to make a bit of extra money.

It clearly states in Rules you can't use loans in that way.

 

[Amjid Javed]

Your whole weak argument that certain subjects are "debatable" when reality is to prove a claim you need facts.

Not random articles.

- purpose of leverage Debt. Many clubs use this. Even the Glaziers do.

- Direct investment of owners money into Transfers. All clubs in FFP rules have to clearly show where money direct comes from for everything on balance sheets. This is where you get proof of investment. This information is always available to public listed companies in the UK. That's a fact. Not a claim its a fact. Its a legal requirement in this country for public companies to do so.

THE ARSENAL FOOTBALL CLUB LIMITED overview - Find and update company information - GOV.UK

THE ARSENAL FOOTBALL CLUB LIMITED - Free company information from Companies House including registered office address, filing history, accounts, annual return, officers, charges, business activity

find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk

 

[BouncerGuy]

PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC INSTEAD OF MAKING PERSONAL REMARKS... WILL REMOVE THE POSTS NOW.

 

[Amjid Javed]

Man city on their yeay accounts have said they got money from certain sponsors

Example

Sponsors A
Sponsors B
Sponsors C

Man city have said they have used that money to pay wages, transfers etc..

Why are they in court? Because they have been accused that the money from Sponsors is actually from the owners. So essentially they breached the amount owners could put in for transfers.

Man city (in an Article which a certain poster is using as s called "evidence" - yet can't even comprehend Man citys allegations towards Arsenal)

Man city are saying that what Arsenal are reporting as their "debt" for FFP / PSR is technically not correct. As kronkes moving the club's debt from themselves to Arsenal, is not within what they deem "fair market" conditions in terms of repayment.


Arsenal have essentially falsified what they have used the loan money for.

Which Is fraud and breach of PSR

Arsenal a public listed company have hidden this information on their yearly accounts, and have also hidden it from PSR regulators. All because of an online "article"

Amazing evidence, a club whose owners want to use a self sustaining model are now commiting fraud.

Amazing insight.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

if your so called claim above was even remotely legit, then your indicating the following.

1) Arsenal are not disclosing correcting accounting which is essentially fraud

2) Arsenal are not disclosing correct accounting which is breaking of FFP rules

That is your claim not what I stated.
If you had read the article I shared earlier, rather than rushing to bash out another meaningless post, you would have understood the reason City were in court challenging the APT amendments the Premier League is trying to enforce.

Man City highlight the huge shareholder loans, running into the hundreds of millions, that other clubs have benefitted from, giving them ‘an unfair advantage’ as Premier League sides battle with the profit and sustainability rules.

Man City accuse Premier League 'of distorting the competition in favour of Arsenal'

Man City are insisting that the Premier League rules over shareholder loans favour Arsenal and other rival clubs...😬

www.football365.com

Arsenal are highlighted as one of the main beneficiaries in terms of shareholder loans.

Clearly your understanding of what is allowed in FFP regs is flawed.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Wow so now leveraging debt is now investment.

This isn't some dodgy Asian business where the accounting books are made up to make a bit of extra money.

It clearly states in Rules you can't use loans in that way.

Leveraging debt improves the financial outlook of the club.
It means they are making vastly lower payments to service debts in comparison to external loans.
Any business that reduces debt payments from let’s say £100m to £40m is going to benefit them. Surplus can be used for other purposes.
City challenged and won the recent APT hearing calling it discrimination against sponsorship investors that were contributing to their finances being deemed unfair whilst shareholders loans were not seen in the same way.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Your whole weak argument that certain subjects are "debatable" when reality is to prove a claim you need facts.

Not random articles.

- purpose of leverage Debt. Many clubs use this. Even the Glaziers do.

- Direct investment of owners money into Transfers. All clubs in FFP rules have to clearly show where money direct comes from for everything on balance sheets. This is where you get proof of investment. This information is always available to public listed companies in the UK. That's a fact. Not a claim its a fact. Its a legal requirement in this country for public companies to do so.

THE ARSENAL FOOTBALL CLUB LIMITED overview - Find and update company information - GOV.UK

THE ARSENAL FOOTBALL CLUB LIMITED - Free company information from Companies House including registered office address, filing history, accounts, annual return, officers, charges, business activity

find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk

If you bothered to read the articles then you would have seen the facts mentioned within.

