We don't need that sort of money

Bart: Okay, we're young, rich, and full of sugar. What do we do?
Milhouse: Let's go crazy, Broadway style!

- Boy Scoutz 'N the Hood, the Simpsons

Unlike Bart and Milhouse, we're not going to go crazy, Broadway style. We're not even going to go crazy Real Madrid style. We're going to sit at home and count our pennies. It turns out that we're not young, rich and full of sugar - we're a club of accountants, not a club of Perezian capitalists.

After all, we're the club that turned down £100 million.

Ivan Gazidis had this to say about the right issue:

"With regard to debt, the conclusion reached is that the Club has a very efficient capital structure with long-term debt on attractive interest rates. We can comfortably afford to meet the annual costs of this debt while at the same time generating surplus funds to invest in the Club. Using permanent capital to pay down debt would not, therefore, radically transform the annual cash flow of the Club."

So, in a few sentences, he's told us that we're not mired in debt, and we DO have the funds to invest in the Club. In fact, we're so comfortable that we don't need a £100 million cash injection to pad out our debt, nor to augment Wenger's transfer budget. Everything's fine as is.

Then again, we couldn't afford £21.5million for Melo, and it seems like we need to sell players to generate funds for further acquisitions. The rest of our transfer season seems to hinge upon getting rid of Senderos and Adebayor. So despite our debt being well-structured and on attractive long-term interest rates, maybe a few £££s wouldn't go astray on the transfer front? Apparently we're after Ever Banega now, and even though he's potentially world-class in Football Manager, I'd rather someone proven in real life.

I realise my stance reeks of short-termism. We have a club with a sustainable financial structure. We're the only club in England that has that. We're not Man Utd or Liverpool, who are both mortgaged to the hilt with bad debt. We're not Chelsea or Man City, who're at the whims of billionaire playboys. We're the Arsenal, and the only way forward for us is to play it safe with regards to our finances. It'll be a tragedy if we muck up and sink the club into a Leeds-style fiasco. And it'll be even worse if we were gobbled up by Usmanov.

But still, a rights issue of £100 million wouldn't hurt. Especially if it's negotiated so that none of the major share-holders increase their stake relative to each other. All it would mean is that Kroenke coughs up £25 million, Usmanov £25 million, Fiszman £10 million, and so forth. And then Wenger would have the cash to buy players who are already right now. Like Melo.

The whole idea that we're so well off that we don't need £100 million, and yet have such a small transfer budget that we need to sell to buy, is inconsistent. Either the Club have the money to service the debt and retain a squad that can challenge for the leage, or we don't. If the Club has that money and isn't spending it, then it's doing us a disservice. If the Club doesn't have that money, surely it should consider alternative methods of raising such funds, such as the rights issue?

This rejection shows the aversion the Board has towards Usmanov. That's acceptable. When the guy walks, storm clouds rumble with apocalyptic gloom. But worryingly, it also shows that Kroenke, Fizsman and co. are happy to spend millions buying out each others' shares, but not so happy to splurge a bit to make Arsenal a better team.

And that's not acceptable, as far as I'm concerned.

Farsenal

"The club is fundamentally strong. I can say with confidence that provided we don't do foolish things, this will be one of the leading clubs in the world this year, five years from now and 20 years from now. This is not some experiment to see how successful we can be over the next couple of years, and who knows where we will be after that. This is a good, sustainable business."

- Ivan Gazidis, no longer sticking it to the man

I'm going to rescind my batch of "I ♥ Gazidis" T-shirts. There's no need for them. Ivan Gazidis isn't a tiger who fights for ordinary, glory-hunting gooners anymore. He's not a relentless negotiating machine, ready to sign players who match our ambitions. No, Ivan Gazidis is a corporate drone now, repeating the company line and supporting a "sustainable business" model for the Arse.

On a day when Real Madrid bought Karim Benzema for £30 million, that's sickening.

