crossy1686
career ending
He's also only taking out and not putting anything in, regardless of how Arsenal do.Kronke did not bury the club in 800m debt, and pay another billion on that debt.
He's also only taking out and not putting anything in, regardless of how Arsenal do.Kronke did not bury the club in 800m debt, and pay another billion on that debt.
Becoming a pattern in recent years, we beat City for pretty much every signing. Of course they take revenge by beating us pretty much every time we play.
Lukaku would sign a 5 year deal though. Let's say 75m(no way inter can pay this much btw) plus 12m in wages for 5 years, rounds up to 27m a year for them. Pretty much the same as Alexis 25m a year, but for a younger player and with resale valueOf course. In terms of outlay, it's less for Inter. 2 years on a 400K deal is 40M. We'd surely wave a fee. Whereas Lukaku, for 75M plus his wages would be far north of 100M. The more sensible move of course, but in terms of figures, the far more expensive deal.
What are you talking about? Just because Stone works for BBC doesn't mean the club has talked to him about De Ligt. If his sources aren't saying anything about it he has no information. That's not stealing a living, that's just how journalism works. No sources, no story.Didn't Stone say he had a feeling about De Ligt or something?
Why is Simon Stone 'assuming' and 'feeling' things? He works for one of the biggest news outlets in the world and he covers one of the biggest clubs in the world. He should do better than just guessing. None of these journalists know shite about what's going on at United, all they can do is assume. In fact in the above tweet he seems more sure about what's happening at Inter than at United
Football journalists and agents are just stealing a living. The former just makes up shite and gets paid for doing so and the latter.. well what on earth does agents do? Talk shite I guess
Right, so I'm guessing we are going to do a double announcement - De Ligt and Bruno on the 9th? Niceeee
Lukaku would sign a 5 year deal though. Let's say 75m(no way inter can pay this much btw) plus 12m in wages for 5 years, rounds up to 27m a year for them. Pretty much the same as Alexis 25m a year, but for a younger player and with resale value
Then why is he tweeting saying things like assuming and feeling? If you have no info then don't say anything about itWhat are you talking about? Just because Stone works for BBC doesn't mean the club has talked to him about De Ligt. If his sources aren't saying anything about it he has no information. That's not stealing a living, that's just how journalism works. No sources, no story.
It's his opinion. Journalists aren't robots, and they assume people reading can understand context.Then why is he tweeting saying things like assuming and feeling? If you have no info then don't say anything about it
Nah mate it's gonna be triple. You're forgetting James!
I agree. Tweets like these are just for attention.Then why is he tweeting saying things like assuming and feeling? If you have no info then don't say anything about it
Yeah. But for Inter it still makes more sense to target Lukaku, financially. Mostly on the basis that even without a transfer fee, it makes no sense for them to fork out 25m a year in wages to a 31 year old, especially one coming off a horrible last 2 years, for 2-3 years.Sure, but the key factor there is a transfer fee.
Becoming a pattern in recent years, we beat City for pretty much every signing. Of course they take revenge by beating us pretty much every time we play.
Nah mate it's gonna be triple. You're forgetting James!
How can anyone compare Glazers to Kroenke? Glazer are ambitious and are giving us money each season to spend. This year it's apparently 200-250M Pounds. Over the last years , we are one of the highest net spenders around Europe. We just didn't use the cash right.
Kroenke is just sucking Arsenal dry, he just wants to earn money.
Is that what journalists are supposed to do? Share their opinions on transfers based on their assumptions and feelings? How is that journalism? I could have written that tweetIt's his opinion. Journalists aren't robots, and they assume people reading can understand context.
Yeah. But for Inter it still makes more sense to target Lukaku, financially. Mostly on the basis that even without a transfer fee, it makes no sense for them to fork out 25m a year in wages to a 31 year old, especially one coming off a horrible last 2 years, for 2-3 years.
Good for you, mate. Your critical thinking skills are a bit lacking though so I wouldn't go applying to the BBC just yet. You might get there eventually though.Is that what journalists are supposed to do? Share their opinions on transfers based on their assumptions and feelings? How is that journalism? I could have written that tweet
Because nobody knows what the feck we are doing. I like it to be honest.FFS no tweets about united, only Barcelona and their fecking drama circus.
Kronke did not bury the club in 800m debt, and pay another billion on that debt.
What a load of crap. They have one of the highest cash reserves in football. Have the new Adidas deal kicking in next season and generated healthy amount of EBITDA last season again without champions league.
Anyway if they do what they do best by unearthing some gems, they could challenge for top 4 next season, I wouldn’t have the faith in us to do so even if we spend far far more than them.
We won’t get 25 penalties next season though.Would love this to be the case. We scored 65 goals in the league this season. Pogba the highest scorer with 13 goals in the league (7 pens, 3 missed). Fernandes scored 20 league goals (8 pens, 2 missed). The goalscoring burden needs desperately to be more shared in our team.
But not having a debt would cost us more in terms of taxes etc?You clearly have no idea of how finances work.
How much was the debt give years ago and how much is the debt now?
I am not sure myself but I'll bet that it's the same - £350m.
Now how many quality players could you buy with that money today and 5 years ago?
Give it another 5 years and players of the quality of Mbappe, Hazard and co will cost £250m easily.
Glazers are just paying minimal installment waiting on inflation to eat up the debt. Until the day comes a player of the quality of Lukaku will cost as much as the debt.
Players values will stay the same for the foreseeable, in 5 years I'd imagine football will of had its bust and prices of players will fall.You clearly have no idea of how finances work.
How much was the debt give years ago and how much is the debt now?
I am not sure myself but I'll bet that it's the same - £350m.
Now how many quality players could you buy with that money today and 5 years ago?
Give it another 5 years and players of the quality of Mbappe, Hazard and co will cost £250m easily.
Glazers are just paying minimal installment waiting on inflation to eat up the debt. Until the day comes a player of the quality of Lukaku will cost as much as the debt.
I reckon this is the main reason Arsenal find themselves short of funds at the moment:
Yup, all debt is not bad debt.But not having a debt would cost us more in terms of taxes etc?
Us Pooh-poohers, using our black magic tactics and sacrificing our reputation on an online forum for the good of our club. We are the true heroes!That happened to me in the pogba thread a few years ago. I firmly declared we weren't signing him and that it was all media driven bollocks and within about 2 or 3 hours we'd signed him. I pooh-poohed it, but it turned out my pooh-pooh was the pooh-pooh. Since then I've had to live with that stigma. All because of pooh-pooh.
Becoming a pattern in recent years, we beat City for pretty much every signing.
What is that? Looks like Sea world or something.
Excuse me sir, it doesnt need an economy expert. They have taken for dividends and payed on the debt interest (that they created) 1 billion pounds. Imagine what would Sir Alex could have done with that money.You clearly have no idea of how finances work.
How much was the debt give years ago and how much is the debt now?
I am not sure myself but I'll bet that it's the same - £350m.
Now how many quality players could you buy with that money today and 5 years ago?
Give it another 5 years and players of the quality of Mbappe, Hazard and co will cost £250m easily.
Glazers are just paying minimal installment waiting on inflation to eat up the debt. Until the day comes a player of the quality of Lukaku will cost as much as the debt.
What is that? Looks like Sea world or something.
Because nobody knows what the feck we are doing. I like it to be honest.