Such as:
Article discrediting your claim of a slap by Auba to Arteta

City APT challenge and how shareholders loans should be seen in a similar light to sponsorship deals

Article that confirms Kroenke gave Arsenal a shareholder loan and didn’t take a loan from the club (as you wrongly claim)

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Man city on their yeay accounts have said they got money from certain sponsors

Example

Sponsors A
Sponsors B
Sponsors C

Man city have said they have used that money to pay wages, transfers etc..

Why are they in court? Because they have been accused that the money from Sponsors is actually from the owners. So essentially they breached the amount owners could put in for transfers.

Man city (in an Article which a certain poster is using as s called "evidence" - yet can't even comprehend Man citys allegations towards Arsenal)

Man city are saying that what Arsenal are reporting as their "debt" for FFP / PSR is technically not correct. As kronkes moving the club's debt from themselves to Arsenal, is not within what they deem "fair market" conditions in terms of repayment.


Arsenal have essentially falsified what they have used the loan money for.

Which Is fraud and breach of PSR

Arsenal a public listed company have hidden this information on their yearly accounts, and have also hidden it from PSR regulators. All because of an online "article"

Amazing evidence, a club whose owners want to use a self sustaining model are now commiting fraud.

Amazing insight.

Unfortunately the hearing sided with City and the three judges decided the revised APT regs were not fit for purpose.

 

[Amjid Javed]

That is your claim not what I stated.
If you had read the article I shared earlier, rather than rushing to bash out another meaningless post, you would have understood the reason City were in court challenging the APT amendments the Premier League is trying to enforce.

Man City accuse Premier League 'of distorting the competition in favour of Arsenal'

Man City are insisting that the Premier League rules over shareholder loans favour Arsenal and other rival clubs...😬

www.football365.com

Arsenal are highlighted as one of the main beneficiaries in terms of shareholder loans.

Clearly your understanding of what is allowed in FFP regs is flawed.

Your claim was that the kronkes had heavily invested in Arsenal since taking full control.

All the kronkes have done like any full business owners have taken the entire business assets, that includes any debt as well.

Just like the Glaziers at united. The kronkes have moved the debt that they took on and have put it against the club.

Why because no club owner is going to want to underwrite a clubs debts.

So managing the debt, is not investing in the team.

Arsenal are using a self sustaining model, club generated money is being used for transfer.

Also on the government website it clear shows on Arsenal yearly accounts that the loan has be classified by the club's accounts as a recovery debt

So how exactly is a classified recovery debt a so called investment.

These are facts on the government website.

Yet all uve done is show pointless articles.

Facts are kronkes have directly put money into the club for transfers etc.. no different to the Glaziers.

So wild west theories are a load of ****.

Absolute clueless nonsense.

Refinancing debt and direct invest are two completely different entities in FFP

So your nonsense has been exposed

 

[Amjid Javed]

Leveraging debt improves the financial outlook of the club.
It means they are making vastly lower payments to service debts in comparison to external loans.
Any business that reduces debt payments from let’s say £100m to £40m is going to benefit them. Surplus can be used for other purposes.
City challenged and won the recent APT hearing calling it discrimination against sponsorship investors that were contributing to their finances being deemed unfair whilst shareholders loans were not seen in the same way.

Arsenal registered the loan as debit to be recovered on their account sheets.

So your nonsense claims that the loans were used elsewhere is a load of nonsense.

Again if the loans were uses for direct investment and not correctly classified on accounts, its fraud.

Well done for proving how clueless you are.

 

[Amjid Javed]

Leveraging debt improves the financial outlook of the club.
It means they are making vastly lower payments to service debts in comparison to external loans.
Any business that reduces debt payments from let’s say £100m to £40m is going to benefit them. Surplus can be used for other purposes.
City challenged and won the recent APT hearing calling it discrimination against sponsorship investors that were contributing to their finances being deemed unfair whilst shareholders loans were not seen in the same way.

Glaziers, kronkes, Chelsea owners have all refinanced debt. But when it comes to investing in transfers, wages etc.. you still have to show where that money comes from. Is it club generated or from the owners.

In the case of Arsenal and united, they are using club generated revenue for transfers.

Again uve shown how clueless you are that you can differentiation two different financial variables.

Leverage Debt and direct investment aren't the same thing, nor are the linked.

Like I said, I work in the syndicates loan, leverage Debt market.

Yet your clueless waffling and your acting like a expert, hilarious

Learn the actual regulations and accounting requirements. Rather then half witted assumptions on articles uve read.

Articles are proven facts.

Clubs registered accounts on government website are, its there for public to view.

Absolute comedy gold the rubbish your coming out with.

 

[Amjid Javed]

If you bothered to read the articles then you would have seen the facts mentioned within.

