Official Arsenal FC Thread

Daily Mail claiming that Madrid are going to open the bidding for van Rapist at £30m. You would have to be insane to turn that down.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2099017/Real-Madrid-want-Robin-van-Persie-30m.html

ResurrectionRooney wrote:van Rapist at £30m.

I see you have adopted my nickname for the man.

....Even though the women admitted she made it all up.

Oh well, I would rather have Van "Rapist" than granny shagger Rooney, drug dealer Ferdinand or wife fucker Giggs.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:Daily Mail claiming that Madrid are going to open the bidding for van Rapist at £30m. You would have to be insane to turn that down.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2099017/Real-Madrid-want-Robin-van-Persie-30m.html

Hmm... The world's best striker, our club's talisman, on the verge of reaching his peak with at least three more years to give and you think we would be insane to not sell him at 30 million. Do elaborate.

Would you sell Rooney for 30 million? Robin is also better than Rooney, so keep that in mind

Paulinho wrote:Would you sell Rooney for 30 million? Robin is also better than Rooney, so keep that in mind

No, Rooney is younger and less injury-prone.

Glen Damon wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:van Rapist at £30m.

I see you have adopted my nickname for the man.

I think you'll find I've been using that nickname for a long time.

Splashy wrote:....Even though the women admitted she made it all up.

Oh well, I would rather have Van "Rapist" than granny shagger Rooney, drug dealer Ferdinand or wife fucker Giggs.

What woman? I call him van Rapist because he rapes Premier League defences, look



Did he actually rape a woman or something? Fucking hell.

As for being a granny shagger, nothing wrong with that, Carol Vorderman would certainly get it. Ferdinand has never even been accused of dealing drugs so I don't know what that's all about. There's also nothing wrong with being a wife fucker, although I believe your manager had a secret affair with a French rapper (allegedly). None of those are as bad as being a rapist of women though, as you implied.

BladeGunner wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:Daily Mail claiming that Madrid are going to open the bidding for van Rapist at £30m. You would have to be insane to turn that down.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2099017/Real-Madrid-want-Robin-van-Persie-30m.html

Hmm... The world's best striker, our club's talisman, on the verge of reaching his peak with at least three more years to give and you think we would be insane to not sell him at 30 million. Do elaborate.

Very simple.

He leaves this season - Arsenal get £30m for a striker who'll be 29 when the next season kicks off.

He doesn't leave this season, Arsenal pay his wages for another year (£5m ish), he walks out on a free transfer at the end of the season, Arsenal get nothing

Having him for 1 more year is not worth £35m to Arsenal.

Paulinho wrote:Would you sell Rooney for 30 million? Robin is also better than Rooney, so keep that in mind

I don't agree with that, Rooney is also younger, and has more than 12 months left on his contract.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Glen Damon wrote:I see you have adopted my nickname for the man.

I think you'll find I've been using that nickname for a long time.

Great minds think alike.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Glen Damon wrote:I see you have adopted my nickname for the man.

I think you'll find I've been using that nickname for a long time.

Splashy wrote:....Even though the women admitted she made it all up.

Oh well, I would rather have Van "Rapist" than granny shagger Rooney, drug dealer Ferdinand or wife fucker Giggs.

What woman? I call him van Rapist because he rapes Premier League defences, look



Did he actually rape a woman or something? Fucking hell.

As for being a granny shagger, nothing wrong with that, Carol Vorderman would certainly get it. Ferdinand has never even been accused of dealing drugs so I don't know what that's all about. There's also nothing wrong with being a wife fucker, although I believe your manager had a secret affair with a French rapper (allegedly). None of those are as bad as being a rapist of women though, as you implied.

BladeGunner wrote:

Hmm... The world's best striker, our club's talisman, on the verge of reaching his peak with at least three more years to give and you think we would be insane to not sell him at 30 million. Do elaborate.

Very simple.

He leaves this season - Arsenal get £30m for a striker who'll be 29 when the next season kicks off.

He doesn't leave this season, Arsenal pay his wages for another year (£5m ish), he walks out on a free transfer at the end of the season, Arsenal get nothing

Having him for 1 more year is not worth £35m to Arsenal.