There's something terribly wrong with Gazidis' comments. Saying that Arsenal could be "one of the leading clubs in the world" in five years' time discounts the fact that we could be one of the leading clubs right now. We've got one of the highest turnovers in the world. We've got the devoted fan base. We've got £100 million in the bank. And we've got a manager who's still regarded as one of the best in the business.

All we really need is ambition. We need the ambition to actively look for success instead of waiting for it to fall into our laps. We need a few experienced signings, some discipline in the dressing room, and a serious focus on defensive training and set-pieces. That's it. And it's doable. Hire Keown as a defensive coach. Crack open the transfer kitty and buy a defensive midfielder and a striker. Crack down on the trouble-makers.

We're not going to get that, though.

We're going to get a "good, sustainable business". This means rolling along in 4th place, minimal expenditure on the transfer market, heavy investment in youth and raking in the profits from (hopefully) a sell-out audience. Instead of trying to compete with the Top 3, we're just going to sit back and hope for the rest of the Premier League to collapse under the weight of its debt. It's weak.

Gazidis also said this:

"The road we have chosen is a challenging one. It involves developing young players we believe can form the basis of a world-class team over the next five years. And at times along that path we have had to pay for player development through points. Certainly the team needs to turn potential into real results; they know it is time to step up."

This is what we heard the season after we sold Vieira. Why are we hearing it again? What happened to the intervening four years? Wasn't that supposed to be the transition period we claimed we needed?

Words fail me at a time like this.

Eye of the Tiger

"We are starting to notice the differences he is making at the club. Everyone with a big responsibility like that has a different personality which they bring to the job, and he is making a few changes."

- Arsene Wenger, on Ivan "Tiger" Gazidis

It turns out that I was right. Ivan Gazidis is a relentless tiger who stalks the jungles and brings down the tasty big game upon which we feast. He's like one of those tigers in the wildlife documentaries, the psychotic ones who dive out of trees and swim across raging rivers in order to bag a nice juicy baboon. Only, he wears a suit and speaks in an American accent as well. For those of us who've been subsisting on roots and berries for five years, it's great to sink our teeth into fresh, bloody, gristly meat.

Right now, Gazidis is in the urban jungles of Johannesburg, sharpening his claws and licking his whiskers, waiting for the moment to pounce. The Confederations Cup has one of the biggest concentrations of talent in world football, and he's liking his chances for a fresh kill. He bagged us Arshavin, he bagged us Vermaelen, and he's about to bag us another ridiculously talented, superhuman-esque player to join our band of merry men and pubescent boys.

This year, there's been a definite change in the way we've approached our transfer targets. Gone is the wishy-washy prevarication of yesteryear. Remember how we missed out on Alonso because of £2 million? That will never happen while Tiger Gazidis is in charge. Consider instead the dogged pursuit of Arshavin, the surgical strike at Vermaelen... this is the way it's going to be from now on. We've got a transfer department that works now!

You've got to hand it to Gazidis. He is masterful. In the first six months of a new job, most people would try not to rock the boat. The most startling change they'd hope to effect would be to bring in a new coffee mug. Gazidis, on the other hand, has bought in Arshavin, Vermaelen, and a change in the way we do business.

Well done, Ivan "Tiger" Gazidis.

Vermaelen to the Arsenal?

"Moving to Arsenal is the right path for me. It is a great sporting challenge and I will also be financially better off. I think everything is going to be okay."

- Thomas Vermaelen, maybe the first Arsenal signing of the year?

So it looks like Thomas Vermaelen is moving to the Arsenal. He's 23, the Ajax captain, and he plays both left back and centre back. He's going to cost about £11 million, and as usual, we're all slightly perplexed as to why we're going so hard after a guy with a glaringly obvious fault - he's a short bloke, our Tom Vermaelen.

With the monies in our hands, the general consensus seems to be that we can buy someone suitably awesome. Some people are whispering Zapata like he's the alliterative successor to a Persian sky god. Some others are saying Hagaaland (sic) is the go. Whoever or whatever we're wanting to fill our central defensive space, no one would've thought of Vermaelen.