Such as:
Article discrediting your claim of a slap by Auba to Arteta

City APT challenge and how shareholders loans should be seen in a similar light to sponsorship deals

Article that confirms Kroenke gave Arsenal a shareholder loan and didn’t take a loan from the club (as you wrongly claim)

All the facts are are on the club's Accounts page on the government website.

The KSE loans was use to clear club debt.

The club has put the loan down as recoverable debt on its balance sheet

The club has shown on its balance sheets where money has come from and what it's spent it on.

Same as PSR accounts which show the kronkes have NOT invested their own money into Transfer.

Also this assumption that be refinancing debt, to free up cash and that cash can be used elsewhere. The club has to have a certain amount of money set aside which they have to list as reserves and can't use.

If you want to use the "freed up cash theory"

When any payments are made you still have to show whether that money used is club revenue or owner invested.

So again on PSR it shows the kronkes didn't invest up to 90M that they could have in a 3 year cycle

 

[Amjid Javed]

Glaziers, kronkes, Chelsea owners have all refinanced debt. But when it comes to investing in transfers, wages etc.. you still have to show where that money comes from. Is it club generated or from the owners.

In the case of Arsenal and united, they are using club generated revenue for transfers.

Again uve shown how clueless you are that you can differentiation two different financial variables.

Leverage Debt and direct investment aren't the same thing, nor are the linked.

Like I said, I work in the syndicates loan, leverage Debt market.

Yet your clueless waffling and your acting like a expert, hilarious

Learn the actual regulations and accounting requirements. Rather then half witted assumptions on articles uve read.

Articles are proven facts.

Clubs registered accounts on government website are, its there for public to view.

Absolute comedy gold the rubbish your coming out with.

Articles arent* proven facts

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Your claim was that the kronkes had heavily invested in Arsenal since taking full control.

All the kronkes have done like any full business owners have taken the entire business assets, that includes any debt as well.

Just like the Glaziers at united. The kronkes have moved the debt that they took on and have put it against the club.

Why because no club owner is going to want to underwrite a clubs debts.

So managing the debt, is not investing in the team.

Arsenal are using a self sustaining model, club generated money is being used for transfer.

Also on the government website it clear shows on Arsenal yearly accounts that the loan has be classified by the club's accounts as a recovery debt

So how exactly is a classified recovery debt a so called investment.

These are facts on the government website.

Yet all uve done is show pointless articles.

Facts are kronkes have directly put money into the club for transfers etc.. no different to the Glaziers.

So wild west theories are a load of ****.

Absolute clueless nonsense.

Refinancing debt and direct invest are two completely different entities in FFP

So your nonsense has been exposed

Again this is what you claim I stated, which is categorically false.
No amount of repetition on your part is going to make it true.

What I stated is posted on the last couple of pages of this thread - feel free to highlight the bit where I have stated Kroenke invested in AFC (never mind the fact you upped that even more disingenuously stating it as “invested heavily”).

This is in contrast to what you have undeniably stated and are now running away from.

Such as: The Auba non-slap , the Edu flip-flop , the APT hearing decision in favour of City & the leveraged debt cannot be considered within FFP regs

I’m not going to get into a discussion about the differences between the way Glazers have leveraged debt against United causing financial instability as opposed to how the Kroenkes have renegotiated their debt to leave the club in a much better position financially.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Arsenal registered the loan as debit to be recovered on their account sheets.

So your nonsense claims that the loans were used elsewhere is a load of nonsense.

Again if the loans were uses for direct investment and not correctly classified on accounts, its fraud.

Well done for proving how clueless you are.

Serious comprehension issues or meaningful misrepresentation so that you can post absolute contrivance in relation to what I said?
Where did I say loans were used elsewhere?
I made the point that reducing the repayment amount benefits any business.

Appears it flew straight over your head!!!

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Glaziers, kronkes, Chelsea owners have all refinanced debt. But when it comes to investing in transfers, wages etc.. you still have to show where that money comes from. Is it club generated or from the owners.

In the case of Arsenal and united, they are using club generated revenue for transfers.

Again uve shown how clueless you are that you can differentiation two different financial variables.

Leverage Debt and direct investment aren't the same thing, nor are the linked.

Like I said, I work in the syndicates loan, leverage Debt market.

Yet your clueless waffling and your acting like a expert, hilarious

Learn the actual regulations and accounting requirements. Rather then half witted assumptions on articles uve read.

Articles are proven facts.

Clubs registered accounts on government website are, its there for public to view.

Absolute comedy gold the rubbish your coming out with.

