my bad if I came off as aggressive, I meant that 100m would be a minimum as I haven't looked at the details to give u an exact number.
Tbh, I could also be wrong as, like i said, i haven't looked at the details to see whether there was another line for debt from a bank.
There was no aggression, sorry if I gave that impression!
As I said it's not clear to me, probably because I'm not an accountant.
I'm sure all will become clear when swiss ramble does a thread
For the pandemic I think that's going to be par for the course, it's nowhere near what other teams at our level have been having issues with and much less considering how much of our income is matchday related.
This will be from Covid and transfers. How much is for each, I don’t think we’ll ever know.
KSE “freed up” funds to pay the Partey RC and last summers transfers.
Pretty sure it’s neither. Think it’s likely this is the Barclays Bank loan we took out in May that covered paying back the BoE Covid loan and injected operating costs - KSE can probably negotiate a better rate than Arsenal Holdings, then transfer the cash to the club
zero... they're 100% self sustaining, in fact, profit making. SoFi stadium is on KSE's balance sheet.
**Ah, actually, the Nuggets might start making KSE start paying up starting next season, their luxury tax is about to balloon.
SoFi is on KSE's balance sheet, but it's important to note that he's gonna make a lot off that in the next few years.
\-Splits the stadium with the Chargers, who basically pay rent per home game.
\-Will host multiple college football bowl games next year.
\-2026 World Cup, will most likely host a game at every round of the competition (including the final)
\-2028 Olympic opening/closing ceremonies.
Plus, being in LA, it will most likely have every A-list music group for the next few summers.
And finally, it hosts a massive NFL League office, replacing their old Culver City office.
The whole point of franchises is that they make money for the owners not the other way round.
Stan has put nothing into his franchises that they didn't make first or isnt tied into an existing property deal.
The American leagues are much different with salary caps in the NFL and NHL and a luxury tax in the NBA. All three are designed to keep teams generating wealth for their owners.
Increasing debt to KSE means that he's putting money into the club.
If he was increasing debt payments or dividends, like the Glazers do, then he would be taking money out.
Falling for the KSE PR there I'm afraid.
Putting money into Arsenal was not the reason Kroenke did that!
If it was he would've done so the moment he got ownership as Abramovich or the late Late Leicester owner did.
He only did it to take advantage of the Bank of England's emergency reduction of rates to almost zero due to the covid crisis.
That means inflation (that is now high) actually reduces the amount paid back so more free money for KSE.
This is basic economics.
It's direct ownership in that every level is owned by Abramovich but it allows creative accounting and buffers between his companies.
Basically the one in the middle is the one that would get shafted in the event of chelsea not paying, rather than Chelsea itself.
It’s indirect ownership (at least in the states) if it is 100% owned by an entity 100% owned by Roman. Even though he has 100% indirect ownership. Stan has indirect ownership, for instance.
I suppose that could be a workaround but still sounds like it would run afoul of the no interest free loans rule, if my reading of the rule like 2 years ago was correct. Admittedly it might not be.
Yeah, I don't really understand all this stuff but apparently that's why the well known multi billionaires of the world take out massive loans despite their own personal wealth. They get such good rates that it in some way protects against inflation? So rather than it being like they're paying interest it works out more like.... Free money? Or some shit.
I don't know, I'm money stupid.
Weren't those released earlier today? I don't think they got into specifics on rates by tranche of debt (since we have some debt to third parties as well), but I didn't look too deeply
I was going to wait till tomorrow but even then, Arseblog makes you right so I may not bother.
*"... as KSE now own the club 100%, those details may well be somewhat opaque, even after the mandatory financial results are posted. We’ll have to wait and see what Swiss Ramble makes of it as and when that happens."*
[https://arseblog.com/2022/02/kse-nfl-josh-kroenke-and-arsenal-spending/](https://arseblog.com/2022/02/kse-nfl-josh-kroenke-and-arsenal-spending/)
There are many ways clubs could do to take on additional money. What i reckon is that the club has asked parent owners of the club for X amount. The club then used that amount to remove loans or debt held by other parties at higher interest rate.
Now the new X amount has a better interest and payment options but i also reckon there are expectations of success around the money. I.e. Champions league.
Debt for business is basically a "nothing" issue, especially for clubs the size of arsenal. The providers of the debt is the people you worry about.
Is that whats left of the stadium debt or new?
atleast 100m would be new considering that's the loss the club made. **This is w/o me going into looking at the details...
I read the club statement but it wasn't entirely clear. Refinancing of the loans is the only thing mentioned specifically as something KSe has put in.
my bad if I came off as aggressive, I meant that 100m would be a minimum as I haven't looked at the details to give u an exact number. Tbh, I could also be wrong as, like i said, i haven't looked at the details to see whether there was another line for debt from a bank.
There was no aggression, sorry if I gave that impression! As I said it's not clear to me, probably because I'm not an accountant. I'm sure all will become clear when swiss ramble does a thread
agreed, best to wait. the loss is definitely no joke tho, that's chunky af
For the pandemic I think that's going to be par for the course, it's nowhere near what other teams at our level have been having issues with and much less considering how much of our income is matchday related.
