Arsenal would be worse off keeping Ramsey, not selling him.
Prob true, but such is the state of their team I couldn't think of a third player they could sell!!
Arsenal would be worse off keeping Ramsey, not selling him.
They are building 1, by using less than 20% of their net worth.
They can build two - if it were financially worthwhile.*
So, I think one of us is naive, but I don't think its me...
*When people like Kroenke and Levy/Lewis sit down and look at a project like a stadium - the first, and last, question they ask is: Is this financially worthwhile? And that means, they are crunching numbers and making a determination that the stadium will generate sufficient future revenue to justify the upfront investment. Investors at this level are not getting rich by spending a huge sum on an "expense" - they will only move forward if the project is EV+, and meets their risk tolerance.
If we hadn't had this fire alarm issue, we would've been moving into the stadium at around 90%, but now with this additional delay every other trade has extra time to complete and snag everything, so it's no longer a rushed job. I'm sure some of the other sub-contractors have seen this as a blessing is disguise.
Just so glad we haven't ended up with either City or Liverpool as our first ever game at the new stadium.
I ain't that fussed about the romanticism of the first game at home. It would have been nice to have a more winnable game but for me the sooner we are in there the better regardless of who we play now.
Wembley is costing us £2m per game, a hell of a lot of money when we have a stadium so close to completion if it wasn't for a few poor electricians doing the work on it it seems
Where did the £2m figure come from? That is a huge amount it would have meant we paid almost £50m last season?
Crazy that Wembley costs £2m per game when you consider Wham pay that for season at the London Stadium. Although I guess the the saying ‘you get what you pay gor’ certainly rings true.
£2M per match seems like a losing proposition - but that may also be why we have opted not to use the stadium for domestic Cup matches.I read somewhere that the fee for Wembley last season was £20m for the whole season whereas because we were using it for a game here &a there this time it's £2m per game. I'll try and dog out a link if I can find one but honestly not sure where I read that and if it's a legitimate source
I ain't that fussed about the romanticism of the first game at home. It would have been nice to have a more winnable game but for me the sooner we are in there the better regardless of who we play now.
Wembley is costing us £2m per game, a hell of a lot of money when we have a stadium so close to completion if it wasn't for a few poor electricians doing the work on it it seems
West Ham have genuinely hit the jackpot with that disgustingly unfair deal they got £1m-£2m per season when it instantly generates a further £30m in matchday revenue if all goes well and prices/ fan demand balance is reached is mental. They get a further £25m more than any other team based on their infrastructure gains over the next 100 years.
I don't like Arsenal but ATM least they weren't given corners to cut for such a massive part of the club so future success. The people in charge of that project and decision making when it came to the West Ham bid should be seriously looked into. They'll be able to throw money at it year on year until something sticks. I sincerely hope they go down