Again link to the post where I said this?

Guaranteed you will not and continue to divert. I’m waiting ….

 

[Amjid Javed]

Again this is what you claim I stated, which is categorically false.
No amount of repetition on your part is going to make it true.

What I stated is posted on the last couple of pages of this thread - feel free to highlight the bit where I have stated Kroenke invested in AFC (never mind the fact you upped that even more disingenuously stating it as “invested heavily”).

Again your claims are baseless.

Refinancing debt from a business owner and putting that liability directly on the business itself is not investment.

Also Arsenal are paying that debt off the kronkes.

If the kronkes suddenly left, the club would have to pay the loan off in 2 years.

Refinancing debt, is essential not much different to you remortgaging your house. All your doing is finding a way to make your finances more manageable.

Again its not direct investment.

Unless you can show accounting or payment evidence that "the loan" wasn't used to cover debt, and has been used to invest instead. Then your just waffling assumptions.

This tactic of bring up other things as a diversion ain't working.

Are now saying Arsenal have posted false accounting info? As that's what your your trying to get across with your pointless article pasting.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

I don't need to read your nonsense articles.

All the facts are are on the club's Accounts page on the government website.

The KSE loans was use to clear club debt.

The club has put the loan down as recoverable debt on its balance sheet

The club has shown on its balance sheets where money has come from and what it's spent it on.

Same as PSR accounts which show the kronkes have NOT invested their own money into Transfer.

Also this assumption that be refinancing debt, to free up cash and that cash can be used elsewhere. The club has to have a certain amount of money set aside which they have to list as reserves and can't use.

If you want to use the "freed up cash theory"

When any payments are made you still have to show whether that money used is club revenue or owner invested.

So your whole lil nonsense theory again is a load of ****.

So again on PSR it shows the kronkes didn't invest up to 90M that they could have in a 3 year cycle

Let’s believe the poster and ignore the journalist who specialise in reporting on these issues.

Get it!!

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Again your claims are nonsense.

Refinancing debt from a business owner and putting that liability directly on the business itself is not investment.

You really are slow.

Also Arsenal are paying that debt off the kronkes.

If the kronkes suddenly left, the club would have to pay the loan off in 2 years.

Refinancing debt, is essential not much different to you remortgaging your house. All your doing is finding a way to make your finances more manageable.

Again its not direct investment, so you can waffle on with the nonsense articles you want.

Unless you can show accounting or payment evidence that "the loan" wasn't used to cover debt, and has been used to invest instead. Then your just waffling assumptions.

This tactic of bring up other things as a diversion ain't working.

Are now saying Arsenal have posted false accounting info? As that's what your your trying to get across with your pointless article pasting.

Straw man argument on your behalf for the gazillionth time

You are free to chest thump another victory.

 

[Amjid Javed]

Let’s believe the poster and ignore the journalist who specialise in reporting on these issues.

Get it!!

Journalist post stuff all the time and it's not all factually correct.

Arsenal club accounts are there for all to see as it has to be shown as its a public listed company. You really are stupid, the fact you can't comprehend that

Again when a company lists its accounts it has to show where the money has come from.

That's also a stipulation I'm PSR rules, that's a fact.

Or again are you saying Arsenal's accounts are showing incorrect information?

This isn't about whether I'm an expert or not, that's irrelevant.

The legit evidence is their on government website

 

[Amjid Javed]

Straw man argument on your behalf for the gazillionth time

You are free to chest thump another victory.

You can't show any proven facts to disprove the facts shown on Arsenal club accounts. Which again show what loan was used for.

Feel free to show on the articles the evidence of what the money was used for instead. Lets see all transactions payment evidence this so called journalist have?



But but the journalist in the article said, absolute niave clueless fool.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

No more posts from my part on these matters until the poster can factually prove what I said instead of resorting to straw man arguments.

From my perspective I have proven his dishonesty with the Auba non-slap, Edu flip-flop, lack of understanding around APT, same lack of knowledge surrounding what is allowed within FFP regs.

 

[Amjid Javed]

same lack of knowledge surrounding what is allowed within FFP regs.

you have to understand that owner investment has to be shown on balance sheets.

From government website, where clearly states about loans and refinancing in the last paragraph.

So there are facts. No once have you shown proof against it. Yet some half wit written article now holds more substance over a clubs published financial records.

 

[Amjid Javed]

Imagine calling a journalist an "expert" on club finances, when an article written contradicts. whats actually published on a clubs accounts on a public available government website.