Could be. Right now, he's the only reason we have a chance of qualifying for the Champions League. We get fourth and that's a lot more than 35 million pounds right there. If we can't get him to sign an extension though, we may as well flog him for that much.

Does anyone know how much exactly is given in terms of money for each league position? Van Rapist is probably the difference between 7/8th and 4/5th for Arsenal.

Glen Damon wrote:Does anyone know how much exactly is given in terms of money for each league position? Van Rapist is probably the difference between 7/8th and 4/5th for Arsenal.

I'm not entirely sure, but I do recall the tabloids dubbing that crucial Tottenham Vs. Manchester City game in 2010 the "60 million pound match". Not sure how valid that is though.

Chelsea - £16,000,000 (WINNERS)
Manchester United - £15,200,000
Arsenal - £14,400,000
Totenham Hotspur - £13,600,000
Manchester City - £12,800,000
Aston Villa - £12,000,000
Liverpool - £11,200,000
Everton - £10,400,000
Birmingham - £9,600,000
Blackburn - £8,800,000
Stoke - £8,000,000


That was for 2010-2.4m between 4th and 7th. That's clearly not entirely accurate though, as I'm not sure how much Champions League teams get each year.

BladeGunner wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:
I think you'll find I've been using that nickname for a long time.

What woman? I call him van Rapist because he rapes Premier League defences, look



Did he actually rape a woman or something? Fucking hell.

As for being a granny shagger, nothing wrong with that, Carol Vorderman would certainly get it. Ferdinand has never even been accused of dealing drugs so I don't know what that's all about. There's also nothing wrong with being a wife fucker, although I believe your manager had a secret affair with a French rapper (allegedly). None of those are as bad as being a rapist of women though, as you implied.

Very simple.

He leaves this season - Arsenal get £30m for a striker who'll be 29 when the next season kicks off.

He doesn't leave this season, Arsenal pay his wages for another year (£5m ish), he walks out on a free transfer at the end of the season, Arsenal get nothing

Having him for 1 more year is not worth £35m to Arsenal.

Could be. Right now, he's the only reason we have a chance of qualifying for the Champions League. We get fourth and that's a lot more than 35 million pounds right there. If we can't get him to sign an extension though, we may as well flog him for that much.

Is it really worth >£35m to you? I don't think so, and there's no guarantee even with RVP.

In business, you have to be more intelligent with your evaluation of your chances. The standard practice, when looking at an opportunity, is to multiply the potential benefit by the chances of the event actually occurring.

Let's assume, for arguments sake, that Arsenal have a 0% chance of qualifying with van Persie and a 50% chance of qualifying with him. That means that the income from the Champions League is multiplied by 0.5. On the other hand, if you sell him to Real Madrid, there is a guaranteed income of £30m, in addition to the £5m saved on his wages. £35m is therefore multiplied by one.

In order for keeping him to be a rational choice in that scenario, Champions League income would have to be worth at least £70m to Arsenal. Now further take into account that the chances of Arsenal qualifying without van Persie are greater than 0%, and the chances of qualifying without him are probably less than 50%, and that number would have to go even higher. The CL is lucrative, but it's not THAT lucrative.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:Is it really worth >£35m to you? I don't think so, and there's no guarantee even with RVP.

In business, you have to be more intelligent with your evaluation of your chances. The standard practice, when looking at an opportunity, is to multiply the potential benefit by the chances of the event actually occurring.

Let's assume, for arguments sake, that Arsenal have a 0% chance of qualifying with van Persie and a 50% chance of qualifying with him. That means that the income from the Champions League is multiplied by 0.5. On the other hand, if you sell him to Real Madrid, there is a guaranteed income of £30m, in addition to the £5m saved on his wages. £35m is therefore multiplied by one.

In order for keeping him to be a rational choice in that scenario, Champions League income would have to be worth at least £70m to Arsenal. Now further take into account that the chances of Arsenal qualifying without van Persie are greater than 0%, and the chances of qualifying without him are probably less than 50%, and that number would have to go even higher. The CL is lucrative, but it's not THAT lucrative.