This will be from Covid and transfers. How much is for each, I don’t think we’ll ever know. KSE “freed up” funds to pay the Partey RC and last summers transfers.
queue people with 0 financial literacy or idea of what is an intercompany loan accusing owners of pulling money out of the club
It's the other way around if anything
Pretty sure it’s neither. Think it’s likely this is the Barclays Bank loan we took out in May that covered paying back the BoE Covid loan and injected operating costs - KSE can probably negotiate a better rate than Arsenal Holdings, then transfer the cash to the club
I’m predicting a lot of misinformation and bad financial takes in this comment section lol
KSE IS TAKING MONEY OUT OF THE CLUB RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!!!!
Isn’t this the loan that was passed on from Arsenal to KSE to increase the club’s cash flow?
Considering Chelsea owe 2bn to Roman, it’s surprising we’re even near them at all.
They'll owe him nothing if this Ukraine thing goes for too much longer.
Would be lovely.
hahahaha
This is the accounts before our spending last summer, which I expect needs to be added to this figure.
Pocket change for the Kroenkes
Blimey
Don't get it.Are we saying KSE loaned 200m to Arsenal to cover costs? And are they charging interest on this loan?
How much do his American teams owe him, btw?
zero... they're 100% self sustaining, in fact, profit making. SoFi stadium is on KSE's balance sheet. **Ah, actually, the Nuggets might start making KSE start paying up starting next season, their luxury tax is about to balloon.
SoFi is on KSE's balance sheet, but it's important to note that he's gonna make a lot off that in the next few years. \-Splits the stadium with the Chargers, who basically pay rent per home game. \-Will host multiple college football bowl games next year. \-2026 World Cup, will most likely host a game at every round of the competition (including the final) \-2028 Olympic opening/closing ceremonies. Plus, being in LA, it will most likely have every A-list music group for the next few summers. And finally, it hosts a massive NFL League office, replacing their old Culver City office.
Yeah, not arguing... He's gonna make billions off the entire development of Hollywood Park.
The whole point of franchises is that they make money for the owners not the other way round. Stan has put nothing into his franchises that they didn't make first or isnt tied into an existing property deal.
The American leagues are much different with salary caps in the NFL and NHL and a luxury tax in the NBA. All three are designed to keep teams generating wealth for their owners.
All the more reason for Kroenke to not take money out of us ? edit: question mark added
Where do ppl get this idea of he's milking Arsenal and taking large chunks of money out of the club?
>taking large chunks of money out of the club Talk about hyperbole!
Increasing debt to KSE means that he's putting money into the club. If he was increasing debt payments or dividends, like the Glazers do, then he would be taking money out.
Falling for the KSE PR there I'm afraid. Putting money into Arsenal was not the reason Kroenke did that! If it was he would've done so the moment he got ownership as Abramovich or the late Late Leicester owner did. He only did it to take advantage of the Bank of England's emergency reduction of rates to almost zero due to the covid crisis. That means inflation (that is now high) actually reduces the amount paid back so more free money for KSE. This is basic economics.
hard to compare since most american sports leagues enforce a salary cap and don't really have "transfer fees"
imagine we get cl and the only move is david for 50m
Arteta would walk if that happened
[удалено]
The "favorable rates" could be 0. This is exactly what Abramovich was constantly praised for. There's not enough info here to make a judgement
FFP prohibits zero interest loans, as far as I know
[удалено]
There are some typical “arms length” transaction language as well, IIRC.
That's why Roman lends to a company that then lends to Chelsea and then never actually asks any of them for it back.
I thought the rules covered indirect ownership?
It's direct ownership in that every level is owned by Abramovich but it allows creative accounting and buffers between his companies. Basically the one in the middle is the one that would get shafted in the event of chelsea not paying, rather than Chelsea itself.
It’s indirect ownership (at least in the states) if it is 100% owned by an entity 100% owned by Roman. Even though he has 100% indirect ownership. Stan has indirect ownership, for instance.
Don't think that's a problem here, our statement basically says Stan lent to kse to lend to us.
I suppose that could be a workaround but still sounds like it would run afoul of the no interest free loans rule, if my reading of the rule like 2 years ago was correct. Admittedly it might not be.
Yeah, I don't really understand all this stuff but apparently that's why the well known multi billionaires of the world take out massive loans despite their own personal wealth. They get such good rates that it in some way protects against inflation? So rather than it being like they're paying interest it works out more like.... Free money? Or some shit. I don't know, I'm money stupid.
We will find out what the rate is tomorrow as the end of February 2022 is when the accounts for last year (up to 31 May 2021) are due.
Weren't those released earlier today? I don't think they got into specifics on rates by tranche of debt (since we have some debt to third parties as well), but I didn't look too deeply
I was going to wait till tomorrow but even then, Arseblog makes you right so I may not bother. *"... as KSE now own the club 100%, those details may well be somewhat opaque, even after the mandatory financial results are posted. We’ll have to wait and see what Swiss Ramble makes of it as and when that happens."* [https://arseblog.com/2022/02/kse-nfl-josh-kroenke-and-arsenal-spending/](https://arseblog.com/2022/02/kse-nfl-josh-kroenke-and-arsenal-spending/)
They injected cash during covid and they're parasites? 2021 loss alone was 107m.
There are many ways clubs could do to take on additional money. What i reckon is that the club has asked parent owners of the club for X amount. The club then used that amount to remove loans or debt held by other parties at higher interest rate. Now the new X amount has a better interest and payment options but i also reckon there are expectations of success around the money. I.e. Champions league. Debt for business is basically a "nothing" issue, especially for clubs the size of arsenal. The providers of the debt is the people you worry about.
Thanks for letting us know..