So Arsenal are now publishing false information, because a journalist has said so

the fact some Arsenal fans think the clubs running its finance like some dodgy company in Bradford or Birmingham

 

[Amjid Javed]

No more posts from my part on these matters until the poster can factually prove what I said instead of resorting to straw man arguments.

From my perspective I have proven his dishonesty with the Auba non-slap, Edu flip-flop, lack of understanding around APT, same lack of knowledge surrounding what is allowed within FFP regs.

Edu flip flop? I never mentioned him in regards to this discussion on kronke investment.

Oh I don't understand ATP? I went through that in regards to the terns of refinancing.

Oh I don't underage FFP? the rules clearly state you have to show where money comes from on balance sheets, which are available to see.

 

[Amjid Javed]

Straw man argument on your behalf for the gazillionth time

You are free to chest thump another victory.

Feel free to check the clubs accounts, rather then assumptions being made of articles.

So now a written article by an "expert" holds more substance then a published UK companies accounts.

 

[Asad T]

@Amjid Javed if you want you want to convey a point, you can do so in a respectful way. Please post within the PP guidelines otherwise your posts will be removed.

 

[Amjid Javed]

What I stated is posted on the last couple of pages of this thread - feel free to highlight the bit where I have stated Kroenke invested in AFC (never mind the fact you upped that even more disingenuously stating it as “invested heavily”).

This is in contrast to what you have undeniably stated and are now running away from.

Oh yeah your famous kronkes "lent" Arsenal money to strengthen squad. Which was made in this thread, this season. When this comment was made last year, you had zero proof to back it yo, same applies now.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Oh yeah your famous kronkes "lent" Arsenal money to strengthen squad. Which was made in this thread, this season. When this comment was made last year, you had zero proof to back it yo, same applies now.

View attachment 153501

Is that the best you could come up with?

Below is what you claimed I stated:

It's right up there with your other nonsense that you came up with a few months ago that the kronkes were heavily investing their own money into the club and were ambitions. Where I openly exposed your nonsense and you dissapeared.

Where in my above post from months ago does it say the supposed “heavily invested” you repeated ad nauseum?

Read through that post where I actually mentioned Jack Walker, as an example of the archetypal owner who had invested hugely when he was owner of Blackburn Rovers. What did I say in reference to Mr Walker?
I quote:

Not sure if there are any Jack Walker type owners any more

Not my fault you are not able to comprehend such a simple statement.

The “lent” was purposefully written in brackets, again I am aware now that getting you to understand that is not possible.
The reason it was in brackets was because I was not speaking about the usual use of the word (that’s why it gets put in a bracket) to signify investment in the traditional sense.
This was alluding to the renegotiation of the external debts which meant servicing the shareholders loan was a lot cheaper for the club - thus making a saving and possibly greater funds available for transfers or other club operations.
It is the same stance I have used on this recent discussion over the last couple of days.
Feel free to share where I have wavered from this position.
It’s a matter of opinion if you consider leveraging of debt in this way benefits or hinders a business.
I am clear this is advantageous to the club.

If you got any more gems than do share.

 

[Amjid Javed]

Is that the best you could come up with?

Below is what you claimed I stated:

Where in my above post from months ago does it say the supposed “heavily invested” you repeated ad nauseum?

Read through that post where I actually mentioned Jack Walker, as an example of the archetypal owner who had invested hugely when he was owner of Blackburn Rovers. What did I say in reference to Mr Walker?
I quote:

Not my fault you are not able to comprehend such a simple statement.

The “lent” was purposefully written in brackets, again I am aware now that getting you to understand that is not possible.
The reason it was in brackets was because I was not speaking about the usual use of the word (that’s why it gets put in a bracket) to signify investment in the traditional sense.
This was alluding to the renegotiation of the external debts which meant servicing the shareholders loan was a lot cheaper for the club - thus making a saving and possibly greater funds available for transfers or other club operations.
It is the same stance I have used on this recent discussion over the last couple of days.
Feel free to share where I have wavered from this position.
It’s a matter of opinion if you consider leveraging of debt in this way benefits or hinders a business.
I am clear this is advantageous to the club.

If you got any more gems than do share.

Absolute waffling nonsense again

You clearly stated lent money to invest in the squad.

Now uve come up with some lame excuse, that you mean something else, you can smell your ******** from a mile off.

I even asked you at the time to show proof of this investment on the club's balance sheets. Guess what you cudnt.

Just like you can't show evidence of it now.