Certainly an interesting way of looking at it. Another argument that might be made is that his shirt sales are massive, and probably allow Arsenal to get more money through such deals as shirt sales do not go directly to the club by number. If you know what I'm trying to say, my phrasing wasn't great.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:
I think you'll find I've been using that nickname for a long time.

What woman? I call him van Rapist because he rapes Premier League defences, look



Did he actually rape a woman or something? Fucking hell.

As for being a granny shagger, nothing wrong with that, Carol Vorderman would certainly get it. Ferdinand has never even been accused of dealing drugs so I don't know what that's all about. There's also nothing wrong with being a wife fucker, although I believe your manager had a secret affair with a French rapper (allegedly). None of those are as bad as being a rapist of women though, as you implied.

Very simple.

He leaves this season - Arsenal get £30m for a striker who'll be 29 when the next season kicks off.

He doesn't leave this season, Arsenal pay his wages for another year (£5m ish), he walks out on a free transfer at the end of the season, Arsenal get nothing

Having him for 1 more year is not worth £35m to Arsenal.

Well a women accused him of it before and then admitted she made it all up, Since you usually like taking digs at Arsenal I presumed that was what you were referring to.

Glen Damon wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:Is it really worth >£35m to you? I don't think so, and there's no guarantee even with RVP.

In business, you have to be more intelligent with your evaluation of your chances. The standard practice, when looking at an opportunity, is to multiply the potential benefit by the chances of the event actually occurring.

Let's assume, for arguments sake, that Arsenal have a 0% chance of qualifying with van Persie and a 50% chance of qualifying with him. That means that the income from the Champions League is multiplied by 0.5. On the other hand, if you sell him to Real Madrid, there is a guaranteed income of £30m, in addition to the £5m saved on his wages. £35m is therefore multiplied by one.

In order for keeping him to be a rational choice in that scenario, Champions League income would have to be worth at least £70m to Arsenal. Now further take into account that the chances of Arsenal qualifying without van Persie are greater than 0%, and the chances of qualifying without him are probably less than 50%, and that number would have to go even higher. The CL is lucrative, but it's not THAT lucrative.

Certainly an interesting way of looking at it. Another argument that might be made is that his shirt sales are massive, and probably allow Arsenal to get more money through such deals as shirt sales do not go directly to the club by number. If you know what I'm trying to say, my phrasing wasn't great.

All shirt profits go to Nike, and shirt sales for individual players aren't that big an indicator anyway. I often hear something quoted about how when Beckham went to Real Madrid in 2003 they made his transfer fee back on shirt sales over the next 5 years or whatever, but the reality is that if they hadn't been buying Beckham shirts they'd have been buying Zidane/Ronaldo/Figo/Raul shirts instead. It'd have some impact on marketing, but not a massive one, certainly not enough to take the total benefit of having him above £70m.

So many trolls. I don't see much difference between the trolling here and on EA.

Sarmz wrote:So many trolls. I don't see much difference between the trolling here and on EA.

EA is fucking terrible.

ilJuventino wrote:

Sarmz wrote:So many trolls. I don't see much difference between the trolling here and on EA.

EA is fucking terrible.

Someone needs to rescue that Roma fan from over there.

Sarmz wrote:So many trolls. I don't see much difference between the trolling here and on EA.

Who is trolling in this thread? This is a legitimate discussion.

Glen Damon wrote:

ilJuventino wrote:

EA is fucking terrible.

Someone needs to rescue that Roma fan from over there.

I dislike you.

Used a proxy just to see the threads and discussions over there...absolutely horrible.

Then there were the idiots that brought up Heysel and I fucking lost it.

Sarmz wrote:

Glen Damon wrote:Someone needs to rescue that Roma fan from over there.

I dislike you.

I will not respond in a negative manner to this provocative post. All I can say is that I have the utmost respect for you, and I am disappointed that you do not share the same respect and have instead resorted to petty jibes.

ilJuventino wrote:Used a proxy just to see the threads and discussions over there...absolutely horrible.

Then there were the idiots that brought up Heysel and I fucking lost it.

