There is a graph somewhere that shows wages before and after the move. It's pretty clear where the extra revenue went for the last 10 years.
I've been considering making an article like this myself.
With the revenue generated simply by being a PL team, you'd probably have to say we built ours a few years too early.
Spurs seem to be taking advantage of it, same with Chelsea. West ham have got themselves a ridiculously good deal without even using much of the new money. Anfield set for expansion.
It was also a bit of a waste of Wenger's career. I appreciate what he did massively though.
It was well worth getting the site so close to Highbury and having it forever, they can redevelop Emirates as much as they like in the future, they have the space.
One thing people may not take into account is appearances and the effect that can have.
By moving into a new bigger stadium you were cementing your place as a big club in the minds of fans and (more importantly) players.
Not that you weren't big previously but even bigger, it gives off the appearance of a big club going places.
hindsight 101, who would of know masses of money would take over football now, back when during the development things were steady.
Now football has become a business first, then a football second
comment by Hollywood Passer (U13400)
posted 1 minute ago
Now football has become a business first, then a football second
----------------------------------------------------------------------
do you think maybe we contributed to that a little bit?
Was the stadium move necessary?
=================================
What are you on about?
We filled Wembley for our Champions League matches because Highbury was too small to host them.
But we did go back to Highbury for CL cause it was nice.
Yes it was necessary. But the timing was wrong. Hindsight is a wonderful thing
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
Was the stadium move necessary?
Page 1 of 1
posted on 30/4/16
There is a graph somewhere that shows wages before and after the move. It's pretty clear where the extra revenue went for the last 10 years.
posted on 30/4/16
What's done is done.
posted on 30/4/16
I've been considering making an article like this myself.
With the revenue generated simply by being a PL team, you'd probably have to say we built ours a few years too early.
Spurs seem to be taking advantage of it, same with Chelsea. West ham have got themselves a ridiculously good deal without even using much of the new money. Anfield set for expansion.
It was also a bit of a waste of Wenger's career. I appreciate what he did massively though.
posted on 30/4/16
It was well worth getting the site so close to Highbury and having it forever, they can redevelop Emirates as much as they like in the future, they have the space.
posted on 30/4/16
One thing people may not take into account is appearances and the effect that can have.
By moving into a new bigger stadium you were cementing your place as a big club in the minds of fans and (more importantly) players.
Not that you weren't big previously but even bigger, it gives off the appearance of a big club going places.
posted on 30/4/16
Yes.
posted on 30/4/16
hindsight 101, who would of know masses of money would take over football now, back when during the development things were steady.
Now football has become a business first, then a football second
posted on 30/4/16
comment by Hollywood Passer (U13400)
posted 1 minute ago
Now football has become a business first, then a football second
----------------------------------------------------------------------
do you think maybe we contributed to that a little bit?
posted on 30/4/16
Was the stadium move necessary?
=================================
What are you on about?
We filled Wembley for our Champions League matches because Highbury was too small to host them.
posted on 30/4/16
But we did go back to Highbury for CL cause it was nice.
posted on 30/4/16
Yes it was necessary. But the timing was wrong. Hindsight is a wonderful thing
Page 1 of 1