It's funny how you harp on about me not knowing FFP rules, yet the fact thar you can't comprehend the basics that if the kronkes invested their own money into Transfers its registered within a 3 year PR cycle. Last years - the 3 year PR cycles showed that 9 PL clubs including Arsenal did not have a single penny invested from their owners into Transfers.

Only one with comprehension issues is you, now you've conviently made some wild excuse that the statement you made at time, you meant something else you got caught making a false statement, own up to itn

Don't call someone dishonest, when uve been caught being dishonest yourself.

It's hilarious how both occasions last year and now your happy to believe some articles written by journalists, yet their is accounting details of what Arsenal have spent, where that moneys come from etc.. and you choose to ignore it. Then you come up with nonsense like, oh thats not meaningful.
Which essentially implies that Arsenal accounting data is false.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

It's hilarious how both occasions last year and now your happy to believe some articles written by journalists, yet their is accounting details of what Arsenal have spent, where that moneys come from etc.. and you choose to ignore it. Then you come up with nonsense like, oh thats not meaningful.
Which essentially implies that Arsenal accounting data is false.

The journalist was reporting on the APT hearing which City requested claiming the revised rules were discriminatory.
The journalists job is to report what the judges at the end of the hearing decided.

How is it possible for someone not to grasp basic facts such as these.

 

[Amjid Javed]

The journalist was reporting on the APT hearing which City requested claiming the revised rules were discriminatory.
The journalists job is to report what the judges at the end of the hearing decided.

How is it possible for someone not to grasp basic facts such as these.

avoiding the question again, I asked you simple question about Arsenal's accounts and what is shown on governments website and your harping on about APT.

So il ask you again - Are you saying what Arsenal have posted on their annual balance sheets is true or false? So your now basically saying Arsenal as well as other clubs have falsified accounting?

Seems you have a problem grasping basic facts.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Absolute waffling nonsense again

You clearly stated lent money to invest in the squad.

Now uve come up with some lame excuse, that you mean something else, you can smell your ******** from a mile off.

I even asked you at the time to show proof of this investment on the club's balance sheets. Guess what you cudnt.

Just like you can't show evidence of it now.

It's funny how you harp on about me not knowing FFP rules, yet the fact thar you can't comprehend the basics that if the kronkes invested their own money into Transfers its registered within a 3 year PR cycle. Last years - the 3 year PR cycles showed that 9 PL clubs including Arsenal did not have a single penny invested from their owners into Transfers.

Only one with comprehension issues is you, now you've conviently made some wild excuse that the statement you made at time, you meant something else you got caught making a false statement, own up to it

Yes, I mentioned Jack Walker to clearly state there were no longer owners of that type any longer but then contradicted myself immediately afterwards.

Whatever floats your boat.

I get your some sort of financial hotshot but what is this obsession with bringing balance sheets and accounting principles into a simple discussion about reducing repayment costs because an external debt has been renegotiated?

If someone is running a household and part of the costs involve repaying interest on a loan. If that loan is renegotiated to a lower interest rate does that benefit or hurt the homeowner?

Will the homeowner have more disposable income to spend on what they want or less?
Pretty basic stuff that you have failed to understand.

It’s all hot air from your side seeing as you struggle to differentiate metaphors with literal speech. Still waiting on you owning up to the colossal blunder on the Auba non-slap.

You struggle to grasp a journalist job is to report (on a APT hearing on this occasion). And just because he reports on the financial aspects doesn’t make the story untrue or less credible.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

avoiding the question again, I asked you simple question about Arsenal's accounts and what is shown on governments website and your harping on about APT.

So il ask you again - Are you saying what Arsenal have posted on their annual balance sheets is true or false? So your now basically saying Arsenal as well as other clubs have falsified accounting?

Seems you have a problem grasping basic facts.

It’s completely irrelevant to the discussion

 

[Amjid Javed]

It’s completely irrelevant to the discussion

It's only irrelevant to you, because you can't answer the question.

Funny how your conviently pick and choose what's relevant.

You harp on about facts, then dismiss a clubs books and record

Clueless nonsense from you again

 

[Iqbal'sh]

avoiding the question again, I asked you simple question about Arsenal's accounts and what is shown on governments website and your harping on about APT.

So il ask you again - Are you saying what Arsenal have posted on their annual balance sheets is true or false? So your now basically saying Arsenal as well as other clubs have falsified accounting?

Seems you have a problem grasping basic facts.

I’ll answer more fully.

It’s completely irrelevant to the discussion because you’re confusing PL financial rules with Company accounting principles and regulations.