The best thing that forum could do is ban me, and appoint BLP as mod.

They kept banning the proxies I was using as well.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

BladeGunner wrote:

Could be. Right now, he's the only reason we have a chance of qualifying for the Champions League. We get fourth and that's a lot more than 35 million pounds right there. If we can't get him to sign an extension though, we may as well flog him for that much.

Is it really worth >£35m to you? I don't think so, and there's no guarantee even with RVP.

In business, you have to be more intelligent with your evaluation of your chances. The standard practice, when looking at an opportunity, is to multiply the potential benefit by the chances of the event actually occurring.

Let's assume, for arguments sake, that Arsenal have a 0% chance of qualifying with van Persie and a 50% chance of qualifying with him. That means that the income from the Champions League is multiplied by 0.5. On the other hand, if you sell him to Real Madrid, there is a guaranteed income of £30m, in addition to the £5m saved on his wages. £35m is therefore multiplied by one.

In order for keeping him to be a rational choice in that scenario, Champions League income would have to be worth at least £70m to Arsenal. Now further take into account that the chances of Arsenal qualifying without van Persie are greater than 0%, and the chances of qualifying without him are probably less than 50%, and that number would have to go even higher. The CL is lucrative, but it's not THAT lucrative.

But a football club shouldn't just be aiming to generate profit, especially when it ends up in the hands of our useless owners. Yeah, okay, it's much more likely that we'll generate more income if we sell van Persie for 30 million pounds or so than if we keep him. But at the same time, from a footballing perspective, we are much more likely to become a significantly worse team. Footballing success isn't measured economically. That isn't an excuse to be completely financially irresponsible, but when we are as well run as we are (and we are very well run), then there should be no need to sell our most important player at all. If Arsene needs to make 15-20 million pounds every year just from transfers, then he's got more than enough deadweight in the squad to work with. Keeping van Persie should be the quintessential target for Arsenal Football Club during this up and coming summer.

Sarmz wrote:So many trolls. I don't see much difference between the trolling here and on EA.

You are a massive cunt, do you know that? I'm making legitimate points about football and business, and you choose to characterise it as trolling. You should read it thoroughly, you might learn something.

BladeGunner wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Is it really worth >£35m to you? I don't think so, and there's no guarantee even with RVP.

In business, you have to be more intelligent with your evaluation of your chances. The standard practice, when looking at an opportunity, is to multiply the potential benefit by the chances of the event actually occurring.

Let's assume, for arguments sake, that Arsenal have a 0% chance of qualifying with van Persie and a 50% chance of qualifying with him. That means that the income from the Champions League is multiplied by 0.5. On the other hand, if you sell him to Real Madrid, there is a guaranteed income of £30m, in addition to the £5m saved on his wages. £35m is therefore multiplied by one.

In order for keeping him to be a rational choice in that scenario, Champions League income would have to be worth at least £70m to Arsenal. Now further take into account that the chances of Arsenal qualifying without van Persie are greater than 0%, and the chances of qualifying without him are probably less than 50%, and that number would have to go even higher. The CL is lucrative, but it's not THAT lucrative.

But a football club shouldn't just be aiming to generate profit, especially when it ends up in the hands of our useless owners. Yeah, okay, it's much more likely that we'll generate more income if we sell van Persie for 30 million pounds or so than if we keep him. But at the same time, from a footballing perspective, we are much more likely to become a significantly worse team. Footballing success isn't measured economically. That isn't an excuse to be completely financially irresponsible, but when we are as well run as we are (and we are very well run), then there should be no need to sell our most important player at all. If Arsene needs to make 15-20 million pounds every year just from transfers, then he's got more than enough deadweight in the squad to work with. Keeping van Persie should be the quintessential target for Arsenal Football Club during this up and coming summer.

Sporting implications will be taken into account, but only as part of the financial calculation. That's the reality of it. You're not going to make £15-20m by selling deadwood, not without gutting your squad (ask Chelsea how that turned out for them in 2010).

The thing is, a player like Van Persie comes around very rarely. I don't think any player could realistically replace half of what he does for 30m.

Does RVP's contract run out this July or next July?