Skip to main content

Arsenal's transfer bonanza

Earlier this year it was widely reported that Arsenal would only have a £45m transfer budget this summer, after failing to qualify for the Champions League, but the club has actually splashed out well over £100m. The authoritative Swiss Ramble explains how this was possible.

Player purchases added up to £143m (including £8m add-ons). This comprises club record acquisition Nicolas Pépé £72m plus William Saliba £27m, Kieran Tierney £25m, David Luiz £8m, Gabriel Martinelli £6m and Dani Ceballos (loan fee) £5m.

The club had player sales of £64m (including £7m add-ons), mainly Alex Iwobi £34m, Krystian Bielik £10m, Laurent Koscielny £5m and David Ospina £3m. Also picked up useful money for selling some Academy products plus a £4m sell-on for Bennacer’s move from Empoli to Milan.

What has become increasingly familiar to supporters this summer is the use of stage payments instead of paying the whole transfer fee upfront. Based on media reports and a few assumptions, we can estimate that Arsenal's cash outlay this summer was only £46m. On the other hand, the club would also not have received the entire £64m due from player sales this summer. Again, the Swiss Ramble estimates the cash receipts at £23.5m. It will not have gone unnoticed that the gross cash outlay is very much in line with the alleged £45m budget. More importantly, spreading payments allowed the club to buy Pépé.

Often the selling club will still get (most of) its cash immediately, as they sell the debt to a third party financing company for an agreed fee. Obviously, this commission then leaves “the game”, but the arrangement still works well for all parties.

It has been noted that Arsenal have a Champions League wage bill on a Europa League budget. The Swiss Ramble's estimate is that Arsenal's player purchases this summer have added around £500k a week to the wage bill, which would work out to £26m a year. He adds, 'However, I reckon that around £700k has also been taken off the weekly wage bill, i.e. £38m a year. Even though no fees were received for Ramsey, Welbeck, Cech and Lichtsteiner, their departures cut wages by around £400k a week, i.e. £21m a year. So combining transfer fees and wages, Arsenal will spend £71.7m in the first year (transfers £46m + wages £25.7m) gross, but only £10.5m net of player sales (£22.5m transfers offset by £12m wage reduction).'

So the net result of the club's transfer activity this summer in the accounts is a relatively small cost increase of £9m, with player purchases growing the cost base by £54m, largely offset by £45m reduction from sales. This will be more than offset by £57m profit on player sales.

The Swiss Ramble concludes, 'Part of the fancy financial footwork has simply been a willingness from the board to be bolder with its cash balances. In the past, it looked like the club wanted to hold enough cash to cover all future obligations, but that always looked to be overly prudent.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Wolves get raw deal from FFP

  I used to see a lifelong Wolves fan for lunch once a month.   He was approaching ninety, but still went to games.   Sadly he passed away the other week. As football finance guru Kieran Maguire has noted, Wolves continue to be constrained by financial fair play rules.  Radio 4 this morning described them as this year's 'crisis club' and the pessimists have certainly been piling in. Martin Samuel wrote sympathetically in the Sunday Times yesterday, saying that the Premier League drives talent away with regulatory red tape: 'Why could Al-Hilal sign Neves? Because Wolves needed the money. And why did Wolves need the money? Because the club had to comply with an artificial construct known as financial fair play. So Wolves are going skint, yes? No. There is no suggestion that Wolves are in financial trouble, only that they are failing to meet the rigours of FFP. Wolves’ owners appear to have the money to run the club, and invest in the club, and in fact came up with a pow

Gold standard ground boosts Tottenham's income

The gold standard in European football grounds is the Tottenham Hotspur stadium in north London, a £1bn construction project completed in 2019. Its impact on the club’s finances has become increasingly clear as the effects of the pandemic have faded. Previously, the average fan would spend less than £2 inside the ground on a typical match day, but now that figure is about £16, thanks to new facilities including the longest bar in Europe and an on-site microbrewery. Capacity has gone up from 36,000 at the club’s previous home of White Hart Lane to 62,000.  The new stadium — built on land adjacent to White Hart Lane — has opened the door to a broad range of other events that have helped to push commercial income up from €117mn in 2018 to €215mn in 2022. Last year, Tottenham hosted US singer Beyoncé for five nights on her global Renaissance tour, two NFL matches, as well as rugby games and heavyweight boxing bouts.  Money brought in from football has gone up too. Match day income is

Charlton takeover approved

The long awaited takeover of Charlton Athletic by SE7 Partners from Thomas Sandgaard has been approved:  https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/se7-partners-obtain-efl-approval-for-charlton-athletic-takeover/ Charlton have had unhappy experiences with owners for over a decade, so how this works out will remain to be seen.  There is certainly potential there, but will it be realised? This interview with Charlie Methven gives detail not available elsewhere:  https://thecharltondossier.com/charlie-methven-on-the-record/