The APT hearing has found in favour of Man City, no where did they say Everton, Brighton or Arsenal have falsified accounts.
What they said were the revised APT rules that the PL were set to bring in are not fit for purpose and discriminate against clubs with a sponsorship led investment.
They have come to the conclusion that shareholder loans should also be seen in the same way as sponsorship led investment.

Again being the financial hotshot that you claim to be one reading of the posted article would have made all of this clear.

 

[Amjid Javed]

Yes, I mentioned Jack Walker to clearly state there were no longer owners of that type any longer but then contradicted myself immediately afterwards.

Whatever floats your boat.

I get your some sort of financial hotshot but what is this obsession with bringing balance sheets and accounting principles into a simple discussion about reducing repayment costs because an external debt has been renegotiated?

If someone is running a household and part of the costs involve repaying interest on a loan. If that loan is renegotiated to a lower interest rate does that benefit or hurt the homeowner?

Will the homeowner have more disposable income to spend on what they want or less?
Pretty basic stuff that you have failed to understand.

It’s all hot air from your side seeing as you struggle to differentiate metaphors with literal speech. Still waiting on you owning up to the colossal blunder on the Auba non-slap.

You struggle to grasp a journalist job is to report (on a APT hearing on this occasion). And just because he reports on the financial aspects doesn’t make the story untrue or less credible.

We've had the discussion last year on Refinancing last year. See my response below (also on page 8 of this thread), I'm fully aware of the reasons it's done.

So you saying that I don't understand, see the response where I clearly stated its done to obtain more favourable conditions. So thar puts your nonsense to rest. The whole bone of contention back last year and this year was Kronkes aren't putting their own cash into transfer. Something you can comprehend

 

[Iqbal'sh]

We've had the discussion last year on Refinancing last year. See my response below (also on page 8 of this thread), I'm fully aware of the reasons it's done.

So you saying that I don't understand, see the response where I clearly stated its done to obtain more favourable conditions. So thar puts your nonsense to rest. The whole bone of contention back last year and this year was Kronkes aren't putting their own cash into transfer. Something you can comprehend

View attachment 153510

“lent” is now equivalent to invested heavily.

Disingenuous rewriting of the truth.
Why am I not surprised.

Finally, giving you a simple example of a homeowner has made you understand.
In future I will know how to explain even the most basic stuff for you to understand.

 

[Amjid Javed]

I’ll answer more fully.

It’s completely irrelevant to the discussion because you’re confusing PL financial rules with Company accounting principles and regulations.

The APT hearing has found in favour of Man City, no where did they say Everton, Brighton or Arsenal have falsified accounts.
What they said were the revised APT rules that the PL were set to bring in are not fit for purpose and discriminate against clubs with a sponsorship led investment.
They have come to the conclusion that shareholder loans should also be seen in the same way as sponsorship led investment.

Again being the financial hotshot that you claim to be one reading of the posted article would have made all of this clear.

I wasnt confusing anything, I asked you a simple question about the validity of Arsenal's accounts.

Both back last year and now you choose to ignore the validity of the information.

I am always aware of ATP being a completely different issue.

My point all along has been, people have claimed the that kronkes have directly invested in transfers since full ownership.

Facts are they haven't - clubs accounts and PSR have shown that.

In regards to refinancing, I gave you the reasons for that last year. I didn't disagree with you on that point.

So again the whole point of difference has been "kronkes investing their cash on transfers"

 

[aboveandbeyond]

Come on guys. I'm empty on Popcorn

 

[Amjid Javed]

“lent” is now equivalent to invested heavily.

Disingenuous rewriting of the truth.
Why am I not surprised.

Finally, giving you a simple example of a homeowner has made you understand.
In future I will know how to explain even the most basic stuff for you to understand.

Lent - was you implying that kronkes invested their cash into Transfers

The original discussion was raised by immy69 saying kronkes invest their money into Transfer, you then joined the conversation.

I certainly don't need to have something basic explained to me by you. I deal with corporate debt in my job, I'm fully aware of why it's done.

 

[Amjid Javed]

“lent” is now equivalent to invested heavily.

Disingenuous rewriting of the truth.
Why am I not surprised.

Finally, giving you a simple example of a homeowner has made you understand.
In future I will know how to explain even the most basic stuff for you to understand.

Not disingenuous at all, look at the context of discussion you joined originally.

Whole reason I respond to you in 1st place last year was because of your "lent" comment.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Not disingenuous at all, look at the context of discussion you joined originally.

Whole reason I respond to you in 1st place last year was because of your "lent" comment.