But think back over the last few memorable transfers:

Arshavin - why did we buy a creative midfielder when we were crying out for a defensive one?

Nasri - why are we buying ANOTHER promising young creative midfielder, only to bung him on the wing?

Silvestre - why did we swap one inconsistent defender (Senderos) with a crap, over-the-hill, slow, crap, ex-Man Utd, crap defender who can play two positions poorly? And did I mention that he's mostly crap?

Sagna - why did we buy a right back when we've one in Eboue?

Now, some of these were good choices. Some were horrible. It's been a bit of a mixed bag by Le Boss, to the truthful. But whatever the case, we should be used to the idea that he doesn't do things the way we expect. He doesn't do things the conventional way.

But then again, no one knows like Arsene Knows.

Other news, this quote from Ivan Gazidis makes me angry:

"I think perspective is very important. You need to take a distance when you assess the season. This club has over 120 years of history and if you're looking at where we are and how we're doing at this period of our development you have to say it is one of the special times, one of the golden times. I hope we don't forget to appreciate that."

If you're taking the really long view, we should get on our knees and count our blessings. 120 years ago, transportation was limited to horses, paddle-steamers and steam trains. The telegraph was the cutting edge communication device. Penicillin hadn't been invented yet. The world hadn't thrown off the yoke of English imperialism.

So yes, there's a lot to be grateful for over the past 120 years. A lot of advances have been made, and we tend to take it all for granted. But that doesn't mean we should be grateful that a big club like the Arsenal manages to crawl into 4th place, after showing such absymal form in the middle of the year. We're better than that. We're the Arsenal.

What happened to Ivan "The Tiger" Gazidis, out to battle the ocean of sharks for our transfer prospects? Don't give up, Ivan. Fight for us. Use your claws. Use your teeth. Use your jungle camoflage in the murky ocean depths. You can do it, Ivan!

Summer Signings

"Clearly, you can prove anything with stats. So I never quote stats. But Chelsea, playing at home, did not control this game. Barcelone won 77.8% of their tackles, more than the home team's 69.8%."

- Myles Palmer, who says the darndest things

Myles wrote anther article as well, about how the Xabi Alonso transfer fell apart over £200,000. That was an interesting, albeit frustrating, read. But I chose the above quote because it's funnier, and cheers me up. Myles Palmer always unintentionally cheers me up. He's like a short-sighted mole with no peripheral vision. 

We could've used Xabi Alonso this year. He's an excellent player, and while he's not a like-for-like replacement for Flamini, he would have improved the team. We've all seen the impact Arshavin had on the side, and I figure Alonso would've done similar. We have a soft chewy centre at the Arsenal at the moment, and Alonso would've been a tough old nut floating in the middle of that caramel goo. 

I'm pinning my hopes on the fact that Ivan Gazidis is a guy who gets things done. He's like a bald-headed tiger. He couldn't look more tigerish if he painted orange and black stripes on his skull. He got down and dirty with Zenit St Petersburg over Arshavin. He's ready for the transfer season, ready to fight the sharks of Barcelona and Real Madrid over the juicy ewes at the Valencia fire-sale.

He's a tiger in a sea of sharks. The sharks might think he's easy prey because he's in the ocean and out of his comfort zone, but they forget that tigers have claws, teeth and the element of surprise. After all, how many sharks know that tigers are relatively good swimmers?

And meanwhile, Wenger is saying the same old things:

"I'm not chasing any player at the moment. I believe my priority is to stay with the squad we have. We will try of course to bring in one or two players to strengthen the squad... if we buy, it certainly won't be players who lack experience. We have enough of those."

It's something he's been saying since Vieira left and wasn't replaced by anyone of experience. Frankly, I'm sick of read it. Really, the only thing that makes me think that this season will be different is Ivan Gazidis. 

Growl.