It’s disingenuous because you turned lent into heavily invested and further had the temerity to claim I said they had heavily invested.

Hope you understand this, otherwise I will get the junior thesaurus out to assist

 

[ads101]

More entertainment in this thread than Netflix with the recurring characters and themes

Every fan will have their opinion but this is my personal ranking of achivements:

1) Premier League - The bread and butter for any top club and the most accurate gauge of a team's tactical, footballing, physical and mental strength as it's 38 games over 9 months against all opponents in all situations. Brian Clough once said he'd happily accept a League Title in exchange for first round exits in the European Cup, FA Cup and League Cup, and I'm kinda aligned to that view.

2) Champions League - Competing against the continent's best over a fairly large sample size in front of massive worldwide audiences.

3) CL qualification and a domestic cup

4) CL qualification

5) Domestic cup - sad to say but they just don't have the same allure due to expansion of European competitions.

The well resourced PL clubs, Big Six, or whatever name you wish to give them, are primarily judged on the first two priorities by fans and the media. The question is over how long a period of time ? 5 years in fairness is more than most modern managers at top clubs are given - look at how Roman Abrahmovic mercilessly dumped managers at Chelsea even after winning big prizes (which isn't my preferred model).

Arsenal do remind me of how we used to be under Gerard Houllier and Rafa Benitez. We lacked the guile to unlock low blocks especially at home in the league, and so never won the title. We constantly dropped points to teams like Charlton, Portsmouth, Birmingham etc. However we were superbly organised and our style of play lent itself well to European competitions so I wouldn't be surprised if Arsenal won the CL. They were very streetwise the other night and coped well in the febrile atmosphere of Madrid.

However making that next step in the League will depend on the quality of the attacking reinforcements in the summer.

I’d rank CL win over the others. It’s harder to achieve. And because Arsenal hasn’t done it I think it means even more to Arsenal.

Domestic cups like fa cup I hardly care about anymore. Probably because Arsenal has won it so many times. I’d rather have top 4 in premier league. I also think unfortunately domestic cups like this don’t evidence improvement towards the main goal of winning the league or champions league which top 4 sort of does (as we saw with ten Haag winning domestic cups).

That’s probably why I’m a bit more pro Arteta. I want Arsenal to be consistently challenging for title and Europe. The team looks organised and well built. That’s what’s important, not another fa cup. There’s been a clear improvement over the last three years or so where the squad is being structured well.

In fact there’s the defense and defensive midfielder positions overall might well be amongst the strongest in europe already. Which is probably why arsenal are doing well in champions league. Theres really only 2 or 3 positions left to fix upfront to turn this into a truly formidable side. And that hopefully will be fixed in the next transfer windows.

Slow and steady continuous improvement is the key. No need to devolve into chaos like Chelsea and man united despite spending a lot of money.

Liverpool will win the league which is a disappointment for arsenal considering arsenal were favourites at start of the league. But bad injuries, along with experienced winners stepping up like Salah, Allison, Van Dyk etc. guys which Arsenal don’t have yet because Arsenal haven’t won anything, it makes sense. Liverpool really have some fantastic players. Until Arsenal get over the hurdle of their first premier league for a long while or first champions league, I think it will continually be a struggle mentally. Once you get your first, so much easier to win titles in the future. Liverpool after all won the champions league with that side before clinching the premier league. And there’s no right to win a title really, best thing you can do is be title challenging, try your best and hope it happens. Nothings a guarantee, after all in basically any other season Liverpool’s finishes would have been league wins. Arsenal have been not even title challenging or anything in Europe for 15 years. Finally being that again is a definite step up.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Lent - was you implying that kronkes invested their cash into Transfers

The original discussion was raised by immy69 saying kronkes invest their money into Transfer, you then joined the conversation.

I certainly don't need to have something basic explained to me by you. I deal with corporate debt in my job, I'm fully aware of why it's done.

I don’t recall the exact details of the original discussion nor do I need to go back to it.
I know my position on this and that’s why the lent was put in brackets.

If you have a grasp of the language you will know what the brackets represent

 

[Amjid Javed]

I don’t recall the exact details of the original discussion nor do I need to go back to it.
I know my position on this and that’s why the lent was put in brackets.

If you have a grasp of the language you will know what the brackets represent

Doesnt matter if the word is in brackets, if it was in block capitals.

Lent money for transfers - is implying the kronkes invested their cash. Which was the whole crux of discussion. Again look at response on page 8

Their is nothing else to grasp from that.

Also the fact after I asked you show the evidence on club accounts, showed that as how I interpreted it.